4000 odd Speeding convictions null and void

#2
Oh! Dear! Never mind.

Does this mean that our 'Police Farces' will miss their 'targets'? Miss 'Spliff' will be cross!

Yours truly,

Formerly, a whole-hearted supported of the police, but now.................

PS: Miss 'Spliff' will only be cross if the 'Stalinesque' Statistics people tell her the truth!! (We do not do Truth).

These poor people are probably so frightened about their jobs, that they would never dare tell her that:

WE HATE AND DISTRUST 'STALIN' BROWN
 
#3
Fine, good for the motorists i suppose - However, if you don't wanna get caught, don't speed. I do agree with one thing though - the police are in a shocking state.
 
#4
4128 fines? Is that just one camera? At an assumption of 60 quid a ticket thats almost 250 grand it was earning between April and December. Nice little earner eh, bet the local camera alliance are gutted!
 
#5
boney_m said:
4128 fines? Is that just one camera? At an assumption of 60 quid a ticket thats almost 250 grand it was earning between April and December. Nice little earner eh, bet the local camera alliance are gutted!
Yup and its been there about 18months, still is despite there being no reason for it at all where it is siuated.
Doesn't help me nay, it got me bang to rights 6 months before the clerical error was a factor.
6 points and a couple of hundred for me, one clerical error later and 4000plus get off with it :D
Jelous? Damned right I am!
 
#6
Agree with speed cameras whole heartedly when they are put where they are supposed to be put, i.e. in accident blackspots where speed has been the proven factor in accidents, deaths and injuries.

In places where they are put just to generate revenue, they should be given the tried and tested Soweto Necklace.
 
#7
Aunty Stella said:
Agree with speed cameras whole heartedly when they are put where they are supposed to be put, i.e. in accident blackspots where speed has been the proven factor in accidents, deaths and injuries.

In places where they are put just to generate revenue, they should be given the tried and tested Soweto Necklace.
There's a mobile one that sits just round the bend from a steep flyover in Hull, the limit is 40 but the steep downslope tends to make the traffic faster, 300 yards or so round the bend and it is 70.
 
#9
I've just had a thought. Road safety experts say that roadside shrines at the places where people are killed should be removed as they are likely to cause accidents. So they put a fcuk off great flashy thing on the site instead which makes people drive erratically as they suddenly see it and hit the brakes. Nice one guys.
 
#10
I remember driving past one, cant remember the road but it was out towards Ash from Aldershot. Someone had given it the Soweto necklass and the thing had almost melted and bent into a horse shoe. About 5 cars had stopped and people were taking photo's. Bloody good for morale, just what people need during a recession i think.
 
#11
they gonna get fines and points back but how much hassle to get a insurance refund for the increased premium.
 
#12
As much as I hate the fact that some are badly placed, it's not the cameras fault that people get caught speeding...it's the fault of the person with their foot on the accelerator.

In Germany, they still hide speed traps in wheelie bins and in the back of estate cars...no signs or hi vis warnings. If you’re speeding, then possibly expect a fine...simple as.

The sneakiest trap I saw recently (in Germany) was when the police were well outside the limited area, with a laser gun pointing into the limited area...you could not see them until they pulled you in hundreds of meters ahead....again, no hi-vis-vests etc.
 
#13
Aunty Stella said:
Agree with speed cameras whole heartedly when they are put where they are supposed to be put, i.e. in accident blackspots where speed has been the proven factor in accidents, deaths and injuries.
I'd prefer a mixture of driver education and a few more black rats pulling over people after observing and judging that their driving is inappropriate or reckless, and issuing at least a bollocking and maybe a ticket.

Some people simply don't care if a speed camera flashes them, because the car isnt registered in their name, and probably uninsured/untaxed and unroadworthy or even stolen.

A real human copper can deal with this. A camera can't. All it does collect shit loads of revenue.

EDIT: Silly me, of course its not about revenue. It's about preventing accidents*

*Yeah, right. Pull the other fcuking one!
 
#14
A few years ago, in Aberdeen, local plod were out at about 0800hours with the speed gun, checking passing drivers in Springfield Road, only problem was we were in a tailback moving at about 5mph. Dont know if they wanted to catch a snail going faster.
 
#15
walt_of_the_walts said:
Aunty Stella said:
Agree with speed cameras whole heartedly when they are put where they are supposed to be put, i.e. in accident blackspots where speed has been the proven factor in accidents, deaths and injuries.
I'd prefer a mixture of driver education and a few more black rats pulling over people after observing and judging that their driving is inappropriate or reckless, and issuing at least a bollocking and maybe a ticket.

Some people simply don't care if a speed camera flashes them, because the car isnt registered in their name, and probably uninsured/untaxed and unroadworthy or even stolen.

A real human copper can deal with this. A camera can't. All it does collect shit loads of revenue.

EDIT: Silly me, of course its not about revenue. It's about preventing accidents*

*Yeah, right. Pull the other fcuking one!
This one would have been on track to make half a million quid in a year.
It has a twin sister half a mile away on the opposite carriageway.
 
#16
In the Lancet about 12 years ago there was an article entitled:
"Increased Incidence of Impotence in Police Mobile Radar 'Gun' Operators.

It would appear that, because plod always hold the radar gun 'at ease' between getting readings the proximity of the radar equipment to the crown jewels had led to a significant increase in impotance amongst users. The article was very well researched and threw up mountains of relevant statistical, anecdotal and clinical evidence. It was only when you realised that it was in the April 1st edition that the penny dropped. I still kept a copy for many years!
 
#17
Good bit of spin from Supt Hindle in the Beeb piece:

"We are not happy to progress with offences on this road which occurred between 9 April and 17 December this year.

"Anyone who committed a speeding offence between these dates on this section of road will be entitled to have the points removed from their licence and their fines returned."

Hmmm, sorry Superintendent, but what offences? The whole point is that the speed limit was not legally imposed, so breaches of it (unless in excess of the normal speed limit for that stretch of road, presumably) are not offences.

Now of course, all the people who ignored the temporary speed limit signs did not know that they were not legal, and must themselves have assumed that they were committing an offence. And they were damned lucky that the Plod and Highways Agency had screwed up the paperwork. But equally, Hindle ought to face up to the plain, inescapable fact that these people had not committed an offence, rather than imply that they simply got off on a technicality.
 
#18
"Police said they would be writing to all drivers affected telling them how their fines will be refunded and how any points on their licence will be removed.
"There is no need for people to contact police or provide any documentation, we will be in touch with them," added Mr Hindle. "

What's the odds that they don't chase up the people who should get a refund with as much zeal as they do when they owe the fines.
 
#19
#20
Just read the article on fines for careless driving in collisions. None story really.

If you have to investigate a collision, there is a possibility that one or more drivers may have been careless - thus causing the collision - and they'd face prosecution anyway.

But for those in East Yorks/Blunderside area, the force policy is NOT to issue tickets following a collision but it's not the law.

So generally if you cocked up and had a crunch you could go to court anyway. Been that way for years...

edited to add;

Most road traffic offences don't count as sanctioned detections for plod other than traffic and given that it's not usually traffic who attend, the situation remains mostly unchanged.
 

Similar threads

Top