Speed cameras (UK)

Can one be done by a speed camera on the opposite side of the road?

I was driving south on the A34 between Stoke and Stafford yesterday (a road with cameras every 100 yards it seems), and passed one in the south-bound carriageway at the 40mph limit. As I accelerated away, the camera in the north-bound lane flashed despite no car in that carriageway. Could I get a ticket from a camera pointing in the 'wrong' direction?

Reply to
Hugo Nebula
Loading thread data ...

Reply to
The Question Asker

Isnt that a myth? Perhaps once you could, but i'm sure you can just get taken to court now. If the camera was a Truvelo one then it works the opposite way round to Gatsos ie Gatsos flash after you pass them, Truvelo flash before you pass them, and hence get a photo of your face too. Do you remember if there was

3 white strips close together on your side of the road just before the camera?
Reply to
Carl Gibbs

No its still active see the article belwo or

formatting link
Taken from the western mail: Magistrates' courts could grind to a halt if thousands of motorists exploit a legal loophole unwittingly exposed by a Welsh driver. Magistrates had no choice but to find Phillip Dennis, of Whitford, Flintshire, not guilty of speeding when his case was heard on Thursday.

He had omitted to sign the standard form which is sent to the owner of each vehicle caught by a speed camera - and Mold magistrates said they couldn't accept the form as evidence.

Police have no power to compel car owners to sign the form and have been expecting someone to spot the loophole.

Yesterday the Association of British Drivers, representing about 2,500 motorists, predicted drivers would soon get wind of the court case.

"Motorists are always very quick to seek any way to avoid paying for their speeding ticket, particularly when they've been caught by cameras because they resent very much the way the cameras operate," said spokesman Tony Vickers.

"The cameras have very much reduced public respect for the police and local authorities.

"People are only too glad to find a way to beat the system."

He said motorists who receive a speeding ticket after being caught on camera could opt to have their case heard in court, rather than pay the fine without quibble.

"If a lot of people take up this option it will have another side-effect, which will be to clog up the magistrates' courts with hundreds or thousands of motorists all trying to avoid paying the fine.

"The implications for the legal system are interesting, to say the least."

Although the ABD did not condone breaking the highway laws, it said it would place details of the loophole on its own website for other drivers to read.

"I'm sure a lot of people will try it on and see whether it gets them anywhere."

The prospect of using the loophole could look especially appealing to people who already had endorsements on their licences, said Mr Vickers.

"They should bear in mind that if they fail, they will end up paying the full fine rather than the 50% they would pay if they put their hand up."

When a police camera takes a photograph of a speeding vehicle, the vehicle's registered owner is sent a form asking who the driver was at the time.

It is an offence not to complete the form and name the driver - but the owner does not have to sign it.

If the form has not been signed, the courts cannot take any notice of it.

Magistrates in Mold were asked to prove a case of speeding against Phillip Dennis, 34, of Gwibnant Farm, Downing Road, Whitford, near Holywell.

But clerk Paul Conlon pointed out that the form naming the defendant as the driver was unsigned.

The driver had provided the information required of him but there was no requirement under that section of the law for the form to be signed.

Magistrates said they were not happy but had to find the defendant not guilty in his absence.

Chairman John Beard suggested the police should go back to defendants and ask them to sign the form.

But he was advised that as the law now stood the only requirement was to stipulate the name of the driver, and that there was no legal requirement to sign it even if police did go back and request a signature.

Nobody was available from North Wales Police to comment yesterday.

But one police source said there had been concern that once the loophole was spotted "it could open the flood gates."

He said, "The police generally have been waiting for someone to appeal against a conviction on this point but no one has yet.

"We have basically been keeping our heads down.

"Some of my colleagues say we should just make sure people sign the forms but others are a bit concerned that to do that is tricking people into something they do not have to do.

"The trouble is when this is highlighted they will all be sending the forms back unsigned."

Reply to
The Question Asker

There's no date on that page, and who knows when that article was written that you quoted. However this quote was from August this year: "As a spokeswoman for RAC Legal Services says: "If there is a repeated failure to sign the notice, it is highly probable that an alternative charge will be made: eg failure to supply details of the driver at the time of the alleged offence, an offence which carries the same penalty points and fine as the original speeding charge."" From what i can gather, after a bit of googling, you may get away with it, or you may get done as bad or even worse. Its a risky thing to do!

Reply to
Carl Gibbs

If it was a normal gatso one (grey box on side of grey post), then they sometimes get confused when a car drives towards them.

Don't worry. If there were no registration marks and you were driving towards it, you will not get anything.

MS

Reply to
Marcus Sheen [UK]

On Sun, 28 Dec 2003 18:15:31 -0000, a particular chimpanzee named "Carl Gibbs" randomly hit the keyboard and produced:

It looked like a normal Gatso. It was on the grass verge on the opposite side of a dual carriageway, and there were no road markings on my side of the road.

