Speeding Advice / Entrapment

Jenni_D

Alondonboy said:

vacheron said:

Just FYI the gantry cameras on the M62 will not activate for the first 3 minutes after an aspect change to prevent motorists from being penalised for exactly this reason, so there is no way that a change from 60-50-60 which was less than 3 minutes between aspect changes would have resulted in the enforcement camera activating.

The cameras also capture, but disregard, the 20 seconds prior to an aspect change, even though the camera will flash. This is why many motorists reported being flashed, but then not receiving any prosecutions in the post.

The cameras also test their flasher module every 24-48 hours, usually around 3am, which has also probably freaked out its fair share of innocent motorists too! 

My reason for knowing this is I designed the LED signals on the M62 ATM project and spent 2 years doing all the compatibility testing with the camera systems (which we do NOT manufacture before anyone lynches me)!

To clarify, I'm not saying one individual sign changed from 60>50>60, I'm stating that they were all at 60 with little traffic then one was 50 then the next 60. Just no need for the drop other than to trap people.

Erm ... that's exactly what you have just said? 😕

born_again said:

Ectophile said:

born_again said:

Ectophile said:

born_again said:

TadleyBaggie said:

born_again said:
There is no need to throw anchor out. You see gantry & lift off the throttle, engine breaking will reduce speed by more than enough for10 mph

Maybe for a ICE but an EV may not do that the same way. 

EV's tend to be worse.
Daughter had a Mini EV. Had a blow out which a tyre place replaced. When she went to pick it up, guy said something seriously wrong with car as every time he took foot off throttle on test drive it stopped... Cracked me up that he had no idea how a EV actually brakes.
My previous Hybrid was great, would keep a nice steady speed while going downhill without touching brakes.

Not all EVs are the same.  My Renault Zoe will not stop on a level road if I take my foot off the throttle.  It's set up like an old-fashioned automatic, and creeps forward at about 4MPH if I release the brakes.

Do you not have "B" mode?
Which according to looking at Renault site it does. Which is the regen mode,

https://gb.e-guide.renault.com/eng/Zoe-ph2/GEAR-CONTROL

It does have a B mode, and does regeneration in both D and B modes.  But B is a bit more fierce.  In either B or D modes, it also increases the regeneration on gentle braking.

So tend to use D mode all the time.  If I want to slow down more, I gently brake.  It also makes the brake lights come on, for the benefit of the person behind.

Regen on my Niro brings the brake lights on when a deceleration limit is reached.

You are aware that using the brake pedal, also uses regen to slow you down to a certain point then the physical brakes kick in?

Exactly. If the deceleration rate exceeds a certain value (1.3 m/s2?) then by law/regulations the brake lights must illuminate. In my MG4 that equates to about 7% regen on the driver display.

kimwp

Alondonboy said:

vacheron said:

Just FYI the gantry cameras on the M62 will not activate for the first 3 minutes after an aspect change to prevent motorists from being penalised for exactly this reason, so there is no way that a change from 60-50-60 which was less than 3 minutes between aspect changes would have resulted in the enforcement camera activating.

The cameras also capture, but disregard, the 20 seconds prior to an aspect change, even though the camera will flash. This is why many motorists reported being flashed, but then not receiving any prosecutions in the post.

The cameras also test their flasher module every 24-48 hours, usually around 3am, which has also probably freaked out its fair share of innocent motorists too! 

My reason for knowing this is I designed the LED signals on the M62 ATM project and spent 2 years doing all the compatibility testing with the camera systems (which we do NOT manufacture before anyone lynches me)!

To clarify, I'm not saying one individual sign changed from 60>50>60, I'm stating that they were all at 60 with little traffic then one was 50 then the next 60. Just no need for the drop other than to trap people.

Ah ok! Thank you for clarifying.

Hoenir

Alondonboy said:

vacheron said:

Just FYI the gantry cameras on the M62 will not activate for the first 3 minutes after an aspect change to prevent motorists from being penalised for exactly this reason, so there is no way that a change from 60-50-60 which was less than 3 minutes between aspect changes would have resulted in the enforcement camera activating.

The cameras also capture, but disregard, the 20 seconds prior to an aspect change, even though the camera will flash. This is why many motorists reported being flashed, but then not receiving any prosecutions in the post.

The cameras also test their flasher module every 24-48 hours, usually around 3am, which has also probably freaked out its fair share of innocent motorists too! 

My reason for knowing this is I designed the LED signals on the M62 ATM project and spent 2 years doing all the compatibility testing with the camera systems (which we do NOT manufacture before anyone lynches me)!

To clarify, I'm not saying one individual sign changed from 60>50>60, I'm stating that they were all at 60 with little traffic then one was 50 then the next 60. Just no need for the drop other than to trap people.

Since the introduction of speed control on motorways. I've generally found journeys more relaxed and smoother.  There's still many who endlessly speed up to gain another 100 yeards before being forced to brake hard. Causing everyone behind to do likewise. Causing the stop start frustration of old. 

Alondonboy

TooManyPoints said:

Your heading ("Entrapment") is misleading.

