OT: Gatso Speed cameras

I don't know if it works in the UK, but an approach that works here is to request (in writing) the calibration records for the camera, the training record for the operator, and the record of how it was set up on that occasion as you wish to defend the ticket in court. In about 95% of the cases they will withdraw the ticket immediately rather than go to all the trouble of providing the information (which often proves that the camera was being operated outside the law) and then going to court over it.

Yep - a global phenomenon. The registered keeper carries the can here too if the driver is unidentifiable (but there's no points attached to it).

|| Richard Brookman wrote: ||| NTL News wrote: ||| ||||| 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. ||| || I don't know if it works in the UK, but an approach that works here || is to request (in writing) the calibration records for the camera, || the training record for the operator, and the record of how it was || set up on that occasion as you wish to defend the ticket in court. || In about 95% of the cases they will withdraw the ticket immediately || rather than go to all the trouble of providing the information || (which often proves that the camera was being operated outside the || law) and then going to court over it.

BTDT! I got all the paperwork and records and contested it in court, in great detail. The long and the short was that as I was not qualified in electronics and could not *prove scientifically* the equipment was faulty/incorrectly set up, or did not bring an expert witness who could do the same on my behalf, it ws my word against this fine, upstanding young officer, etc. I think they were out to prove a point. (We've been here before, but I later met the camera operator under other circumstances, and he admitted that I had introduced enough doubt into his mind that he would have let me off.)

Going a bit OT, but I have always been a strong supporter of the rule of law etc., but this experience has made me utterly cynical.

A cautionary note: I was pulled over by gentleman in green, (cf blue in GB) and reported for going a bit too fast, according to his on-bike Vascar, quite a bit too fast as it turned out, was in a hurry to get to a funeral! When the summons arrived it had the wrong date, it had the date when the summons was typed not the date of the offence. I wrote to the prosecuting inspector, pointing out the error and stating on the evidence presented in the summons there was no case to answer, and that I was not going to give them the opportunity to correct their mistake in court. No case, end of story. The moral is avoid the court if at all possible the evidence you will be contesting is that given in the court not on the summons!

Has he still got his Triton Nige?

Martin

On or around Sun, 07 Jan 2007 17:36:47 +0000, Lord Austin the Ebullient of Happy Bottomshire enlightened us thusly:

that should be "goods" of course.

Truevelos for one flash do visibly 'flash in your face' although they are not as bright as Gatsos, the flash is meant to be filtered to infra-red, but they are still quite bright.

Jeff

I THINK you have to be over the white markings on the road to allow a secondary check of the cameras accuracy.

David

Truevelo cameras can be set to work from both the front or the back. For some reason when working from the front they seem to have just 2 parallel white lines across the road, but when they are operating from the rear they have the 'scale' type marking along the road. There are several sets around here with both set of markings, and the mode of operation is varied, sometimes from the front and sometimes from the rear. The camera is just swung around to face the other way.

Gatsos only seem to have the scale type markings from the rear.

Jeff

Truvelo's don't use radar, they use strips embedded in the tarmac that calculate your speed as you pass so the white lines are not used.

Just adding my 2p worth!

On or around Mon, 8 Jan 2007 13:48:14 -0000, "Andy" enlightened us thusly:

ain't truvelos the average speed thingies that are a mile apart or whatever?

In message , Lord Austin the Ebullient of Happy Bottomshire writes

No that's SPECS.

Truvelos are the forward facing cameras with the IR filter over the flash.

Will

I wrote to them ages ago to say that I only had a TV for watching DVDs etc, and had no trouble from them for over a year. Since then I've been trying to sort out a working Freeview setup, to no great success so far (not a supported signal area) so I'm expecting them to start hassling me again soon.

They did say that they might come round sometime to check up, which I find objectionable, especially being as it's all to fund the london-centric, anti-4x4, townie-infested, lazy, plummeting downmarket BBC.

The whole "innocent until proven guilty" thing has never been true, it's just a line trotted out in TV dramas, a soundbite basically.

The white lines are used to indicate which vehicle triggered the camera, the tyre of the offending vehicle should be within the set of parallel lines across the road. This is particularly important on dual carriageways.

I think the local ones are either radar or dual radar/piezo sensor. Probably radar when rear facing using the scale markings on the road. There is a panel in the top corner that is normally blanked of for piezo only sensors that is covered by a grey panel which may be the radar sensor.

Jeff

I once had a problem with TV licensing because I was running a business from my home address. They informed me I needed a seperate licence for a TV on business premises. Two licences for one address, get stuffed ...

Getting more complicated all the time, that sounds too expensive for them and us, I think we're paying too much council tax.

Martin