For those living in UK-a speeding question

elko2



Joined: 24/07/2007
Posts: 4400

Message Posted:
21/03/2011 18:59

1. Has anyone got a speeding ticket in UK with the photo taken from the back and driver not shown?



2. If you do not remember who was driving it at the time, do they presume that the owner was the driver?



Has anyone challenged this in court so far?

Thanks

ismet

gooligan


Joined: 30/01/2007
Posts: 1591

Message Posted:
21/03/2011 19:04

Ismet,this may help http://www.nopenaltypoints.co.uk/WhatToDoIfYouGetASpeedingTicket.html

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
21/03/2011 19:05

Hi Ismet,



Neil and Christine Hamilton case



http://menmedia.co.uk/manchestereveningnews/news/s/74/74169_christine_spared_by_speedtrap_loophole.html

fosterscan


Joined: 27/02/2010
Posts: 541

Message Posted:
21/03/2011 19:08

If you do challenge the fact you dont know who was drivein at the time and the photo can not prove with out doubt it was you the judge will dismiss the case. i know a van driver builder who has been to court twice and dismissed both times.they dont just presume you are the owner it was you .Most in the uk take the fine as not to go to court.

elko2



Joined: 24/07/2007
Posts: 4400

Message Posted:
21/03/2011 19:50

Just what I wanted, thanks folkes, C44 is great

ismet

Harold2555



Joined: 19/04/2008
Posts: 1139

Message Posted:
21/03/2011 20:16

Sorry Ismet



This has nothing to do with TRNC







Harold

IbrahimAbi


Joined: 24/10/2010
Posts: 245

Message Posted:
21/03/2011 21:54

But you have been publically boasting about speeding in this country what goes now?

walkerscott


Joined: 13/08/2009
Posts: 901

Message Posted:
21/03/2011 22:09

Hi Ismet,

I actually had this experience and also one with being an Amber Ambler, slowly through amber traffic lights but being told it was red!

I was in someone else's car and photographed from the rear with no picture showing who was at the wheel. If I wouldn't have owned up, it would have been the registered owner of the vehicle, my sister, who would have got the points and fine.

MUSIN M


Joined: 26/06/2008
Posts: 1352

Message Posted:
21/03/2011 22:13

It makes no differance if you have a picture or not ,the registered keeper not even the owner get,s the summons and then it,s left up to the registered keeper to show who was the driver at the time and if he A refuses or B he does not know does not help him, the keeper picks up the fine and the three points however some people are offered a chance to save themselves the three points by way of attending a safety course.



all speeding cars are photographed from the rear of the vehicle ,unless you are caught by a variable speed camera .



musin



long live the kktc

Johnatcastle


Joined: 23/07/2009
Posts: 163

Message Posted:
21/03/2011 22:22

REF MESS 3:

I remember that case, I think she got advice from Nick Freeman (Mr Loophole!!)

I also though at the time that it would be easy to find out who was driving. Just amend the law to say "if more than one person has access to the vehicle at that time then ALL persons will receive the points and the fine unless the actual driver steps forward" (ok a bit basic but you get the point!!) This was basic justice even at school, "who threw that note" barked the teacher, "right if the writer will not own up then the whole class gets detention!!"



Ring any bells????? LOL...

fosterscan


Joined: 27/02/2010
Posts: 541

Message Posted:
21/03/2011 22:45

Johnatcastle so all people who work for and have access to a vehicle they all get the points poor eddie stobart lol if you go to court you get away with it but they know a fixed penalty its easyier to say oh well i did it i dont want the hassle.They dont care who did it as long as someone pays the fine.

Johnatcastle


Joined: 23/07/2009
Posts: 163

Message Posted:
21/03/2011 23:51

Hi Foster, nope sorry wouldn't work for poor old eddie!!!! Everyone knows that a driver MUST fill his/her tacho in when driving so that's an easy one...LOL

My point is obvious isn't it?? Two people have access to car (legally) so it MUST be one of them driving, yes?

Therefore if no-one is going to admit to it then they both get the points otherwise we get just what happened a mockery of justice!

No1Doyen


Joined: 04/07/2008
Posts: 16617

Message Posted:
22/03/2011 00:43

Sorry I can't help - I'm law abiding. )

breezyboy


Joined: 14/05/2007
Posts: 1179

Message Posted:
22/03/2011 15:40

Yes Elko,

When my ex told them I was driving her car through a red light, which I wasn't. Told them it wasnt me and pleaded not guity.

Went to court and after saying the photo was being couriered over they admited that the police had lost it and case dismissed. But the car was an XJS with a porthole for a back window so no way could they tell who was driving anyway.