Entrapment means encouraging or fooling somebody into doing something (usually commit a crime) which they would not otherwise have done. Nobody has encouraged you to do that. If the limit was properly signed you missed it and you're guilty and if it wasn't you're not guilty.

You have a simple choice: you can either accept any out-of-court offer the police may make (and for that speed it will almost certainly be a course) or you can decline or ignore any offer in which case you will be prosecuted in court. In that event you will be served with the evidence that the police intend to rely on to convict you and once you've seen that you can decide how to proceed.

Police turning the screw and only have days to respond. 

Why are they turning the screw? You must respond to the request for driver's details within the 14 days allowed regardless of any issues you may have with the speeding offence itself. You know you were the driver at the relevant time and place and that's all you need to know in order to provide your response. Even if you are absolutely certain that you are not guilty, you must still do that.

You won't need to decide what to do until you have to say whether you want to accept their offer or not. Courses are not provided for in legislation and the period you will have varies between forces, but they usually want the course to be completed within four months of the date of the offence. With a fixed penalty you must accept the offer within 28 days.

You're right. Not dealt with this before so wasn't aware of procedure. Completed details online and after a week away got home to a letter offering course so will likely just take that.

Alondonboy

ThorOdinson said:

Too many people slow down slowly when limits charge. You need to throw out the anchor and get under the limit before reaching the gantry. Beware of people not paying attention who might not brake in time.

This will be the way in the future and sod anyone else behind. I'm afraid road safety goes out the window when it begins to cost. Lesson learned.

Alondonboy

RandomTourist said:

1. All you are being asked to do is to identify the driver. Failure to do that costs 6 points, a biggish fine, and grief on your insurance premiums for a few years (insurance companies would wonder why you were concealing the driver).

2. You've been given sufficient information to decide who was the driver. That's all they have to provide (indeed the photos are not a requirement) and it's all you need to make that decision.

3. Once the police know who was driving, they can then deal with the driver. There is still no requirement on them to submit all (or any) of the evidence they'd rely on for a prosecution. The fixed penalty (or course) saves the driver time and money, saves the police time and money and depends on a driver who knows they've got it wrong admitting the fact.

4.You'd be entitled to the full evidence if you chose to go to court; that will include a photo of your car and of the speed limit as displayed on the gantry. However pleading guilty in court will be a bit more expensive and cost you 3 points; a not guilty plea followed by conviction will cost much more as you'll be paying costs as well; the total bill will be several hundreds - and three points.

In short - good observation skills are needed but the speed limit changes and enforcement changes are arranged in such a way that a reasonably observant, competent driver wouldn't be caught speeding.

....and to try and catch people out. There is no way people can argue these are not money makers. Yes they help at times, others they're used purely to gain revenue.

Alondonboy

TooManyPoints said:

I do think this is unfair, especially with the increasingly poor postal service. It's unfair to double the penalty just because you are slower with paperwork, more older people use mail and will not pay online.

There is no "doubling of the penalty" involved with speeding offences.

The recipient of the request for driver's details has 14 28 days to respond. The penalty for failing to do so is a charge of "failing to provide driver's details".  However, many police forces provide a reminder (though they have no obligation to do so) and usually allow another seven days after that. Even then they will no usually begin proceedings immediately and will usually accept a late nomination. The only time it becomes an issue is if the speeding offence is close to "timing out" (six months after the date of the offence).

As far as using mail goes, it is obligatory for the driver to return his response signed and on paper. E-mail  or online responses are only permitted where the recipient of the request is nominating somebody else as the driver. This is because the signed response forms part of the evidence to support a speeding prosecution in court. It is all the police have to prove who was driving and an e-mail or online response is not acceptable as evidence.

As far as this example goes, the OP has received the request and has all the information he needs to respond to it (and did have when he first saw the request). He has no reason to delay his response and the police cannot be said to be "turning the screw".

'it is obligatory for the driver to return his response signed and on paper. E-mail  or online responses are only permitted where the recipient of the request is nominating somebody else'

This is incorrect. You can nominate yourself as driver online with a digital signature. No need to send by post.

Alondonboy

mr_stripey said:

the comments about how one should slow down or how quickly are pretty much irrelevant to OP's case as it has been mentioned there is a grace period between the gantry limit changing and speeding fines being issued. 

If it changes "suddenly" and you go past "over" the new limit then no fine is issued 

So given the OP received a NIP then presumably the gantry hadn't suddenly changed and more likley OP was not paying full attention (not judging - we all have lapses)

People are getting confused over the 'change' issue. It's not one gantry changing from 60 to 50 but a number of them in a row going 60>60>60>60>60>50>60>60>60>60.

Car_54

Alondonboy said:

TooManyPoints said:

I do think this is unfair, especially with the increasingly poor postal service. It's unfair to double the penalty just because you are slower with paperwork, more older people use mail and will not pay online.

There is no "doubling of the penalty" involved with speeding offences.

