colnerov
Member
- Messages
- 4,925
- Location
- Nr Gatwick UK
It's just a shame the DVLA don't honour that when they claim logbooks and other paperwork hasn't arrived.
- Thread starter RaceDiagnostics
- Start date
It's just a shame the DVLA don't honour that when they claim logbooks and other paperwork hasn't arrived.
skotl
Forum Supporter
- Messages
- 10,109
- Location
- Edinburgh, UK
As an ex cop up here in Scotland I can confirm you do indeed need corroboration for Road Traffic offences. Whilst alot of Roads policing officers travel around single crewed they will almost always have in car video recording equipment and will call up another copy before charging anyone and issuing a ticket.
In Scotland a police officer needs another officer to corroborate any charges made to a suspect and also corroborate any tickets issued etc.
They must have been messed with in some way.
Different speedo head, changed gearbox, wrongs sized tyres ect.
No manufacture would supply a car that could get you a speeding ticket as its illegal & the bad press would kill sales.
- Messages
- 17,452
My guess was different tyres than standard.
brightspark
Member
- Messages
- 40,959
- Location
- yarm stockton on tees
if u have altered your wheels and tires just drive past the speed indicators on the road and check it or check on a rolling road
ask them when the gun was calibrated if your pulled overshould give you an interesting answer
all modern laser speed detection devices (speed guns) self test when you turn them on. If it doesnt complete the self test cycle it wont work. Legally they only require calibration once a year by a certified test facility.
Some info for all below to dispel a myth that they go out to catch speeding motorists to make money.
Contrary to popular belief, the police DO NOT receive a penny from any fines issued. In Scotland it's the Scottish Court Service that collects and retains the money from fines. I imagine it's also the same in other parts of the UK. If the police got the money then they wouldn't be buying 1.3 astras and 1.1 ford's for patrol cars!
I had a stretch of the A9 on my beat and I attended a fair few serious RTCs where speed played a massive factor. We never went out just to catch speeders; we went out to improve the safety on the roads by educating drivers - sometimes that resulted in 3 points and a fine or a court appearance.
Wedg1e
They call me Mr. Bodge-angles
- Messages
- 7,745
- Location
- Teesside, England
Aye, my TVR went from being within 2MPH (versus Mr Garmin) up to "about" 100mph
to being nearly 8mph over when I swapped to lower-profile tyres. Ironically the lower profile was the correct size, the taller ones were fitted as they were all I could get at the time for the money in my pocket.So now I have to do 110 to be certain I'm doing a ton. On track, of course
Wedg1e
They call me Mr. Bodge-angles
- Messages
- 7,745
- Location
- Teesside, England
Maybe so, but I bet arrogance and incompetence were the root cause of most. You only have to see how some people can go hell for leather in a straight line but show them a bend and they poo themselves.
Bill Edwards
Member
- Messages
- 4,959
- Location
- Scarborough, North Yorkshire
The 10% + 2mph is just guidance, not a rule. Plenty get done for 32 in a 30 zone, and on a motorway (70) I was going bang on the limit (satnav and cruise control) and a car came past very slowly and there was a flash. My estimate was he was doing 73mph, barely any faster than me.
Tell me there's a typo there, 15 mph?
Sorry but however the money side of things gets directed there are hardly any police out for speeders in accident blackspots but huge amounts out to do people in 30 zones that should be 40/50.
Some (possibly all) forces claim not to make (or even take) any money from speed awareness courses, it's 'all about safety' and the money goes elsewhere.
Except the courses are held in rooms rented from the police.
Go figure...
Tell me there's a typo there, 15 mph?
Sorry but however the money side of things gets directed there are hardly any police out for speeders in accident blackspots but huge amounts out to do people in 30 zones that should be 40/50.
Some (possibly all) forces claim not to make (or even take) any money from speed awareness courses, it's 'all about safety' and the money goes elsewhere.
Except the courses are held in rooms rented from the police.
Go figure...
skotl
Forum Supporter
- Messages
- 10,109
- Location
- Edinburgh, UK
Can we be absolutely clear on this? My understanding is that a police officer in Scotland, for the majority of traffic offences, does not need corroboration from a fellow officer. Corroboration is effectively the calibration of the kit involved, or the observance of road traffic signs, plus a single officer's interpretation of these readings.
While Scottish law requires corroboration generally, the majority of driving offences are exempt from these requirements (Section 36 of the Road Traffic Act 1988).
Am I wrong on this point?
skotl
Forum Supporter
- Messages
- 10,109
- Location
- Edinburgh, UK
I put larger tyres on my truck, with around an additional 10% rolling circumference. This means that, according to my satnav, my speedo is pretty much spot on now.Aye, my TVR went from being within 2MPH (versus Mr Garmin) up to "about" 100mph
So now I have to do 110 to be certain I'm doing a ton. On track, of course
It always takes a while to remember that when I'm driving someone else's vehicle!
The_Yellow_Ardvark
https://www.death-clock.org/
- Messages
- 20,093
- Location
- Going Away.
