|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
Driver Wins Speed Camera Appeal
Article by: rob brady
Date: 12 Jun 2016
Get Speed Camera Warnings For SatNavs
Get Speed Camera Warnings For iOS (iPhone and iPad)
Get Speed Camera Warnings For Android (phones and tablets)
A driver who was clocked at 85mph, and claimed he was only travelling at 29mph, has lawyered up and persuaded the authorities that the speed camera that clocked him was incorrect.
The incident happened in December last year, but he had to wait for his case to go to court, and was only eventually issued with a court summons in March.
Van delivery driver Thomas Baird was represented by Bobby Bell of BB Law, who commented: "Gatso cameras take two photos which are 0.5 seconds apart. We calculated the true speed of the vehicle by making an application to Staffordshire Police for a copy of the second photograph. Once the police disclosed this, we were able to calculate the speed by reference to the physical markings on the carriageway, proving he had been travelling at a maximum of 29.08mph."
He added: "If the suggested reading had not been so high Mr Baird probably would have just paid the fine. There aren't many people who can spend the time, effort and money fighting something they think the police are likely to win. This case is a stark reminder that these supposedly infallible devices can produce inaccurate and unreliable evidence. The most concerning fact about this case is that the police apparently still have no idea as to how or why this device managed to over-calculate my client's speed by a whopping 56mph."
Staffordshire Police consequently withdrew the prosecution and paid £2,000 to cover legal costs.
Superintendent Simon Tweats argued that: "This is the only time this type of error, to the best of our knowledge, has not been picked up prior to going to court. This was a one-off individual error."
How likely does everyone think this is?
Source
| | |  |
| Comments
|
 Posted by Kremmen on Sun Jun 12, 2016 11:14 am |
 |
Surely a trained operator should have picked up the second photo position and realised it was wrong ?
Satnav:
Garmin 2599 LMT-D (Indoor test rig)
DashCam:
Viofo A119 V3
Car Average MPG :
 |
|
| Posted by M8TJT on Sun Jun 12, 2016 1:49 pm |
|
That assumes that they use trained operators K, not just someone who blindly issues the NIPs
|
|
| Posted by Kremmen on Sun Jun 12, 2016 2:14 pm |
|
True
I thought someone visually checks the photos just in case. I've been flashed a few times knowing I was under the limit so I assumed common sense had kicked in for a false alarm.
Things do fly across the sensor giving these false alarms.
Satnav:
Garmin 2599 LMT-D (Indoor test rig)
DashCam:
Viofo A119 V3
Car Average MPG :
|
|
| Posted by sussamb on Sun Jun 12, 2016 3:39 pm |
|
And speed cams can be set off by someone driving the other way, so if you're 'in the box' it's you who would get a ticket, except for the fact that someone is meant to do the visual check 
Where there's a will ... there's a way. |
|
| Posted by rf065 on Mon Jun 13, 2016 5:00 am |
|
| sussamb Wrote: | | And speed cams can be set off by someone driving the other way, so if you're 'in the box' it's you who would get a ticket, except for the fact that someone is meant to do the visual check |
The visual check probably amounts to, "yes there is a car in the photographs, issue the fine".
Russ
|
|
| Posted by Kremmen on Mon Jun 13, 2016 9:03 am |
|
I wonder if the latest digital Monitrons have similar issues.
Satnav:
Garmin 2599 LMT-D (Indoor test rig)
DashCam:
Viofo A119 V3
Car Average MPG :
|
|
| Posted by MaFt on Mon Jun 13, 2016 5:57 pm |
|
At 85mph the car would cover 124 feet in that 1 second - that's nearly 38m. Versus the 44ft/13m at 30mph.
I didn't think the calibration lines would be 38m long. Either way, there's a clear difference between 13m and 38m on a photo - the length of a normal swimming pool, or 6 Ford Focus' tail-to-nose...
|
|
| Posted by Kremmen on Tue Jun 14, 2016 4:19 am |
|
I thought I'd seen posted that you should get the 2 photos in the NIP pack so you can see for yourself.
Satnav:
Garmin 2599 LMT-D (Indoor test rig)
DashCam:
Viofo A119 V3
Car Average MPG :
|
|
| Posted by M8TJT on Tue Jun 14, 2016 9:26 am |
|
| MaFt Wrote: | | At 85mph the car would cover 124 feet in that 1 second - that's nearly 38m. Versus the 44ft/13m at 30mph. |
It's half a second. Does that help your sums?
|
|
| Posted by MaFt on Tue Jun 14, 2016 1:04 pm |
|
| M8TJT Wrote: | | MaFt Wrote: | | At 85mph the car would cover 124 feet in that 1 second - that's nearly 38m. Versus the 44ft/13m at 30mph. |
It's half a second. Does that help your sums? |
Divide it all by 2...
|
|
| Posted by Rondeco on Fri Jun 17, 2016 7:28 am |
|
| sussamb Wrote: | | And speed cams can be set off by someone driving the other way, so if you're 'in the box' it's you who would get a ticket, except for the fact that someone is meant to do the visual check |
I think you'll find they can only be set off by vehicles on the 'camera' side of the road.
|
|
|
| Click here to view more comments... |
|
 |
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
