I would fight any speeding offence recorded less than 10% over the speed limit simply because the regulations in force for speedometers say that the speedo must be accurate to within 10%. If your speedo complies with those regulations how can you be prosecuted for driving within the legally allowable tolerance?
I’ll have a look through the C&U regs later to check that it is still 10%.
My understanding of the guidlines in force for speed cameras is that the prosecution threshold should be no less than the limit + 10%+2mph, i.e. in a 40 limit I wouldn’t expect to see any offence of less than 46mph being processed.
I’d definitely fight that one. Say that you were doing 40mph according to your wagon’s speedo. I’ll bet you money that you’ll get off with it because 2mph isn’t enough to justify them arguing it with you. I think you’d be stupid to let it go and pay up for 2mph.
Reagrding the A420, I’ll give it 12 months before it’s made a 7.5 tonne limit except for access.
Reported in Truckstop news and commercial motor, HGV driver done for 49 along thet same stretch of road.
He decided to fight it as he was convinced by his tacho that he had been travelling at 38-42mph at the time.
CPS dropped the case the day before it went to court, despite them saying that tacho evidence was not accepted.
Strange, they can use the tacho to prove you were speeding, but you can’t use tacho to prove you werent.
i quite frequently travel to Swindon from Grantham and have found the 429/419 a more relaxing run than the 420, theres always some pillock up your arse on the 420 when you travel at 40, it tends to be less busy on the 429 and sitting at 40 more relaxing.
I would fight any speeding offence recorded less than 10% over the speed limit simply because the regulations in force for speedometers say that the speedo must be accurate to within 10%. If your speedo complies with those regulations how can you be prosecuted for driving within the legally allowable tolerance?
I’ll have a look through the C&U regs later to check that it is still 10%.
My understanding of the guidlines in force for speed cameras is that the prosecution threshold should be no less than the limit + 10%+2mph, i.e. in a 40 limit I wouldn’t expect to see any offence of less than 46mph being processed.
This is alo my understanding Qhunter, according to the Camera partnership website the 10%+2 is applied for the same reasons you give, ie accuracy of speedo’s,etc.
I would fight any speeding offence recorded less than 10% over the speed limit simply because the regulations in force for speedometers say that the speedo must be accurate to within 10%. If your speedo complies with those regulations how can you be prosecuted for driving within the legally allowable tolerance?
Not quite right, a speedometer may over read by up to 10%, but may not under read.
I would fight any speeding offence recorded less than 10% over the speed limit simply because the regulations in force for speedometers say that the speedo must be accurate to within 10%. If your speedo complies with those regulations how can you be prosecuted for driving within the legally allowable tolerance?
Not quite right, a speedometer may over read by up to 10%, but may not under read.
Also the ACPO guidelines are just that, Guidelines. To be ignored when money can be made.
I would fight any speeding offence recorded less than 10% over the speed limit simply because the regulations in force for speedometers say that the speedo must be accurate to within 10%. If your speedo complies with those regulations how can you be prosecuted for driving within the legally allowable tolerance?
Not quite right, a speedometer may over read by up to 10%, but may not under read.
Also the ACPO guidelines are just that, Guidelines. To be ignored when money can be made.
tachos have to be accurate + / - 2%
but lets say you were travelling at 42 mph according to the tacho 2% = 42.8 ok & 10% = 46.2 up the creek
and if your tacho showed you consistently near the 80 k line they would probally want to keep the money
Dratsabasti:
CPS dropped the case the day before it went to court, despite them saying that tacho evidence was not accepted.
Strange, they can use the tacho to prove you were speeding, but you can’t use tacho to prove you werent.
Is that not a quid pro quo from the days when tachos were being introduced? There was widespread opposition in the driving profession and to avoid trouble (unions were a force to be reckoned with in those days) the government agreed that drivers couldn’t be convicted of speeding on tacho evidence alone. If this is the case it is hardly surprising that prosecuting authorities want to take advantage of the same concession when the boot is on the other foot.
Having said all that an LA can take tacho evidence into account when dealing with otherwise offending drivers.
To get back to the point, I would have thought that 2mph over 40 was sufficiently close (5%) to warrant a challenge.
TBH the cameras are digital now and the fines are processed by computer automatically, a computer cant reason so if the trigger speed is set at 40 it sends a fine out.
If you appeal then it gets reviewed by a human who will more than likely let you off. Follow their apeals procedure with a polite letter included, importantly be polite because if you were the person reading the letter and it comes across as being ‘arsey’ you’d just shove it straight in the rejection pile.
If that doesnt work then request information on the calibration of the camera as this will have to have a specified tollerance which they’re supposed to check every so often (just the same as a tacho is)
