The Great Speed Awareness Course Scam

DoaM

How does that make a Speed Awareness Course a scam? (The thread title)

Your beef appears to be not with the course, but the underlying system itself.

Car_54

sgarrod79 wrote: »

I recently got a NIP alleging I was doing 35 in a 30, total BS as I had two witnesses int he car who can confirm how fast I was going when I passed by the area the camera was (someone was tailgating me so I slowed right down to troll him) but sadly everything relies on what you can prove and without any evidence of my actual speed I am going to be presumed guilty.

On the contrary, if it goes to court you will be presumed innocent and the onus will be on the prosecution to prove their case beyond reasonable doubt.


You do have evidence of your actual speed, it's just that it's provided by two non-independent witnesses.


Their evidence may prove to be more credible than that of the prosecution, in which case you will win. But don't hold your breath.

Stoke

Car_54 wrote: »

On the contrary, if it goes to court you will be presumed innocent and the onus will be on the prosecution to prove their case beyond reasonable doubt.


You do have evidence of your actual speed, it's just that it's provided by two non-independent witnesses.


Their evidence may prove to be more credible than that of the prosecution, in which case you will win. But don't hold your breath.

What if the prosecution refuse to release documents like when the camera was calibrated? Are they legally obliged to? I'm just thinking you know what they're like, innocence doesn't really matter in their eyes, just ensuring a conviction is the main goal.

Car_54

Stoke wrote: »

What if the prosecution refuse to release documents like when the camera was calibrated? Are they legally obliged to? I'm just thinking you know what they're like, innocence doesn't really matter in their eyes, just ensuring a conviction is the main goal.

The prosecution have to release all evidence on which their case depends, or which could assist your defence. If they fail to do so, then the court can order them to.


However, they may take the view that calibration is irrelevant. It certainly isn't the magic bullet that some pub lawyers believe it to be.

HWW

Having done the course yesterday, I am firmly of the opinion the course is a money making scam.
Advice, watch out in the West Mercia police area (Hereford, Worcester & Shropshire), ALL their Gatso's work, which is much more than can be said about the vast majority of them elsewhere, that have been abandoned/set fire to/run over Etc Most now rely on mobile camera's & unmarked police cars - no problem with the latter, if they catch some of the ridicules speeders (usually Audi & Merc) in the motorway & duel RH lane hoggers.


https://www.alamy.com/stock-photo/burnt-speed-camera.html

almillar

Having done the course yesterday, I am firmly of the opinion the course is a money making scam.
Advice, watch out in the West Mercia police area (Hereford, Worcester & Shropshire), ALL their Gatso's work, which is much more than can be said about the vast majority of them elsewhere, that have been abandoned/set fire to/run over Etc Most now rely on mobile camera's & unmarked police cars - no problem with the latter, if they catch some of the ridicules speeders (usually Audi & Merc) in the motorway & duel RH lane hoggers.

What speed were you doing when you got caught?!!

hollie.weimeraner

Car_54 wrote: »

However, they may take the view that calibration is irrelevant. It certainly isn't the magic bullet that some pub lawyers believe it to be.

Calibration is very relevant. If the means of checking the speed isn't calibrated the case will be thrown out as it can't be proved to be accurate. (Oh and I'm not a pub lawyer either).

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/98933/17550-cal-guide-UNIPARSL700.pdf

The above is for fixed cameras but similar rules apply for hand held and in car equipment which will require calibration but may differ in frequency

Johno100

almillar wrote: »

What speed were you doing when you got caught?!!

Not sure how that is relevant, obviously below the threshold for an automatic fixed penalty or a summons to court.

TooManyPoints

Calibration is very relevant. If the means of checking the speed isn't calibrated the case will be thrown out as it can't be proved to be accurate.

It doesn't need to be proved to be accurate. Approved devices are assumed to be accurate unless the contrary can be shown. Lack of calibration by itself does not render a measurement invalid. Speed cameras (and the like) do not suddenly become inaccurate on day 366. If a driver doubts the accuracy of a device the burden falls on him to convince the court of that. Part of his case may well be that the device had not been calibrated as the guidance (which you provided) suggests but he will need to do more than that before he sees himself acquitted. If he simply pitches up saying "the device wasn't calibrated as it should have been last [week/month/whatever] he will receive short shrift.

almillar

Not sure how that is relevant, obviously below the threshold for an automatic fixed penalty or a summons to court.

It's relevant in assessing whether it is a scam (catch people very close to the limit, make money) or the poster was actually speeding, and actually deserved points, or a course. 31 in a 30? Scam. 40 in a 30? Not Scam.