Speeding FAQ's

The signs look right, so does it really matter?

Illegal or incorrect signing can and will

provide a statutory prohibition against

conviction when enforcement relates to

certain forms of speed limit.

For example, the sign to the right may

‘look right’ but, by government definition,

its use was unlawful and it is merely an illegal

obstruction of the highway by a highway authority

acting beyond its powers.

The Police and Highway Authority insist the limit has been set up correctly and the enforcement is valid, won’t that do?

Incorrect Traffic Regulation Orders (TRO’s) invalidate the status of a speed limit.

How can a Traffic Order be invalid?

The ‘Order’ can be badly worded, any failure by a Highway Authority to consult or listen to the findings of that consultation process can lead to the ‘Order’ being void or voidable in law.

The Police use scientifically proven devices like cameras, surely that means they are always right doesn’t it?

Any number of failures can occur, by simply not carrying out a calibration check of the speed detection device at the appropriate time the enforcement will be invalidated

Additionally, laser and radar devices are prone to both operator error and bad practice.

How can I prove that I am innocent?

Whilst it is for the ‘Crown’ to prove you guilty beyond reasonable doubt, do not expect the Police or the Partnership to admit their mistakes either to you or the Court.

Do not expect the highway authority to admit their regime has not been lawfully created, the authorities will go to the wire to defend defective or illegally signed regimes, to put it simply, too much money is involved.

Your defence will initially be in your hands, my recommendation is that:

Firstly, you must secure all your evidence, without evidence, your lifestyle and your livelihood may be unnecessarily at risk.

Secondly, I suggest that:

1. If you find or believe that you are to be prosecuted for

speeding in a permanent speed limit then you should:

a. Photograph all the signing, include the speed limit signing at the

start, the end, and those sings present throughout the

restriction.

b. Ensure your photographs show the full width of the road.

c. Photograph the limit in both directions.

d. Note and photograph the location of the enforcement site or

camera.

e. Ensure that any changes to the signing that occur after your

detection are permanently recorded by camera and the dates

are noted.

f. Any ‘unusual’ or additional signs should be shown both in close-

up as well as in wide angle/distance shots.

g. The images should work like a slide show and enable the viewed

and the Court to ‘drive’ the route on a screen.

h. Use a digital imaging system. Do not alter or enhance the

images, in the first instance burn the images to CD and keep it

safe.

i. Make sure you take enough photographs, you must provide

enough detail.

It may be impossible to prove later what was there, or what has been

altered or removed once you alert the authorities to the problems.

2. If you suspect that you have been detected or are being

prosecuted for speeding within a temporary restriction, such

as road works then I advise that:

i. Return to the site as soon as you suspect you have been

detected.

ii. Photograph all the signing entering, within, and leaving the

works. Include the advanced warning signs on the approach and

unrelated signs within the system.

Try to record the signing on the side or slip roads for both

entering and leaving the site/restriction.

iii. Follow points a to i above.

iv. If the signing regime changes on an hourly, daily or weekly basis

you must record those alterations.

3. Documents:

a. Keep copies of all the documents you receive, those

segments of documents you do not return to the SCP or Police

should also be retained.

b. NIP’s can be badly worded or have typing mistakes and still be

valid, however, they must be sent within 14 days of the offence

to the Registered Keeper of the offending vehicle.

Partnerships have tried to encourage people to accept the FPN

when the NIP was served out of time, explaining that it is only a

technical point. Actually, an ‘out of time’ notice totally

invalidates any ensuing prosecution.

4. Section 172 Notices:

a. Section 172 of the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988 empowers

the Chief Officer of Police to demand drivers details. This

power is being challenged in the European Court of Human

Rights as a breach of Article 5, however that case has yet to be

decided.

In the interim you must comply with the form, the penalty is

far greater for such a failure than for the initial offence.

Bear in mind changes to legislation and punishment

means an aggressive prosecution stance on those who

the authorities want to suggest are manipulating the

system.

b. If the driver is unknown you are tasked by Statute to take all

reasonable steps to identify the driver. At the conclusion of the

exercise the Act provides a defence and you cannot be

convicted of failing to provide details, however, the legislation

does not set out what is ‘reasonable’.

c. The advice I have received suggests you must:

i. Provide the names, addresses and dates of birth of all

parties who could have been driving on that day.

ii. Provide their full contact details including telephone

numbers.

iii. Provide details of insurance policies to show ‘they’

were legally entitled to drive.

iv. Show what enquiries have been made to identify the

driver at that time.

v. Ask to see the photographs, show a genuine attempt

to resolve the issue by all means possible.

The Police will suggest that they will prosecute for this offence

unless someone takes the fixed penalty, after you have

complied with all of the above they still issue a summons.

The changes to the prosecution system now mean that

there is an incentive to take the three points.

Whilst the Police would prosecute a driver/owner for

apparently lying to avoid a fixed penalty ticket resulting

in imprisonment, this ‘new’ system actively encourages

an owner/keeper to lie and falsify documents in a

manner that would normally result in a serious

conviction, just to avoid six points and to take three.

I am advised that the SCP’s are still required to take all steps

they can to secure acceptance of a conditional offer.

5. Cloning:

There are growing indications of the use of ‘cloned’ vehicles, that

is someone using your registration number to avoid their

prosecution.

Try to see the enforcement photographs, check your vehicle to

see what unique identifiable marks there are; stickers scratches,

dents etc.

If the same marks are not in the photographs it may well be

that it was not your car, however, many SCP’s are very

reluctant to allow images out of their offices without a

plea of not guilty. One has to wonder why!

FAQ’s : Speeding