Speeding fine for imaginary speed?

Shrimply

Are you sure your app matches up with your speedometer? I find that very hard to believe.

In my experience speed calculated using GPS tends to be about 5 to 10 mph less than that of the actual speedometer. I certainly wouldn't rely on it to keep me under a speed limit.

Nasqueron

agrinnall wrote: »

Are you sure? I don't think that was one of the locations that was included in the list of reactivated cameras.

http://www.birminghammail.co.uk/news/midlands-news/birmingham-solihull-speed-cameras-everything-11721860

Having said that, I live near to there and I agree that many people do drive too fast along that stretch of road.

Not sure about reactivated, it was moved back in 2010, my issue is that, whether it worked or not, having it outside a school makes sense, taking it away from the school and putting it on the straight smacks of money making

Stoke

Shrimply wrote: »

Are you sure your app matches up with your speedometer? I find that very hard to believe.

In my experience speed calculated using GPS tends to be about 5 to 10 mph less than that of the actual speedometer. I certainly wouldn't rely on it to keep me under a speed limit.

Equally, the speedometers are usually miscalculated.

Nasqueron

Franz_Ferdinand wrote: »

Fixed that for you.

Well done for quoting the well worn fallacy about civil servants paying tax to contribute towards xyz - as I'm sure you should be aware, a public servant paying tax is simply giving the government money its own money back again in a form of PAYE recycling

Private sector worker pays tax = new revenue to the government / council
Government / council uses that money as part of budget for salaries for public sector workers
Public sector worker pays tax, giving the money back to the government

They do not generate new income, or to put it another way, if the public sector was the only job, the government would not have any money to pay them

Franz_Ferdinand

Nasqueron wrote: »

Not sure about reactivated, it was moved back in 2010, my issue is that, whether it worked or not, having it outside a school makes sense, taking it away from the school and putting it on the straight smacks of money making

It ain't making any money though.

facade

Franz_Ferdinand wrote: »

Does/did a court code get added to your licence when you accept a fpn?

There's a four digit number for them.

Edit: Just looked on google at an image. Even if you accept the fixed penalty the court code is added. So yes your conviction is by a court.

Yes you are right, you accept that a court can endorse your licence, for an offence that you accept you committed, without actually admitting that you committed it, or being prosecuted for it.

A bit like blindly accepting a Caution as an alternative to prosecution for something, which shows on your record with the same status as a conviction, because you have to agree that you committed the offence to accept the Caution.
(the difference is that in a lot of cases, there wouldn't even be a prosecution through lack of hard evidence, or "not in the Public Interest", whereas speeding they have sufficient evidence)


So you get convicted without any legal proceedings, saves a lot of court time & public money though.

phoenix_w

esuhl wrote: »

Does it really matter if speed cameras are sometimes used to generate revenue?

The problem, as I see it, is that the police are over dependent on speed cameras to do all of their traffic work. Where I live there are rarely any traffic cops on the beat - the roads are completely lawless. You can be a complete muppet behind the wheel and drive as fast as you like almost anywhere. So long as you remember to slow down for the odd speed camera or know the same tired and lazy places the vans work, you're laughing.

We see traffic coppers two times a year: Once when the announce on twitter they're going to patrol the next day, and again when they announce on twitter that they're going to do a tax & insurance crackdown. The pose for their picture in the local paper next to the one vehicle they managed to catch and then spend the rest of the year playing top trumps.

iolanthe07

Franz_Ferdinand wrote: »

You do know that that camera was unused for a number of years and raised no money at all?

It was doing its job then, wasn't it? That's why it was moved - to raise revenue.

Franz_Ferdinand

facade wrote: »

Yes you are right, you accept that a court can endorse your licence, for an offence that you accept you committed, without actually admitting that you committed it, or being prosecuted for it.

A bit like blindly accepting a Caution as an alternative to prosecution for something, which shows on your record with the same status as a conviction, because you have to agree that you committed the offence to accept the Caution.
(the difference is that in a lot of cases, there wouldn't even be a prosecution through lack of hard evidence, or "not in the Public Interest", whereas speeding they have sufficient evidence)


So you get convicted without any legal proceedings, saves a lot of court time & public money though.

You admit it by accepting the ticket.

Franz_Ferdinand

iolanthe07 wrote: »

It was doing its job then, wasn't it? That's why it was moved - to raise revenue.

How did it raise revenue if they switched them all off?