Speeding (again)

SyStemDeMoN

Distinguished Member
Joined
Feb 27, 2008
Messages
5,613
Reaction score
1,971
Points
1,181
Age
47
Location
Telford
On the 23rd of July I was pulled over by an unmarked police car for speeding.
I am not sure of what speed I was doing but the officer guessed about 50 in a 40.
I did not say much as I was in the back of his car as I was sure he was right. I probably was speeding and I held my hands up. It's a fair cop gov.

However I have only today got the letter from the police. Usual stuff about paying the fine and accepting the points.

I am just wondering if I have any argument over the length of time it has taken for the letter to come.
Also (I know its petty but this is the police) the place they have said I was pulled over is spelt wrong. They have left the 'D' out of Telford, saying it was in Telfor.

I am quite willing to accept my punishment but if there is a little bit of shenanigans from their side I am willing to utilise it.

Thanks for any help.
 
On the 23rd of July I was pulled over by an unmarked police car for speeding.
I am not sure of what speed I was doing but the officer guessed about 50 in a 40.
I did not say much as I was in the back of his car as I was sure he was right. I probably was speeding and I held my hands up. It's a fair cop gov.

However I have only today got the letter from the police. Usual stuff about paying the fine and accepting the points.

I am just wondering if I have any argument over the length of time it has taken for the letter to come.
Also (I know its petty but this is the police) the place they have said I was pulled over is spelt wrong. They have left the 'D' out of Telford, saying it was in Telfor.

I am quite willing to accept my punishment but if there is a little bit of shenanigans from their side I am willing to utilise it.

Thanks for any help.
I wonder what is meant by guessed at the speed. Surely they have to use a certified device to accurately measure the speed over a measured distance. Guessing at the speed isn't really an accurate measure of @SyStemDeMoN speed.
 
I wonder what is meant by guessed at the speed. Surely they have to use a certified device to accurately measure the speed over a measured distance. Guessing at the speed isn't really an accurate measure of @SyStemDeMoN speed.
he officer won't have "guessed"... It will be recorded when the verbal NIP was issued. I'm "guessing" the OP just put that word in there to make it sound like he's looking for some leniency

By the sounds of the thread title - this isn't the first time the OP has been caught.

Pay up and move on, you've nothing to fight here
 
I wonder what is meant by guessed at the speed. Surely they have to use a certified device to accurately measure the speed over a measured distance. Guessing at the speed isn't really an accurate measure of @SyStemDeMoN speed.

Actually, contrary to what most people think, officers opinion and estimation is enough. Any speed measurement device just technically corroborates their opinion, but isn’t strictly required (a calibrated speedo, which RPU cars will have, can also be used. They will also have a camera recording). Of course if the amount over the speed limit was minimal, you may have an argument in court that the officer could not have been that accurate. But that’s to argue out in court if you want to.

However clearly the issue here is that he admitted speeding to the officer. So it’s a moot point really.
 
he officer won't have "guessed"... It will be recorded when the verbal NIP was issued. I'm "guessing" the OP just put that word in there to make it sound like he's looking for some leniency

By the sounds of the thread title - this isn't the first time the OP has been caught.

Pay up and move on, you've nothing to fight here
I did wonder which is why I queried the wording as I wondered if it was a car other than a traffic car that had pulled him.

I agree about him being done before, just be careful.
 
Actually, contrary to what most people think, officers opinion and estimation is enough. Any speed measurement device just technically corroborates their opinion, but isn’t strictly required (a calibrated speedo, which RPU cars will have, can also be used. They will also have a camera recording). Of course if the amount over the speed limit was minimal, you may have an argument in court that the officer could not have been that accurate. But that’s to argue out in court if you want to.

However clearly the issue here is that he admitted speeding to the officer. So it’s a moot point really.
But only if its a traffic/ARV car as other cars (some others might, like an ANPR unit etc) dont have calibrated speedos, or recording facilities.
That still doesn't mean that they cant at all in a car without a calibrated speedo, as they can always check your speed using their car, then check their own speed using a traffic car in convoy. Is if they checked you at 60mph and then they used a calibrated car to check their own speed which showed at 60mph they were going 58mph then that would still stand.

As for the OP, you ALWAYS have the right to go to court (its a legal right we all have) where you can argue your case and the police can argue theirs.
There should be full disclosure prior to court of the evidence that they are going to use.

If it was a marked car then they usually will use Cleartone/Provida (or newer) devices, but as Autopilot said, they can follow you and as long as it can be shown to be at a constant distance over a period of time using a (within) calibrated speedo it will stand. I have even known the courts to say 'its not the exact speed you were travelling its whether you were going faster than the limit or not'.

Did you not get the option for a course? Or have you already had one?

EDIT
Just to add, its all an estimation in any case, even with a calibrated device, as its an average over a distance, so the actual speed will be higher and lower than the speed measured. Even a speed camera is an estimation due to the angle its being used. The greater the angle the less speed it will show as its measuring something coming towards it.
 