At another time I went past a camera van at 41 in a 30 zone in my Triumph Stag with the roof off and there was no argument even with the back of my head!

elko2



Joined: 24/07/2007
Posts: 4400

Message Posted:
22/03/2011 16:26

Right, let us get a few things put straight. In a period of 12 months probably I pass through many speeding cameras. Let us say I pass through 10 when I go to Lefkosa and another 10 on my way back, so that makes 20. I go to Lefkosa about once a week on average, so that makes 20*50= 1000 times passes through the cameras in a year. If I get caught about 5 times in a year, that makes 0.5% or one in 200. Let us keep things in proportion but of course it is so much easier to get on a high horse and criticize out of all proportion. Most ordinary citizens slow down at a camera and then back to normal afterwards. So only those like me who are more absent minded who get caught more often but it has nothing to do with safe driving and everyone know it except the hypocrites.



So let us keep things in proportion please.

ismet

elko2



Joined: 24/07/2007
Posts: 4400

Message Posted:
22/03/2011 16:31

I am not surprised at the comments above about rough justice i.e. punish all who use the same car if the driver is not known. It is true that this is how the whole class is punished because they all know the culprit. In this case that is not the case. Even if two people uses the same car e.g. husband and wife, you cannot punish both if you cannot prove who the driver was at the relevant time. In criminal cases, the well established principle is that the accused must be proved guilty "beyond any reasonable doubt". It is up to the police to prove the guilt. ıt is no excuse to say that the cameras take pictures from behind in 50% of the cases. If they want to prosecute properly, then they must have the cameras facing both directions. They cannot compromise justice against costs. This is as simple as that.

ismet

wanderer


Joined: 05/02/2009
Posts: 1653

Message Posted:
22/03/2011 18:05

Ismet

sorry for this one but

"ignorance of the law is no defence"

So no knowledge of who was driving again is no defence

The founder of builder Redrow says his conviction is ridiculous for failing to tell North Wales Police who was driving his car after it was clocked speeding.



Steve Morgan said he did not know who was at the wheel of the Mercedes when it allegedly did 64mph in a 50mph zone.



He intends to appeal after Flintshire magistrates rejected that claim.



The chairman of Premier League side Wolverhampton Wanderers and head of the Flintshire-based builder was fined £600, with £715 court costs.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-north-east-wales-11851049

breezyboy


Joined: 14/05/2007
Posts: 1179

Message Posted:
22/03/2011 18:25

Wanderer

The difference is who the vehicle is insured for.

It is illegal to aid and abet someone to drive whilst uninsured.

It is also ilegal to pervert the course of justice. So you need to say something which doesnt get you one or other of these charges.



Steve lives near me and lots of people drive his many vehilcles so they are probably any driver insured. It is quite feasable for him not to know who was driving one car that day.



As with the one I mentioned above it is only insured for me or my wife and in a convertible it is obvious if it is a male or female driver.

IbrahimAbi


Joined: 24/10/2010
Posts: 245

Message Posted:
22/03/2011 18:50

Ismet



Have you considered that if you stick to the speed limit it does not matter how many times you pass the camera, you may even save a life, which may be mine, or my family's, less arrogance less speed please

Brinsley


Joined: 04/04/2009
Posts: 6858

Message Posted:
22/03/2011 18:54

Ismet

You can do anything in the UK, it's shown on your licence; 'Tear Along Dotted Line'!



Richard

elko2



Joined: 24/07/2007
Posts: 4400

Message Posted:
22/03/2011 19:10

msg. 19 Ibrahim Abi, I have nothing to add and I do not have a mission to make everybody agree with me. I explain and move on. You may or may not agree with me and I will let you have the final word, no problem.



msg. 17, Wanderer wrote:

"ignorance of the law is no defence"



"So no knowledge of who was driving again is no defence"



I have never dispputed the first sentence but I cannot see the relevance to the second sentence. Not knowing who was driving your car at a particular time is no offence. If one day "poor memory" becomes a criminal offence, half of Famagusta can testify that I am guilty

ismet

awellwisher


Joined: 12/04/2009
Posts: 28

Message Posted:
23/03/2011 02:50

Just noticed this topic. Very difficult to argue with a camera but if pulled up by a policeman my advice is get out of the car and walk towards him. The last 3 times I did this I only received a warning even though I was doing 95 in the UK, then just outside Famagusta in TRNC, but the best was when doing 85 on the M1, the policeman said give me a reason not to book you and I said that "you will feel yourself a much nicer person in the morning if you don't" and he let me go. I try to observe the limits now, probably because their kindness made more of an impression on me than a fine.

IbrahimAbi


Joined: 24/10/2010
Posts: 245

Message Posted:
24/03/2011 19:37

Ismet there are many victims of speed who do not get the luxury of the final word