Reply to
Hugo Nebula

You're fine then. I don't think Gatsos ever flash on-coming traffic unless they have an infra-red flash (like the Tuvelo ones).

The same happened to me in Eastbourne and I enquired on a speed camera website and they confidently said that it was the camera getting confused by oncoming traffic.

MS

Reply to
Marcus Sheen [UK]

I'd imagine you'll be ok then. Must have just been the camera having a fit

Reply to
Carl Gibbs

the rules regarding cameras can be daunting, however this is certain, the police, or anyone else for that matter are forbidden to take a physical photograph of yourself without your permission, this being the case gatso's take an image from the back of the vehicle which is permitted, some of the newer cameras can get away with it because they are infa-red images and not photographs so these are acceptable under uk law. there is also the case that approx 60 - 70% of cameras may flash, but do not contain any (expensive) camera equipment inside in which case you will get away with it, they are a detterent more than anything, although good revenue for the government when you are finally caught. one simple rule really, if you get caught speeding then cough up like everyone else has to. if people are so dead against paying and refuse to sign the form or plead guilty etc etc then why bother to even slow down when you see one approaching ???

Reply to
steve

On the A338 into Bournemouth there are some Gatso cameras situated on the central reservation of the dual carriageway, when you drive along you see that the camera is pointing at you so you think you are OK, HOWEVER there is a camera in both sides of the box! Well my suspicion is there there is 1 camera in the box and they can make it face either way but you just cant tell. Could it be that the box that flashed you had a camera on each side?

Reply to
Simon Gillow

Theyve replaced those now with cameras either side, so i reckon they only worked one way at a time, and now they've made enough money to put cameras on both sides. Well that was my theory when i saw they'd all been dug up the other week.

Reply to
Carl Gibbs

you can't get 'done' driving towards a n old type GATSO. it works on a spring that compresses (sort of). BTW you can't get away with not signing/overpaying/ignoring etc the penalty notice. you just incur court costs for wasting time. If you don't name the driver the registered keeper gets the fine by default. was all covered on sky TV programme 5th gear a few weeks ago.

Simon

Reply to
SimonDS

There's one like this going into Eastbourne, athough I tend to agree that there is only one 'occupied' side of the box as it is very slightly angled down one side which I assume to be the working side. Haven't ever seen it flash to know though.

That wouldn't happen as it wouldn't flash approaching it, and if it did, it would again be a case of a 'confused' camera.

MS

Reply to
Marcus Sheen [UK]

GATSO cameras work by radar, hence they occassionally get confused. The radar emits from the grey panel halfway up the box.

The ones that use the loops in the road are the Tuvelo ones which are the ones that take the picture from the front. I think there is only one, maybe two areas in the country that use these. GATSOs are by far the most popular, and I've seen a lot of Specs cameras up North.

MS

Reply to
Marcus Sheen [UK]

Funnily enough I had an argument with a Gatso this evening.

Was following prevailing traffic in Eastbourne past a well-known Gatso. The gap between me and the prevailing traffic widened as we approached the camera and I watched my speedo. I'd say that the traffic in front was going over 30mph, but only marginally.

Never the less, I was surprised that the camera did not go off for them (there was about 45ft between me and the two cars in front), but when I passed the camera and was in the registration marks by the curb... FLASH, FLASH.

"Hmm" I thought. I remember not braking (as it would be pointless) and looked at my speedo - 25mph on the dot, and I know my car couldn't have slown down that quickly by me subconsiously easing off the gas.

I know cameras can get confused when you drive towards them, but can the same be said when driving in their 'catch area'? Also, how are fines issued? Will they verify that I was going under 30mph before issuing it?

MS

Reply to
Marcus Sheen [UK]

Wrong, Truvelo cameras don't flash at all, but they do take a picture of the car before it passes rather than after. However, the original poster said it flashed, so it must have been a gatso.

I used to live near a gatso camera which you could set off by going in the wrong direction too fast, I used to do it all the time and never got done, dunno about the poor folk who were travelling in the opposite direction to me at the time though....

Reply to
miknik

I very much doubt it, my mate got hounded for ages about going through a Gatso in his green Mondeo at the other end of the country, it took several months before the police sent him a copy of the photo showing a silver Porsche 911 wearing his Mondeo number plates and agreed they had made a mistake. If they can't tell a Porsche from a Ford then it's a miracle they manage to address the envelope properly to send you the fine!

Reply to
miknik

But what about the points? The fine is no big deal....

Reply to
miknik

OK I'm ignorant about these things!!

Which Cameras flash as you approach them??

There are a couple of Cameras in a Village near me that have TWO Cameras, both facing the on-coming Traffic. On one occasion I got flashed by one of them (fortunately I didn't get the follow-up ticket) but it temporarily blinded me!! Now that is what I call a contribution to road-safety - if any Pedestrian had chosen that moment to step out in front of me, I wouldn't have seen them!!!!

Regards, John

Reply to
John J. Burness

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.