Speeding Fine but not in area/street of residence

[CrazyChemist]

A friend has received a notice of intended prosecution for travelling at 52 in a 40 limit.

The only problem is he was tucked up in bed at 1:25am (the time of the offence) and over 40 miles away from the location of the "offence".

His vehicle was in the garage at the time of the offence. There is no possibility it could have been stolen then returned. It was most likely captured by a mobile speed camera (judging by a motorcyclists' website with a list of camera locations). I'm not entirely sure how to make sure though - the location is A5 Watling Street, Nuneaton (warwickshire) Southbound (40mph limit).

However, the main point we want to get across is that it was not his vehicle that has been picked up and he was at home at the time of the "offence". I know we can request photographic evidence but obviously the great worry is, has the plate been cloned?

[raymond]

Get photographic evidence. There are tens of thousands of cloned cars driving around, better this way than if someone had been knocked down in a hit and run by your "cloned" car.

[mistyarthur]

Even if it is a cloned plate I'm sure the people who have cloned it will not have gone to the extent of getting the same car model/colour etc. so the photograph will show it up as not being your friends car?

[crossleydd42]

Was he tucked up in bed with someone - an alibi is a help. You can, and should, get a photo of the vehicle from the authority - maybe the vehicle could be identified as not being his, as it looks like a number-plate cloning job. He may have to use a solicitor in the end, but look at this website for some useful background information. Any correspondence with anyone should be by Recorded Delivery.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/insideout/westmidlands/series7/car_cloning.shtml

[moonrakerz]

With some police forces you can view the photos on line - it tells you how to do so on the NIP.

[Wig]

They do get the same model and colour, there isn't a lot of use doing it any other way (for the criminal). You will definately need to ask for the photos, and I suppose it won't harm to start off as you mean to go on, so tell them from the outset, you are requesting the photos because you believe the vehicle has been cloned.

You might find yourself having great difficulty trying to prove it's not your car, you'll have to look at the shape of the exhaust and look for stickers on the window. position & colour of road tax disc etc etc. Good luck and report back when you have the photos.

Oh and did you mean the garage of the house or the garage (repair shop) having repairs done, it could have been one of the staff borrowing your car.

[HugoSP]

There is of course the view that if you dig your heels in then they would ultimately have to satisfy the court that your friend is guilty of the offence. Burden of proof and all that.

H

[zappahey]

There's a fair bit of jumping off the deep end about cloned cars here. It may be a simple mistake. A bloke I know got a parking ticket for his bike because the processing centre read the plate (of a car) wrongly.

Just ask for the photos and take it from there.

[Mookfish]

Get photographic evidence. There are tens of thousands of cloned cars driving around, better this way than if someone had been knocked down in a hit and run by your "cloned" car.

I agree. This is exactly what I said when the following happened.

A relative got 3 tickets for not paying the fee an a toll road in birmingham recently and was making a big fuss about it, even though she could prove she was at work in liverpool within 15 minuetes of the offences.

[Mookfish]

Here's an idea to prevent this hapening, make sure there is something on your car near the numberplate that is distinctive, then get someone to take a photo of you stood by it with todays newspaper.Okay it may not be definative proof, what with image editing software and the possivility that you may change the distinguishing features of your car, but it's practically free so got to be worth doing.

[CrazyChemist]

Oh and did you mean the garage of the house or the garage (repair shop) having repairs done, it could have been one of the staff borrowing your car.

Nah it's the garage at home. In fact being a tandem garage his car was boxed in by his wife's car so if it was his, then his wife's car would have had to be backed out first, parked on the road, then the second garage door opened and then his car nicked, then replaced later on without anyone noticing. The problem with this is that neighbours would have noticed (neighbourhood watch) and also his wife's car is a newer model Peugeot 206 - much faster (and overall better) than a 106. This is to illustrate that it was definitely not his car.

He's in the process of typing a letter to them stating that he was at home at the time as was his car (1:25am!) asking for photographic evidence, to prove that it was not his car. As you say it could be a simple misread index number. :confused:

[hjb123]

Could easily be misread - you see on the TV on these many police camera action programmed that the Automatic Vehicle Registration can pick up the wrong registration of a car if there is something on the number plate that makes the letters or numbers look like another letter or number

[Bossyboots]

I know someone who was in this position and was adamant it was not his car. The police did take his suggestion of it being cloned very seriously as at the time it was a popular vehicle for cloning. They asked him to send any recent photographs they had of the vehicle and they also forwarded him photographic evidence.

Unfortunately, it was absolutely clear from both sets that this was the same vehicle so he put his hands up to it but he never did explain to anyone why he had claimed it could not have been where it was so we are left to assume one of his children was driving it illegally, possibly without his knowledge, but he won't discuss it any further with anyone.

Not saying that is the case here, just that the police were very helpful when he claimed it had been cloned. Of course, they could simply have been playing with him.

[crossleydd42]

To make your car stand out if it's photographed on cammera, you could always put the tax disc at the TOP left-hand side of the windscreen. Quite legal, but non-standard. Also, put some sort of sticker on the BACK window. Make sure it's nothing to do with Cliff Richard; that an offence in itself!!

[Wig]

Top near side (passenger side), that's where mine is :) because I didn't want to remove a sticky holder that was already in that position, if I removed it it would

a) lose its stickyness, so unable to reposition
b) leave a mark on the screen that I would have to clean off.

[waster]

Top near side (passenger side), that's where mine is :) because I didn't want to remove a sticky holder that was already in that position, if I removed it it would

a) lose its stickyness, so unable to reposition
b) leave a mark on the screen that I would have to clean off.

Problem is most speed cameras (not all though) take the photos from the rear. So anything on the fron windscreen would be of little assistance.

My mother in law had this problem. I wrote to the Safety Partnership (there's a larf!!) concerned on her behalf and they wrote back saying they had made a mistake!! I wrote asking them to explain what the mistake was, but they never responded. I suppose they were afraid that if they admitted in writing what type of errors they can make, it could potentially open the flood gates and lead to problems in future when they are trying to persecute (sorry - prosecute) the motorist.

Write and query their evidence. Good luck.

[CrazyChemist]

Problem is most speed cameras (not all though) take the photos from the rear. So anything on the fron windscreen would be of little assistance.

My mother in law had this problem. I wrote to the Safety Partnership (there's a larf!!) concerned on her behalf and they wrote back saying they had made a mistake!! I wrote asking them to explain what the mistake was, but they never responded. I suppose they were afraid that if they admitted in writing what type of errors they can make, it could potentially open the flood gates and lead to problems in future when they are trying to persecute (sorry - prosecute) the motorist.

Write and query their evidence. Good luck.
He's sent the letter off by recorded delivery so hopefully will get a reply soon. :rolleyes: It's encouraging to know you've had this problem and it was resolved successfully :T Cheers :beer: :D

[CrazyChemist]

Excellent News - they (the "safety" partnership") wrote back the next day and apologised for the "error on their part". Muppets! :rolleyes:

Thanks for all the posts and ideas people, much appreciated! :T

CC :beer: