Speed cameras N.B.

[ubuysa]

Got flashed by a mobile speed camera last night, I was doing around 65mph in a 50mph limit so it's just going to be a basic fine and points I guess. I noticed today that there are no markings on the road where the camera was sited, so how do they know how fast I was going?

I know the camera took two pictures because it flashed twice, so I assume they'll be using the distance travelled and time between flashes, but how do will they know how far I've travelled with no road markings?? Fixed cameras have road markings for just this purpose.

If it's some whizzy new camera that measures speed more acurately than the fixed Gatso cameras why did it need to take two pictures??

Tony C.

<hr width=100% size=1>Eagles may soar, but weasels don't get sucked into jet engines.......

 

[Its_Only_Money]

First off it will depend on if you intend to confess - which is what they invite you to do if they issue a fixed penalty. If you accept the penalty then the marks (or lack of) is irrelevant as it will never be looked at.

If they take you to court (and for 15mph over they might), then the evidence will be important.

I don't know whether the lines are important but the logic of two pictures would seem to imply they are important in validating the distance you travelled between the pictures. If they give you the option of requesting a copy of the picture before deciding how to proceed I'd take it and then get an opinion from an eagle with relevant experience. If of course they take you to court then the pics will be provided to your defence...

No doubt anyone who has recent exp of this may provide more detail on these circumstances....

<hr width=100% size=1>Rgds

Simon
Its Only Money
Fairline Sprint
Solent-based

 

[snowleopard]

thought they used double exposures on traffic light cameras to check if you stopped after crossing the line, are you sure it wasn't one of them?

there are so many changes to speed limits of late and they don't always put up the required repeater signs so it's possible the limit isn't legal!

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[ubuysa]

It's not a traffic light camera, it's a section of road I travel often and they haven't changed the limit for as long as I can remember. It's a dual carriageway with no footpath, so why the heck it was ever 50mph is beyond me.

I must admit I'm tempted to ask for the pictures and seek advice to see whether it's worth challenging it........

Tony C.

<hr width=100% size=1>Eagles may soar, but weasels don't get sucked into jet engines.......

 

[clyst]

Have a look at pepipoo.com might be of some help

Cheers

terry

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[cliff]

Why bother challenging it - you have already admitted your guilt on this forum .

Also even if you do fight it and win, you still lose as the boys in blue will hound you until they get you for something else - they do not like being made to look fools.

You broke the law, pay the fine and move on.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Peppermint]

Re: 15 mph is more than

25% so you could end up with a worse slap than you think. It depends on a lot of variables such as you driving history and the history of that it of road. If it's a death trap type accident blackspot they'll get more shirty.

The usual format for the Gatso from behind double flash thing is to have road markings as a datum. Many of the mobiles use the same method but they can use obvious features on the road like street furniture or kerbstones to measure distance. Thats how the old bills car computers do the distance time = speed calculation. I suspect now days they've got a beam that does the job though, like the guys who pull you over have.

Your best hope is that nothing will be heard. A mates just done a lot of research on this stuff cos he's down to his last chance. Many more people are flashed than ever get a ticket.

We've had a visit from "Captain Gatso" around here. He's torched a few and they haven't been replaced. It's rumoured that if the driver of the vehical has an address in Athens and this detail is passed on in good faith but in Greek, no great effort is made to track him down.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Rabbie]

In Eastbourne there is a well-known dual carriageway which is a 40mph limit. A local traffic expert tells me that the upper limit set on cameras is 70 and drivers consistently exceed this!. No surprise there.

<hr width=100% size=1>A day not spent on my boat is a day in my life wasted.

 

[Stork_III]

Without lines on the road they cannot measure distance travelled accurately enough for a successful prosecution either for single cameras or the sneeky dual cameras working in tandam over distances, can be 2 or 3 kilometers. Lots of cameras in my area have lots of flash but no film. The digital record type produce too much data, ie miscreants, for the police to process in the time limit set in law.

