Got a letter in from the Fife Constabulary the other day about getting caught on one of their mobile speed cameras. Do the police have to inform you of the offence within 14 days, because according to the letter I got off them, they took 16 days
14days + a few for the postage
see .....
message
The letter I got off them states the offence date as 3/11/03 and the date of issue of the letter as 19/11/03. Thats 16 days. The letter was posted on the
19th and I received it on the 21st. It's the 16 days between "alleged" offence and date of issue thats the interesting bit.
Indeed, but unfortunately I suspect you'll find it's 14 *working* days, not
14 calendar days :-(
mate of mine contested his, asked for the photos, went back measured it out, checked the timings and asked for alll the bumf callebration certificates and alike,
not only was the camera out of its calibration period, he was actually no speeding "past the mph+10% (or whatever it is) only a fraction, but was enough to get the ticket binned
worth a try!
What? The police don't work on weekends????? LOL I can but try. Keep you posted.
Have you noticed how the Fife Constabulary mobile speed camera van looks remarkably like a works van?,orange lights on the roof etc,and how they have taken to setting it up round sweeping bends so you cant see it till its too late? I reckon they are just using it as a revenue raiser rather than a speed deterrent,any thoughts?
message
Yep, the only way I usually recognise it, is the way it is usually parked illegally. It's also usually found on a downhill stretch where your speed creeps up, like the downhill side of the dual carriage way in Dunfermline that goes past the railway station, where the speed limit is 40 instead of the customary 60, or the other dual carriage way going into Dunfermline from Rosyth, where the limit is 50 where it used to be National limit. Only accident I've seen on these roads is the 3.00am Super Nova types. Never seen the mobile camera out working at 3.00 am though.
Were you speeding though?
Of course they are - just like every other police force that operates them.
Did you see last night's Top Gear, where they high-lighted the recently published stats, that whilst convictions have topped the million, raising 10's of millions of pound, the casualty figures have not changed at all. It is MOSTLY about raising money !
The fact that they have fixed limits 24/7 is utterly ridiculous, and can not be justified in any way whatsoever, even if they are worthwhile at peak times ! We really are too accepting in this country, of what our so-called representatives, inflict on us.
Andy Pandy To e-mail, address hopefully, self-explanatory !
I saw the show last night..
It just proved that cameras DON'T work and just raise money without the police actually doing any work..
If they took that money and sorted out the crime (Rape, Murder, Drugs, Guns, Theft, etc..) in general in the country I would say fine its being put to good use but I don't see anything constructive coming from it.. They probably use it to simply buy more cameras..
The average Joe motorist is a soft target compared to the drug dealers, murderers and theves which would mean that the police would actually have to get their hand dirty and do some real police work..
Better end my rant now.. It just annoys me how motorists are always the target, and how people are being forced onto public transport(which is a joke in itself) by taxes and no road improvement to deal with the congestion so that people can have a choice as to their prefferred mode of transport..
Later..
ISTR that the revenue raised from speed cameras was to be used in the prevention of accidents - ie ploughed straight back into the area that the speed cameras are supposed to be there for.
Given that, could it not be argued that a reason (one of many I dare say) for the line of deaths attributed to speed, is such because the Police have funded initatives to prevent these accidents ? Its feasible that with less revenue, the Police would cut back on these said initiatives and hence the death figures could rise.
-- Andy Jenkins UK Broadband Usergroup :
According to the stats only 7% of deaths on the road can be attributed to speed.. Add to that the fact that since 1996 there has been NO reduction in road related fatalities but a radical increase in prosecutions (and revenue) using evidence gained from speed cameras..
So if we use your theory that the money is being used to fund road saftey and awareness then the message and campaign must be fundimentaly flawed in that it had not lead to a reduction in road fatalities..
IMO fineing, taxing and restricting the freedoms of road users is never going to work.. The driving practices and responsibilities of the drivers is what needs to be addressed and that will never happen by forcing people and imposing ever more restrictive laws.. The authorities need to work with the public not against them..
However, the number of road users has *increased* over that period of time so the fatality rate has actually fallen.
sPoNiX
It is a bit of a grey area because the number of people owning cars may have increased but the number using public transport has probably increased as well and many more people are able to work from home because of improvements in technology so many cars are left at home most of the time..
It would be interesting to see a percentage of fatalities to cars on the road over the last 5 or 10 years.. I doubt a stat like that is possible to calculate so it will probably remain speculation as to the increase or decrease of fatalities on the road..
Duh, do you expect them to have surplus cash left over for that?
The Times "obtained" the accounts of Essex SCP and they managed to spend 83% of the £6.2m fines collected just issuing fines and running the service and had to return the rest to the treasury:
There are provisions in the law for the fines to pay for road safety engineering, but predictably there are "no plans" to use them like that at the moment.
Gareth
I've seen that statistic all over the place, but what does it actually mean? Does it mean that those 7% of road deaths were caused by excessive or illegal speeds.
If it is illegal speeds, then fair enough enforcing speed limits is a priority.
If it is excessive (too fast for the road and conditions but legal) speed enforcing speed limits acheives nothing. I'm sure I could find lots of places on lots of roads where I could kill myself, my passengers or other road users without exceeding a speed limit.
I think what this comes down to is the fact that a motorist exceeding a speed limit on a straight piece of road (relatively safely) is an easier target than somebody using public roads as their own personal race track. Their are far worse things you can do on the road than speed where road, traffic and wether conditions allow it.
-- James
I totally agree!!
THey did however conveniently forget to show the massive increase in the number of registered vehicles though and the massive increase in mileage done over those years too. Something has to have kept those figures the same even though there's been a massive rise in the number of vehicles and journey miles.
What a completely imbecilical response. Are laws supposed to be different at different times of the day? Does this mean I shouldn't be prosecuted for a bank robbery during the day because they're mainly done at night? Or prosecuted for shoplifting after 8pm because most shops are closed then?
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.