Speed reading - Possibly a Scam ?

[nitehawk]

Just got home from court after being NIP'd for doing 54mph in a thirty according the the South Wales S.Camera Pratnership.


Sequence of Events

21st Aug 2003 Alleged Offence took place :violin:

28th Aug 2003 Notice of Intended Prosecution (NIP) sent

1st Sept 2003 Letter written asking for photograph

2nd Sept 2003 Photo request from me received by them

9th Sept 2003 Photo sent by them 'allegedly'
(item never received) :bang:

13th Oct 2003 Reminder to provide driver details notice
sent by them

15th Oct 2003 Letter requesting photo to be provided c7u8

21st Oct 2003 My second request received by them


No Correspondence received until


27th Nov 2003 Statement of witness sent out

27th Jan 2004 Photo finally sent. Just after the nick
of time !

Please note: When they received the second letter concerning the fact that the photograph had not been received by me, they decided to decline the resending of the item but neglected to notify me of this policy or decision (How arrogant). How was I supposed to ID the driver without this ? They had my address and telephone number either of which they could have used to contact me but instead decided to take action as I was being uncooperative !

Spoke to them 23rd March 2004 and was told that I may not have a copy of the video evidence as it is against the Data Protection Act. It can however be shown in court on the day. How can they use this as evidence against me but deny me access to it in order to defend my case ?

My Solicitor got hold of (part of ) the tape which quite clearly shows that the whole thing was a blag. (the whole tape could not be provided for reasons of Data Protection Act, what difference does the act make re: part or whole of the tape ?) The LTi 20-20 device records and 'error 3' message half a second prior to giving a screen listing of 54mph W.T.F. ! Don't these things need 3-5 second to reset and test after an error is reached ?


So What happens ? - The S.Camera chappies then decide to drop the speeding matter entirely (if I was doing 54 in a 30mph zone, surely this is fcukin' dangerous and they should tear up my licence).

Now pursuing me for section 172 - failing to provide driver's details (Hmmm. Maybe 'cos they never provided the photo).

Now some cynical people amongst you would question why they are dropping the 6pt dangerous offence for a lesser, civil type 3pt thingame. Is it :rant: because the actual speeding offence did not take place ?
Go figure. :shooter:

Could it be about revenue ? Is it possible that they don't really give a rat's about speeding as such, only about the money, money money ? g0551p

I will update you when the case is concluded. :neenaw:

 

[Moggy]

If you're not guilty......

go for it. 90% of the population would just cough up and help buy them a shiney new police car! Good luck :yo:

 

[turbine_2]

Okay, silly question time (well, more rhetoric actually) but how can you fail to provide witness details for an offence that didn't happen?

I think more words with your solicitor should sort that out.

 

[XXLarge]

My mate had a very similar experience when the photo provided didn,t show his vehicle and the alleged speed in the same frame. They did exactly the same thing, dropped the speeding charge and screwed him on the other thing.
If the speeding charge is dropped why the f%ck should it matter if you fail to provide drivers' details????????? Why should they want drivers' details if there was no offence.
:bang:

 

[PsychoBikerBen]

Spoke to them 23rd March 2004 and was told that I may not have a copy of the video evidence as it is against the Data Protection Act.:

I believe you have the right to obtain any film footage(The sequence where you feature) from any image capturing device that is used in a none private erea,be it cctv or speed survaiance equipment.I believe the charge is ?10 for such footage to be provided on VHS tape.
As you pointed out-this footage is evidence and if featuring yourself-You are entitled to a copy.

