Speeding On Tower Bridge

Likisma_Angel

Tower Bridge apparently has a 20mph speed limit, stupidly I didn't notice and drove across at 30mph at around 5am one Thursday morning. I received a speeding ticket letter, which I duly completed and returned.

Two days later, I received another ticket saying I was speeding in the opposite direction on the same bridge around 20 minutes later. I definitely wasn't. I haven't returned this letter yet.

Any advice?

anewman

"Definitely wasn't"?!... Hmmmm, if you'd said there was no chance the first instance was you I'd have believed you, but I am guessing the second notice means you're about to lose your license? Anyhow, the best site to deal with these sort of things is pepipoo.com forums.

Likisma_Angel

Seriously, I wasn't - and my license is point free at the moment, it's not the points that bother me. I admit totally I was not going at 20mph when I crossed the bridge and didn't notice the signs. The photos that were on both letters are exactly the same, but the details of direction and time are different.

I knew there was a website out there that dealt with this sort of thing, but I couldn't find it from Google, so thank you for that. I shall get on to it immediately.

hewhoisnotintheknow

ask for photographic proof?

sarahg1969

hewhoisnotintheknow wrote: »

ask for photographic proof?

Don't ask for evidence or proof - you are not entitled to see this until proceedings are issued.

Ask for photos to assist you in identifying the driver.

Could it be that the first one was wrong - in the wrong direction? And the second one was right?

If this is the case, and the second was sent outside the 14-day period, then you're off the hook (but you DO need to ID the driver).

www.pepipoo.com will assist further.

Conor_3

Likisma_Angel wrote: »

Two days later, I received another ticket saying I was speeding in the opposite direction on the same bridge around 20 minutes later. I definitely wasn't. I haven't returned this letter yet.

Any advice?

You definitely wasn't as in you didn't go back over the bridge 20 minutes later or you definitely wasn't because you're sure you were doing 20MPH?

Wig

If you crossed the bridge only once, you should phone them up and deal with it on the phone, they probably will realise thier mistake, either they confused your car/case with another car/case or they are just total dimwits.

If you crossed the bridge twice, ask them for the correct photo of you crossing the other way.

sarahg1969

I personally wouldn't deal with anything like this over the phone. The OP has received 2 S172 notices which he/she must comply with or risk 6 points and a large fine.

I would not take someone's word over the phone that they've dropped the matter. I'd put everything down in writing to them just to be sure.

Wig

sarahg1969 wrote: »

I personally wouldn't deal with anything like this over the phone. The OP has received 2 S172 notices which he/she must comply with or risk 6 points and a large fine.

Must only comply if it is either

1. Valid
2. Not subsequently retracted

I would not take someone's word over the phone that they've dropped the matter.

Neither would I but in these cases they (and you demand it, if they do not offer) send you a letter cancelling the erroneous NIP and saying no further action to be taken. Which if you don't recieve within 5 days you phone up again and speak to the same person you spoke to before.

I've dealt with NIP errors on the phone and it works out ok. They supply a phone number on the paperwork for this reason. It's a lot faster than using snail mail, the camera partnership take 1 - 2 months to reply to a letter round here. (which helps with time expiry ..... note I only said phone them up if OP crossed the bridge only once )

sarahg1969

The NIP may not be valid (if out of time), but that does not invalidate a S172 request.

Wig

When I said 'valid', I meant in the sense that it has to relate to a real event - not because it was delivered late. If the OP only crossed the bridge once, they cannot say who was driving when the car was crossing the bridge in the other direction 20 mins later because the car was not crossing the bridge at that time. If this was the case no S.172 offence would be committed by non reply. A phonecall in the first instance would be ok. If no letter stating "no further action" is received the OP can always send the NIP back (just before 28days are up) with a covering letter explaining that no one was in the car on the bridge at that time thus complying with an imaginary S.172 requirement. But IMHO if the car was definately not there there would be no need to reply at all, just be sure you can prove it in court. Of course the "do nothing" idea is stupid, and it is far easier just to phone them up and try to get to the bottom of the problem over the phone.