Hiya
Has anyone read this small entry in CM about this trucker who is being done by Police for doing 49 in a 40 even though his tacho, checked, says he was doing 40-42?
The police have refused to accept his tacho as evidence and state their equipment is " extremely accurate"
Hmm.
Haven’t read about it but I bet they would use his tacho as evidence against him if he had gone over the driving limit or such like 
Thing is could this, if it is proven against the driver, set a presedent & result in tacho speed recordings not being seen as accurate for prosecutions.
This could work against them & for us.
If the court sees the tacho as being inaccurate could it not raise questions as to the validity of tacho recording including driving hours ?.
If the speed trace is seen as innacurate then the argument must be that the accuracy of all the recorded imfomation is in doupt.
Presently in the UK you cannot be prosecuted for speeding only on tachograph evidence. The reason for this is that a speeding conviction requires the following; location, time, date and road speed. Whilst the tachograph chart provides the last three, it doesn’t provide the location with enough accuracy for the Courts. Also the instruments ‘in service’ accuracy of +/- 6 km/h with regard to true road speed would cast sufficient doubt on the evidence. A chart could be used to establish a ‘pattern’ of speeding, for example where a vehicle travels from a known starting point on single carriageway roads, yet the speed trace shows 90 km/h. This evidence would usually be presented in Public Inquiry, where the burden of proof is less than in Court.
The biggest problem this driver faces is getting an ‘expert witness’ to testify under oath that at the time of the speed check the vehicle was catorgorically not exceeding the posted limit. Problem is this type of report costs a great deal of money due to the equipment involved and time for analysis. Even if the Court agreed, it is most unlikely that the tachograph would be found to be unreliable regarding driving time offences etc. Again, inservice accuracy limits for distance travelled is 4 per cent and time has to be accurate to 2 minutes per day or 10 minutes per week. When the VOSA or Police prosecute for driving or rest offences they usually give quite a margin on time limits to ensure that there is a reduced chance of arguments.
i believe that you get 10% + 4mph over the speed limit before the police will prosecute but surely the driver could argue that the tacho is a calibrated piece of equipment which told him he was only doing 42mph so why should he think that was incorrect? if the court then judged against him wouldn’t they be saying to all drivers that tachos aren’t accurate enough to be believed?,where would that leave everyone?
smeserver:
The police have refused to accept his tacho as evidence and state their equipment is " extremely accurate"Hmm.
I wonder if they have produced their calibration certificates etc to prove the accuracy of their speed detection, money making, motorist robbing camera equipment?
If I remember correctly, the tacho equipment had been checked and found to be OK.
I hope the haulier stands his ground and proves them wrong.
I think one of these clued up transport lawyers will take this case on, to make mincemeat out of the CPS.
It could affect a lot of past cases if they do, like drivers losing licences because the TC has had cards checked. It happened years ago to Abbey Hill drivers
The problem with that argument, is that a tachos speedo can be “doctored” by a driver or TM or owner, or by a mechanic on behalf of any of the above, with or without the knowledge of any others of the above.
There are people who are perfectly capable of doing this trick where it isn’t possible to tell, without specialist equipment. One of the simplest methods, which is easy to check on, is to get your unit MOTed and tacho calibrated with low profile tyres on. After you get back to the yard you put standard profile tyres back on. A simple thing to do, which will give you a speed increase of about 8km h. But, as I said earlier, also easy for the authorities to check up on. If you don’t know it has been done, you will go by your tacho’s speedo and be done for speeding.
The 10% plus 2 only applies to private vehicles, because their speedos don’t need to be calibrated every so often and are notoriously inaccurate anyway.
As I understand it, the argument “at that time I was only doing 39mph your honor, look, see!” is inadmissable due to the fact that the time on the tacho head is manually set, and therfore rarely acurate. Look at 10 tacho heads and I’m pretty sure you’ll find 10 different times shown. However, the trace will show that at times during that driving session, you have exceeded the speed limit.
i read the article but i don’t think it’s correct because i recently got away with a speeding offence using exactly that excuse, my employer even photocopied my licence with an increase in size to show clearly the speed i was travelling at and he received a notification that there would be no prosecution pending but the intitial telephone conversation was to a person who is a member of the public and employed by the speed camera partnership who was unable to give any clear indication as to whether or not the chart would be accepted, so my employer decided to send a copy anyway and even blew it up and highlighted the area that covered the time of the alleged offence.
every person has a right to view any and all evidence that will be used to enforce a prosecution and the deciding facts of the case are based on that evidence.
i was prepared to go to court over my offence because i knew i was not travelling as fast as they had claimed. luckily it never came to that and i am extremely grateful to my employer for his persistance and ingenuity, most employers would have just filled in the forms and sent them off.
i am at least £60 better off and have kept a clean licence too because of his endeavours.
the moral of the story is that if the speed limit is 40 for your vehicle then drive at 40, that way you will always know that you are in the right.
see my letter in truckstop news reference this exact thing.
geebee45:
Presently in the UK you cannot be prosecuted for speeding only on tachograph evidence.