The recipient of the request for driver's details has 14 28 days to respond. The penalty for failing to do so is a charge of "failing to provide driver's details".  However, many police forces provide a reminder (though they have no obligation to do so) and usually allow another seven days after that. Even then they will no usually begin proceedings immediately and will usually accept a late nomination. The only time it becomes an issue is if the speeding offence is close to "timing out" (six months after the date of the offence).

As far as using mail goes, it is obligatory for the driver to return his response signed and on paper. E-mail  or online responses are only permitted where the recipient of the request is nominating somebody else as the driver. This is because the signed response forms part of the evidence to support a speeding prosecution in court. It is all the police have to prove who was driving and an e-mail or online response is not acceptable as evidence.

As far as this example goes, the OP has received the request and has all the information he needs to respond to it (and did have when he first saw the request). He has no reason to delay his response and the police cannot be said to be "turning the screw".

'it is obligatory for the driver to return his response signed and on paper. E-mail  or online responses are only permitted where the recipient of the request is nominating somebody else'

This is incorrect. You can nominate yourself as driver online with a digital signature. No need to send by post.

Do you have any evidence for that? If so, what police force? And could a digital signature be relied upon in court?

I had a (very) recent NIP from the Met which didn't give the option

Okell

Alondonboy said:

TooManyPoints said:

I do think this is unfair, especially with the increasingly poor postal service. It's unfair to double the penalty just because you are slower with paperwork, more older people use mail and will not pay online.

There is no "doubling of the penalty" involved with speeding offences.

The recipient of the request for driver's details has 14 28 days to respond. The penalty for failing to do so is a charge of "failing to provide driver's details".  However, many police forces provide a reminder (though they have no obligation to do so) and usually allow another seven days after that. Even then they will no usually begin proceedings immediately and will usually accept a late nomination. The only time it becomes an issue is if the speeding offence is close to "timing out" (six months after the date of the offence).

As far as using mail goes, it is obligatory for the driver to return his response signed and on paper. E-mail  or online responses are only permitted where the recipient of the request is nominating somebody else as the driver. This is because the signed response forms part of the evidence to support a speeding prosecution in court. It is all the police have to prove who was driving and an e-mail or online response is not acceptable as evidence.

As far as this example goes, the OP has received the request and has all the information he needs to respond to it (and did have when he first saw the request). He has no reason to delay his response and the police cannot be said to be "turning the screw".

'it is obligatory for the driver to return his response signed and on paper. E-mail  or online responses are only permitted where the recipient of the request is nominating somebody else'

This is incorrect. You can nominate yourself as driver online with a digital signature. No need to send by post.

No - you are wrong.  You simply can't make that categoric a statement - it depends on the police force in question.

If, for example, you are covered by Norfolk & Suffolk constabularies then, yes, they will accept a driver's self-nomination online.  (I got caught last year)

But most other constabularies require you to return the nomination form by snail-mail and it needs a "wet" signature too.  If you don't you risk a failing to identify the driver charge with worse consequneces than the underlying speeding charge

Car_54 said:

Alondonboy said:

TooManyPoints said:

I do think this is unfair, especially with the increasingly poor postal service. It's unfair to double the penalty just because you are slower with paperwork, more older people use mail and will not pay online.

There is no "doubling of the penalty" involved with speeding offences.

The recipient of the request for driver's details has 14 28 days to respond. The penalty for failing to do so is a charge of "failing to provide driver's details".  However, many police forces provide a reminder (though they have no obligation to do so) and usually allow another seven days after that. Even then they will no usually begin proceedings immediately and will usually accept a late nomination. The only time it becomes an issue is if the speeding offence is close to "timing out" (six months after the date of the offence).

As far as using mail goes, it is obligatory for the driver to return his response signed and on paper. E-mail  or online responses are only permitted where the recipient of the request is nominating somebody else as the driver. This is because the signed response forms part of the evidence to support a speeding prosecution in court. It is all the police have to prove who was driving and an e-mail or online response is not acceptable as evidence.

As far as this example goes, the OP has received the request and has all the information he needs to respond to it (and did have when he first saw the request). He has no reason to delay his response and the police cannot be said to be "turning the screw".

'it is obligatory for the driver to return his response signed and on paper. E-mail  or online responses are only permitted where the recipient of the request is nominating somebody else'

This is incorrect. You can nominate yourself as driver online with a digital signature. No need to send by post.

Do you have any evidence for that? If so, what police force? And could a digital signature be relied upon in court?

I had a (very) recent NIP from the Met which didn't give the option

Yes - as above.  Most forces will not accept an online nomination if you are nominating yourself.  But most will allow you to identfy someone else online.

The Norfolk and Suffolk online notification makes it quite clear that you accept that it can be used against you in court - although I don't recall the exact wording.

I suspect there have been no precedent-setting cases about what the court would and would not find acceptable.

But I wouldn't want to fun the risk of a failing to identify conviction so I'd just follow whatever the instructions are letter by letter. 

[Edit:  @Car_54 -  just to be clear, I'm agreeing with you in your challenge to the OP.  My clumsy wording might make it look like I'm callenging you - I'm not...     ]