Faulty Speed cameras

tonys_3

Interesting article in the London Metro newspaper on Monday.
It revealed that half of the speed cameras from seven partnerships were found to be faulty when sent for their annual maintenance check. This
appears to be an unacceptable level of inaccuracy and calls into question
the safety of many convictions.

Bobolink

Agreed, but payment of the £60 and 3 points on licence is supposed to be an admission of liability and you can never get that back apparently. there was a case on the radio a few months back where they admitted there was some fault and dropped the cases which had gone to court but as for the people who accepted the fine, they kept the points and the government kept their money.

If speed cameras were really about safety, they would only have penalty points, and that would prove that it isn't a money-making scheme.

tonys_3

I don't know where you get that idea from Bobolink. There are many instances in which fines have been returned when the conviction has been
subsequently adjudged unsafe.

Perhaps more might come out soon as the discovery was made by the BBC1.
Their politics show asked to see calibration certificates for certain SE Counties.

Bobolink

I heard it on R4 - they interviewed a safety partnership after it was found their equipment was unsafe and he said that those who had accepted liability by way of the 3 points and £60 have no way of reimbursement as they have accepted liability by payment of the fine.

movieman

I suspect they're just bullshitting because they're pooing their pants at the thought of having to return millions of pounds that they've already spent. I'm sure I've also read of at least one speed camera organisation having to return lots of money when their cameras were shown to be inaccurate.

This is precisely why we're supposed to be innocent until proven guilty in a court of law: they should be the ones proving that their cameras are accurate.

Bobolink

movieman wrote:

I suspect they're just bullshitting because they're pooing their pants at the thought of having to return millions of pounds that they've already spent. I'm sure I've also read of at least one speed camera organisation having to return lots of money when their cameras were shown to be inaccurate.

This is precisely why we're supposed to be innocent until proven guilty in a court of law: they should be the ones proving that their cameras are accurate.

Really, so they can revoke the points after endorsement? Cheeky little !!!!!! :eek:

tonys_3

Bobolink wrote:

Really, so they can revoke the points after endorsement? Cheeky little !!!!!! :eek:

Yes that have to when they are wrong. It should encourage some to query
the allegation when the calibration of so many cameras is wrong. The fact
that they make challenging the camera more expensive if you lose the case
is to act as a deterrent to query the validity of the charge. We are expected
to pay up as the consequences of getting it wrong are designed to put us
off.