Interesting.
Why did all the Knowles drivers get prosecuted then if not on tacho evidence ?
The A-roads around Wisbech (area of Knowles depot) are all single-carriageway. VOSA came in, inspected all the tacho’s and found the majority of the tacho’s just after start of shift from Wisbech were showing 56mph. Given that the nearest motorway is at least half an hours drive away then they had to be speeding. It went to court and a hell of a lot of Knowles drivers received points and fines for SP40’s - exceeding goods vehicle speed limit (think it’s SP10 now) for those speeds arriving/departing the Wisbech yard.
laybybobb:
geebee45:
Presently in the UK you cannot be prosecuted for speeding only on tachograph evidence.Interesting.
Why did all the Knowles drivers get prosecuted then if not on tacho evidence ?
The A-roads around Wisbech (area of Knowles depot) are all single-carriageway. VOSA came in, inspected all the tacho’s and found the majority of the tacho’s just after start of shift from Wisbech were showing 56mph. Given that the nearest motorway is at least half an hours drive away then they had to be speeding. It went to court and a hell of a lot of Knowles drivers received points and fines for SP40’s - exceeding goods vehicle speed limit (think it’s SP10 now) for those speeds arriving/departing the Wisbech yard.
It was because the authorities could show a “pattern” of offences which is different to a specific offence ie getting caught on a camera at a specific place at a specific time.
If they were running on the limiter as soon as they left the yard & the nearest motorway was 1/2 hour away everyday this shows it is their normal routine and therefore a pattern of behaviour will show on inspection of their tacho’s.
A pattern needs less accurate proof than a specific offence the ie if they were doing this everyday then a specific time and place would not be needed just day and area.
Also I was led to believe that the tacho not being used as the only evidence against you was a concession to the unions to bring the legislation in in the first place
Simon:
The problem with that argument, is that a tachos speedo can be “doctored” by a driver or TM or owner, or by a mechanic on behalf of any of the above, with or without the knowledge of any others of the above.
Going by the same logic you could have a copper who alters the calibration of his recording equipment to make it easier for him/her to meet his conviction “targets”
then reset it for certification.
north surrey haulage:
Simon:
The problem with that argument, is that a tachos speedo can be “doctored” by a driver or TM or owner, or by a mechanic on behalf of any of the above, with or without the knowledge of any others of the above.Going by the same logic you could have a copper who alters the calibration of his recording equipment to make it easier for him/her to meet his conviction “targets”
then reset it for certification.
That is true, but would the police be willing to let an independant body review their equipement and certification to prove that they can not do this? Doubtful?! Unless formally compelled by a higher force…
That Knowles case was similar to Abbey Hill so I will retract my first post 
but I still think a clever lawyer will take this case on
there is a big difference between these 2 cases (knowles and the speed camera).
firstly knowles were not prosecuted in the same terms as a driver caught speeding, whilst a driver cannot be prosecuted for speeding on tachograph evidence alone the traffic commisioner can take action against drivers based on tachograph evidence, you will note from the knowles case that no drivers had any penalty points placed on their licence and none of them lost their drivers licence, the traffic commissioner revoked the drivers hgv entitlement only and placed fines upon the drivers.
if a driver was to lose their licence for drink driving and it was a second or third offence the driver may not get their hgv entitlement back until the t/c thinks that they are fit to hold a licence to drive a hgv which could be another 10 months or 5 years after a driving ban has elapsed.
an offence of speeding whether it’s in a truck or car that is caught either by the police or on camera is a motoring offence and therefore will be dealt with as such.
i would say that if the driver was to turn up at court with the tachograph chart for that day then they would have a good chance of getting off with the speeding charge.
Anyone who uses a GPS based navigation system knows how accurate these devices are. The newer ones can operate better in areas where the of low signal availability. The tacho on my coach over-reads by about 1 kph, so at 100 indicated kph the GPS i have shows 99. But I’ve been finding it very difficult to overtake some trucks and i’m pretty sure their tachos are showing 90 kph as I crawl past them!
smeserver:
HiyaThe police have refused to accept his tacho as evidence and state their equipment is " extremely accurate"
Hmm.
It isn’t up to the police, or the CPS to accept or otherwise. It is for the court to decide so as Johnny says the driver and his boss should definitely plead not guilty and turn up with as much documentary evidence as possible.
I remember many years ago getting done in the early hours for doing 80 down the bank towards Symonds Yat in an old Mk1 Atki. I knew I was doing more than 40, but I knew I wasn’t doing anywhere near 80, so I therefore knew that the cops had guessed not checked. In the event I took a day off, hired a car and turned up at Monmouth and was cleared with costs. Another driver who did the same but turned up and changed his mind at the last minute, was convicted.
If you know you’re right, go for it.
Salut, David