 

[reefer]

i heard somewere a couple of weeks ago that if you are caught by a "safety camera van" you can ask for the evidence..ie the video tape//but
for them to use it in court againts you they have to supply the whole tape regardless of whats on the rest of it..so therefore you are intitled to have the whole tape also..not just the bit your on as it is regarded by the courts as "one piece of evidence"..in fact i think it was a link of here that someone posted up where i printed it off from
there are lots of websites to help you ion your postion which i guess you already know about :dunno:

 

[eyebrows]

Points or cash

It occurs to me (having been nipped twice in 03) that safety cameras ARE purely for income generation. If I thought I was going to get 6 points for a speeding offence by camera I would be a LOT more carefull, If I was only going to get the ?60 fine I wouldn't be THAT carefull, so, IF the cameras arent there for income generation, dont fine, just whack 6 points on a persons licence, If however you ARE after the money then continue with the fine, and lack of disincentive.

 

[mikew]

Bastards ...all of em'

I'm due in front of the beak on 1st June relating to an alleged speeding offence back in October.

Despite several letters and phone calls, the PO-LICE man8um Central Ticket Office in Huntingdon absolutley refuse to provide me with a picture so that I can confirm the identity of the driver (i.e. it could have been me or my son on the day in question). Despite me explaining at length that I cannot give the details of the driver without seeing the evidence, they are continuing the case.

Today I was advise that a further charge of failing to provide driver details has been tacked on for good measure!!!! so my question to all you police-types is

how the fuck am I supposed to provide details when your "colleagues" won't show me the effin evidence??? :dunno: c7u8

Now they say I can go and view the tape at their HQ (between 10am and 1430 pm with an hour out for their munch), which is fine if you have a job where you can just drop everything and go, which I don't.

Suppose I lived in Scotland and travelled all the way down there to find it wasn't me? who is going to reimburse my expenses?


I will let you know the outcome,

Oh yes, not happy .......

 

[nitehawk]

Okay, silly question time (well, more rhetoric actually) but how can you fail to provide witness details for an offence that didn't happen?

I think more words with your solicitor should sort that out.

Seems that they are able to drop the case, if, as and when their argument falls through (i.e. was not supported by the evidence). However, they still don't admit that no offence took place ! Apparently, we can't even pursue them to prove this as it is no longer and issue to them. They call the shots. WTF ! :bang: :bang: Regardless if there was an offence in the first place, a second offence has been committed by not telling them who was driving at the time the offence wasn't committed (the mind boggles).

If, when it's concluded, I am in a financial position to chase them and can obtain support and representation for a 'civil' case, maybe something can be achieved via that route. It would be nice to see a bit of justice.

Maybe I can get them for fabricating and or tampering with evidence.

Loads more research needed. c7u8

 

[nitehawk]

P.S. Loophole I think.

If I had said that I was the driver at the time of the incident, but denied the offence had taken place, I would have been able to insist that the complete video tape be supplied to my legal representative to be scutinised by an expert - they would have refused + CASE DISMISSED !!!

Unless of course, all of a sudden the Date Protection Act no longer applies, They supply the full tape and get you for contraveining an new law that they fabricated the very same morning ! Wan*ers. man8um

 

[skippy]

Seems that they are able to drop the case, if, as and when their argument falls through (i.e. was not supported by the evidence). However, they still don't admit that no offence took place ! Apparently, we can't even pursue them to prove this as it is no longer and issue to them. They call the shots. WTF ! :bang: :bang: Regardless if there was an offence in the first place, a second offence has been committed by not telling them who was driving at the time the offence wasn't committed (the mind boggles).

If, when it's concluded, I am in a financial position to chase them and can obtain support and representation for a 'civil' case, maybe something can be achieved via that route. It would be nice to see a bit of justice.

Maybe I can get them for fabricating and or tampering with evidence.

Loads more research needed. c7u8

Seems to me that they were trying to prosecute a speeding offence on inadmissable evidence, due do to design or incompetance, have been caught out and are now persuing a mallicious prosecution for failing to supply driver details even though they tried to withhold the information that you required to supply that said information ...........wonder what might happen in the littigation happy US of A under such circumstances

 

[John01XX.. RIP Aug 2nd 22]

In the good ole US of A the lawyers would be knocking on your door to have you file a lawsuit through them, at the Gov.
Promising wheelbarrows of Gov money placed in the bank of your choice.
Never happens quite like that but sometimes you never know.