I wonder what is meant by guessed at the speed. Surely they have to use a certified device to accurately measure the speed over a measured distance. Guessing at the speed isn't really an accurate measure of @SyStemDeMoN speed.
He said in the car that as I overtook him he guessed that was my speed.
Like I said its a fair cop I am happy to take it on the chin, I was just asking for any advice as normally I hear that some people get out of it over some loop hole.

And yes it's not the first time I have been caught speeding but on that occasion I was told conflicting advice about forward facing cameras and such. I took that one on the chin also.
Anyone would think I Was Boris Johnson or someone important.
 
I guess he was doing 40, so knew that you were doing more than 40 as you overtook him.
As i said, sometimes they dont need to know the exact speed, only that you were in excess of it.
You could argue that your speedo was showing 40 and therefor you were not aware you were speeding i guess, but that still wont wash (especially as you have already admitted it).
As for the location, its clear its a typo not a mistake by the officer. If it was showing a different location then you would have cause to argue the case i guess.
If he made a clear mistake then a solicitor could argue that the office made a mistake there, is there a possibility that they also made a mistake about the speed, casting doubt.
 
Your speedo isn't allowed to show lower than actual speed, only over by up to 10%. However most modern cars are pretty accurate. Against Google maps and another GPS app at 50mph my car is 1mph over and at 70moh it's 2mph.
 
Yeah, as others have said, you were sat in the back of the car so the 14 day rule is not needed. It is then 6 months for the paperwork.
 
Yeah, as others have said, you were sat in the back of the car so the 14 day rule is not needed. It is then 6 months for the paperwork.
THIS is what I needed to know really.
Thanks.
 
You could always call Mr loophole and see if there's a chance he could get you off?
 
THIS is what I needed to know really.
Thanks.
Np. A friend of a friend thought he’d got away with it as after 5.5 months he’d heard nothing, then in the last week, just before the 6 months was up, the court summons landed on his doormat.
 
THIS is what I needed to know really.
Thanks.

Which is what I said in post 3.

Perhaps it’s worth explaining why we have the 14 day postal NIP rule - NIP’s are not just for speeding, but the main reason they exist is that it’s considered unfair if people are expected to defend themselves a long time after doing something if they can’t remember doing it or who was driving etc. You never know, they might have been a good reason for what they did (although most traffic offences are what’s called ‘strict liability’ - meaning the police don’t have to prove intention like they do with most offences - there are some statutory defences). So it’s about fairness, so people can think back, and 14 days was decided by the powers-that-be as being a fair amount of time. NIP’s are not required where RTC’s are involved because it’s accepted that you would not forget that event in 2 weeks.

NIP’s don’t have to be done by a letter in the post. If it was speeding captured by fixed speed camera then it almost always is, so most people think it’s all about the letter. But it’s a ‘notice of intended prosecution’, and that notice can be given verbally at the roadside, meaning a letter in the post is not required (but is often still sent anyway). If you are pulled over by a police officer and issued a TOR (traffic offence report, sometimes incorrectly referred to as a ‘ticket’) they will do it verbally (“you will be reported for the consideration of prosecution…”). You should also be cautioned. It’s not definite that you will be prosecuted (given a fine etc), just that you should know it’s a possibility. You may be asked to sign it, but refusal doesn’t invalidate it.

* The 6 month limit mentioned by mjn about is the statutory time limit on bring prosecutions (charges) for most summary only offences, which most traffic offences like speeding are. So they said does happen to many people for all sorts of things. It can be a long wait and a bit of a shock!

I should also say, I have over simplified things and none of the above should be taken as legal advice. Always speak to a solicitor.
 
Last edited:
Which is what I said in post 3.

Perhaps it’s worth explaining why we have the 14 day postal NIP rule - NIP’s are not just for speeding, but the main reason they exist is that it’s considered unfair if people are expected to defend themselves a long time after doing something if they can’t remember doing it or who was driving etc. You never know, they might have been a good reason for what they did (although most traffic offences are what’s called ‘strict liability’ - meaning the police don’t have to prove intention like they do with most offences - there are some statutory defences). So it’s about fairness, so people can think back, and 14 days was decided by the powers-that-be as being a fair amount of time. NIP’s are not required where RTC’s are involved because it’s accepted that you would not forget that event in 2 weeks.

NIP’s don’t have to be done by a letter in the post. If it was speeding captured by fixed speed camera then it almost always is, so most people think it’s all about the letter. But it’s a ‘notice of intended prosecution’, and that notice can be given verbally at the roadside, meaning a letter in the post is not required. If you are pulled over by a police officer and issued a TOR (traffic offence report, sometimes incorrectly referred to as a ‘ticket’) they will do it verbally (“you will be reported for the consideration of prosecution…”). You should also be cautioned. It’s not definite that you will be prosecuted (given a fine etc), just that you should know it’s a possibility. You may be asked to sign it, but refusal doesn’t invalidate it.