You should still slow down though, generally 10 % + 2 mph over will be ok.

Have you noticed road signs are increasingly displayed in very odd distances (in yards) say 170 Yds. Converts to metres quite well, when TWMBO get up the nerve to go fully metric.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Robin]

I hit the brakes last Friday by Bear Cross for a well hidden mobile unit. It was a 40mph limit and I was doing....35mph. I had already passed 2 fixed cameras on the same road in the last mile, so I guess they really needed that policeman there, now that crime in the area has dropped so much he probably had nothing else to do.

<hr width=100% size=1><font size=1>Sermons from my pulpit are with tongue firmly in cheek and come with no warranty!</font size=1>

 

[tome]

What, a real policeman? What do they look like, I've only really seen one in a car?

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[ianwright]

Just for your interest,,,,,,,

Swimbo got her picture took during the summer, 55 in a 40 limit.
She took it to court and pleaded not guilty. She told them she had to accelerate to avoid a collision with another car.
The Magistrate asked the prosecution if they had evidence to refute this. They hadn't. She got off. Good eh?

IanW


<hr width=100% size=1>Vertue 203, Patience

 

[Robin]

I couldn't really see as he was hidden behind a wall pointing an old Seafix RDF at me and I was more than a bit concerned that the car behind me was going to shorten the wheelbase on my car! If I had known there was a live one out though I could have taken my camera with me.

<hr width=100% size=1><font size=1>Sermons from my pulpit are with tongue firmly in cheek and come with no warranty!</font size=1>

 

[AlexL]

The lines are completely irrelevent, the cameras get your speed from a doppler radar, which is generally fairly accurate (or so they say!). I believe the only reason for the lines and 2 pictures on the fixed cameras is in case there are 2 cars in the shot (i.e a dual carridgeway, or one overtaking another) so you can tell which car was the faster one.
I would accept the 3 points and 60 quid fixed penalty if offered. There is little point arguing and it makes no difference to your insurance (i've had 5 speeding convictions in total, inculding 2 outright bans and only the last ban - 14 days for doing 106 on the M6 made any difference to my insurance, and then it was negligable)

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Shakey]

According to the Road Traffic Act, you have to be notified of the alleged offence within fourteen days.

If no letter turns up in a fortnight, then you can deny everything.

Try googling Speed Trap Bible, it's a very good site with loads of info.

<hr width=100% size=1>It could have been worse - it could have been me.

 

[tcm]

phew, it's a good job that you weren't driving, and that it was either your au pair anne-marie leclairie of 345bis Rue Carnot Aix-en-Provence 64000 France, or if it's a pic from the front then it was you homesexual lover from Norway. Otherwsie, it would be you in trouble, and not them.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[A_7]

Have a look at:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/north_east/4042053.stm

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Its_Only_Money]

Doppler radar acts as the speed trigger but doesn't give any evidence - for these the pictures are what is produced, hence the importance that the pictures are (or aren't) valid evidence....

<hr width=100% size=1>Rgds

Simon
Its Only Money
Fairline Sprint
Solent-based

 

[GeoffW]

With digital cameras it is possible to add the distance lines electronically. this saves painting lies in the road.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Colin_S]

I believe that if a picture was produced with the lines added to it, it would be thrown out of court as tampered evidence.

Locally there's been a few mobile speed traps set up and they use a camera similar to the yellow Gatso unit mounted at a lower level in front of a van. The last couple of times I've seen it, there's been a temporary speed camera warning sign prior to the trap. At least it gives you half a chance of slowing down.

Found this to cheer you up......... A motorist was unknowingly caught in an automated speed trap that measured his speed using radar and photographed his car. He later received in the mail a ticket for $40 and a photo of his car. Instead of payment, he sent the police department a photograph of $40. Several days later, he received a letter from the police that contained another picture .....of handcuffs.

<hr width=100% size=1>