I got flashed today driving on a single carrigeway driving TOWARDS a rear facing GATSO camera (one of these:
-- Thanks, Paul
I got flashed today driving on a single carrigeway driving TOWARDS a rear facing GATSO camera (one of these:
-- Thanks, Paul
Same happened to me once in a 30 mph zone somewhere in Wiltshire, it flashed as I headed towards it on the opposite carriageway. Never got a ticket, don't think they can work out speed this way round.
Andy
|| I got flashed today driving on a single carrigeway driving TOWARDS a || rear facing GATSO camera (one of these: ||
So you're driving towards it, could be any road conditions, day or night, and it sets off a flash in your face? And these are called SAFETY cameras?
I've seen the cameras on the variable bit of the M25 go off for the opposite carriageway, but I never thought they would be allowed to do that on a single carriageway. Just wait till someone has an accident near one of these and claims he was unsighted by a blinding flash from a Gatso directly in his face.
A mad world, my masters.
Happens here all the time - they only ever set them up to catch (and flash) the approaching traffic. Pack of fuckwits.
Did it flash just once? I think they do that if you are over the limit and going towards it. You should not get a ticket as Gatso's are 'rear' cameras.
But what if the camera facing towards you is set off by someone coming flying in the opposite direction, at night. You would get both barrels in the face from the camera as it took a pic of the oncoming traffic. I don't think the cameras look in the oncoming direction first to see if it's safe to take a snap of someone speeding, so it's no different from setting one off as you yourself step up towards one.
Steve
No, it definitely flashed twice....keep seeing it in my eyes for about
5 minutes afterwards. If it does come through I'll contest it, demand to see the pictures. Obviously I need to check if rear-facing GATSOs can actually be used to convict someone if the picture was taken from the front.-- Thanks, Paul
Firstly are you sure it was a Gatso and not another type? Secondly were there any road markings before the camera, if not then you are OK.
Jeff
|| "Richard Brookman" wrote || in message news: snipped-for-privacy@mid.individual.net... ||| Pacman wrote: ||| ||||| I got flashed today driving on a single carrigeway driving ||||| TOWARDS a rear facing GATSO camera (one of these: |||||
Yes, understood. It just seems a bit weird to me that you take a place that already has a bad accident record (or the cameras wouldn't be there in the first place) and set off unexpected high-powered flashes in people's faces as an aid to safety. I'm not sure I can come up with an alternative, but it seems a bit perverse.
Oh no they're not (panto yesterday)!
The owners make obscene amounts of money from 'safety' cameras, so dim-witted (or whatever) they ain't. The sales pitch, often delivered by former traffic police to other traffic police, is apparently "this is best thought of as a cashpoint, to solve your budgetary problems."
Whether the things are morally right and/or bring the law into general contempt is another matter of course.
Regards,
Simonm.
Hi, I used to get flashed like that all the time (in fact i used to do it on purpose occasionally to make ppl coming the way worry!) - Never ever got a single thing through myself, as far as i'm concerned gatso's are one way. Also in case you didn't already know.......the gatso ticket is void if: They take more than 6 months to notify you (Which you can help by sending the ticket back un-signed and the admin to send it back usually takes more than the 6 months!) You have multiple drivers insured and are "unsure" of who was driving that day! (doesn't work on front on cameras obviously) Any single detail on the ticket is spelt incorrect - name, address, car reg, make, model, date and time! All the best, RM
I think that one's dead now. The registered owner takes the hit unless they own up to whoever was actually driving.
On or around Sun, 7 Jan 2007 10:15:16 -0000, "Richard Brookman" enlightened us thusly:
it is.
the alternative is MUCH better driver training, but of course that costs money to implement.
On or around Sun, 7 Jan 2007 09:52:55 -0000, "Jeff" enlightened us thusly:
AFAIK, there are no "flashing" ones that are "in your face". Of course, what might have happened is that someone has rotated it. The one in Cross Hands was, for some time, pointing at the adjacent pub car park...
On or around Sun, 07 Jan 2007 17:09:14 GMT, "NTL News" enlightened us thusly:
that's a dodgy one, especially with good vehicles. I know a builder who tried that and was told "tough, you should keep better records, then". Trouble is, they'll do you as keeper for it unless you can prove you
*weren't* driving, if yer not careful. yet another erosion of the presumption of innocence in British law.|| the gatso ticket is void if: || Any single detail on the ticket is spelt incorrect - name, || address, car reg, make, model, date and time!
I contested one in court where the time was wrong, but lost and had the fine increased and costs added for my cheek. That was a Talevan, rather than a Gatso, mind.
On or around Sun, 07 Jan 2007 17:16:36 +0000, Dougal enlightened us thusly:
You could I suppose claim the vehicle was used without your knowledge, but you'd have to have an witness to give you an alibi for being somewhere else at the time of the offence. Provided you can prove that you were sufficiently far away at the time (or continuously occupied, e.g. in a meeting) then in theory you could mount a credible defence on that basis. dunno if it's been done.
Ask David Simmonite about this kind of thing!! He got jailed for telling porkies in court!
Guilt by association, f*ck me sideways with a broken beer bottle.
Nothing new about that in English law, its like the infamous Bentley case, when Bentley, who had already been apprehended, swung for something his 14 year old co-conspirator actually did.
Steve
MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.