* The 6 month limit mentioned by mjn about is the statutory time limit on bring prosecutions (charges) for most summary only offences, which most traffic offences like speeding are. So they said does happen to many people for all sorts of things. It can be a long wait and a bit of a shock!
Yep, I had this situation a few years ago.
The time on the ticket was manifestly wrong, even if the speed might have been correct - and at the time stated, I was parked up and had evidence of this from the telematics in the truck and an independent witness.

I returned the NIP stating that the truck was not in use at the time of the alleged offence, and therefore I could not supply the name of the driver - as there was not one. I heard nothing back, but kept all evidence just in case.

5 months later, I got a summons to court for failing to supply the name of the driver. I submitted my evidence to court prior to the day and duly attended. The clerk of the court briefly read through the evidence before the hearing was due to begin, called in the CPS lawyer and asked her if she thought she "stood a chance in hell" of gaining a successful prosecution. The CPS promptly dropped the case and I was awarded costs.

They could have applied the slip rule and corrected the ticket time, but for whatever reason decided to pursue me for not supplying the driver details. So in essence, I got paid £144 in costs for a pleasant day out in Kent!
 
Perhaps it’s worth explaining why we have the 14 day postal NIP rule - NIP’s are not just for speeding, but the main reason they exist is that it’s considered unfair if people are expected to defend themselves a long time after doing something if they can’t remember doing it or who was driving etc.
This is where technology has yet to keep up.
Most dashcams use a restricted filesystem that limits the microSD card capacity to 32GB, even a moderate weekly use has that overwritten in way less than 14 days.
They're just starting to be compatible with cards greater than 32GB capacity, but these (cards and cameras) are expensive and the extra capacity is consumed faster with higher resolution video and multi-camera (front and rear) recording.
Who is sufficiently disciplined to back up their SD card every time before it is filled (that could be less than a working day for eg. delivery drivers) - and keep that footage not just for 14 days but for sufficient time to be aware of a diverted NIP (hire car/fleet vehicle)?
So, in the OP case, as the situation is that he overtook a unmarked police car and the allegation is speeding and not a dangerous or undue care and attention driving, if his footage hypothetically demonstrated that he approached the police car from behind whilst driving within the limit (police car going slower than the limit) and after the overtake, returned to within the limit, he could prove there was no intention to speed, and that the disparity between the police car's speed and his own wouldn't be conducive to an accurate estimate of his speed (eg. if the speed was close to the threshold for prosecution).
Obviously since the NIP was 'delivered' at the time of the offence, any footage could have been preserved.
I'm not saying any footage will automatically offer a defence, merely refresh the driver's memory of the circumstances.
 
…he could prove there was no intention to speed…

Speeding is strict liability (sometimes called an ‘absolute’ offence). Intention, or lack of, is therefore irrelevant. In other words, it doesn’t mater what your intention was, if you do you are guilty, period (unless you have a statutory defence or exemption to rely on).

That said, you may be able to argue mitigating circumstances in a court. But that’s a risk you take and you might need a sympathetic magistrate.

Whether or not you can convince a court the police officer is wrong about your speed is another mater entirely.

* Again, don’t take the above a legal advice.
 
Last edited:
Speeding is strict liability liability (sometimes called an ‘absolute’ offence). Intention, or lack of, is therefore irrelevant. In other words, it doesn’t mater what your intention was, if you do you are guilty, period (unless you have a statutory defence or exemption to rely on).

That said, you may be able to argue mitigating circumstances in a court. But that’s a risk you take and you might need a sympathetic magistrate.

Whether or not you can convince a court the police officer is wrong about your speed is another mater entirely.

* Again, don’t take the above a legal advice.
Surely if you don't intend to speed then you are driving without due care and attention. So as you say there is no such defence as didn't mean to speed.
 
Surely if you don't intend to speed then you are driving without due care and attention. So as you say there is no such defence as didn't mean to speed.
I was thinking, in the OP's case, that the police driver inadvertently increased speed whilst the OP was performing the overtake, which would leave the OP the options to fall back behind, or (not intentionally) increase speed to safely complete the overtake. Which would be evidenced on dashcam footage.
 
I was thinking, in the OP's case, that the police driver inadvertently increased speed whilst the OP was performing the overtake, which would leave the OP the options to fall back behind, or (not intentionally) increase speed to safely complete the overtake. Which would be evidenced on dashcam footage.
This was possible as the police man was not doing 40 when I overtook but was following an elderly person just after a set of lights. He didnt then pull me until a few miles later, all of which were at the correct speed. I did what I did in a moment of frustration and wanted to overtake before the the road went back to one lane, I did not realise that I had gone much over 40 although I did think I may of hit 45.
Regardless, I did what I did so now its time to pay up and take the points. Lesson learned.
 
Next time remember to start crying & tell the officer about a family emergency you're rushing to, then you'll not only be let off the hook, you might get a police escort.
It works for a family member of mine, when it was the truth.
 

The latest video from AVForums

Is 4K Blu-ray Worth It?
Subscribe to our YouTube channel
Back
Top Bottom