Speed detection devices will carry out a self test. This is not a calibration. It is a self test, to provide assurance the device is working with in the specifications. It also must be tested against a calibrated speed indication device. EG the digital read out on the police car video camera.
The device must be calibrated once every 12 months. The certification certificate is held by the police and a calibration sticker or similar must be fitted to the device. If in a defence case the device is questioned it will be sent to another calibration, independent of the police, to be verified. You can ask to see it at time, or ask for it to be presented.
Proof off of posting is not proof of receipt. If it sent by tracked, or by a means of proof of receipt. EG signing for at the end is. The Post Office will claim the deliver 99% of all mail. Other couriers can not. that's why DVLA and similar will claim they did not receive it. Most cases they do, but the sender has not addressed it correctly. So it gets lost in the system. DVLA employ a team to sort this mail out. now they have been absorbed into the great mess of DVLA. As a side point DVLA used to post the funny mail they received.
Our local Police Force are frustrated by thee local "do gooder" speed enforcers with the amount of complaints they have received. They range from;
Not reporting their friends.
Not setting up the equipment correctly.
Even hiding from view.
The Police do not get the monies from fines, but it goes to central government to be dished out. How ever a speeding conviction does show up in their crime solved statistics. more speeding convictions better they look on the crime statistics.
The NIP letter does not mean you will be, but pending investigation. that is the time for you to organise your defence.
it is also wise to look back and see if GATSO and similar have had successful appeals against them. There was a GATSO camera in Wiltshire were the lines on the road were incorrect. Yet they speeding fines were being issued until there was a drive to have it removed until the lines were corrected. The authorities were found "In contempt" as they did not inform the people who had been fined for an incorrect prosecution.
The device must be calibrated once every 12 months. The certification certificate is held by the police and a calibration sticker or similar must be fitted to the device. If in a defence case the device is questioned it will be sent to another calibration, independent of the police, to be verified. You can ask to see it at time, or ask for it to be presented.
Proof off of posting is not proof of receipt. If it sent by tracked, or by a means of proof of receipt. EG signing for at the end is. The Post Office will claim the deliver 99% of all mail. Other couriers can not. that's why DVLA and similar will claim they did not receive it. Most cases they do, but the sender has not addressed it correctly. So it gets lost in the system. DVLA employ a team to sort this mail out. now they have been absorbed into the great mess of DVLA. As a side point DVLA used to post the funny mail they received.
Our local Police Force are frustrated by thee local "do gooder" speed enforcers with the amount of complaints they have received. They range from;
Not reporting their friends.
Not setting up the equipment correctly.
Even hiding from view.
The Police do not get the monies from fines, but it goes to central government to be dished out. How ever a speeding conviction does show up in their crime solved statistics. more speeding convictions better they look on the crime statistics.
The NIP letter does not mean you will be, but pending investigation. that is the time for you to organise your defence.
it is also wise to look back and see if GATSO and similar have had successful appeals against them. There was a GATSO camera in Wiltshire were the lines on the road were incorrect. Yet they speeding fines were being issued until there was a drive to have it removed until the lines were corrected. The authorities were found "In contempt" as they did not inform the people who had been fined for an incorrect prosecution.
corroboration is still required. Despite the Road Traffic ACT 1988 being a UK wide act Scots Law still requires it to be corroborated. Part of the procedure of dealing with a RTA 1988 offence is carrying out Section 172 RTA 1988 to identify the driver of the vehicle - this is done even if the police can see it was you that was driving. Scots Law requires the corroboration of this or the driver could lie to the officer. Once the 172 is done then they deal will the offence ie; speeding, drink driving, using mobile phone etc. The vast majority of Road policing vehicles in Scotland don't have in car recording equipment so the 2nd officer is vital for corrboration.
A former colleague of mine lost his job and was convicted of perverting the course of justice by lying that he had corroboration whilst breathalysing a suspect in hospital ( Section 6 RTA 1988)
For example; PC Dibble is patrolling the A9 single crewed and stopped Mr Bloggs for using his mobile phone whilst driving. Mr Bloggs says he wasn't. PC Dibble cannot go any further as he had no corroboration to prove the offence. He cannot seize the phone as evidence as he has no corroboration to prove he seized it. In England Mr Bloggs would have been charged and dealt with by a single crewed officer as the Law there is different.
Scots Law is fickle but corroboration is a safeguard that protects both the police and the accused.
Police respond to community complaints over speeding in 30 zones. It's not the Police that set the speed limits for areas, it's the councils and roads authorities. In Scotland they don't have the resources to sit all day doing people in 30 zones. Only lazy cops sit doing speeders all day. Most traffic cops go hunting for uninsured drivers; unsafe cars and drink drivers. For instance in my area they have 6 traffic cops on duty to cover the whole of Ayrshire including the M77 and after midnight there are none!
Tinbasherdan
Bodger in chief
- Messages
- 7,383
- Location
- Bolton, England
Sarcasm fella, the limit is 50 at the mo but due to the atrocious traffic management 50 is a distant dream most days!
cumbriasteve
Moderator
- Messages
- 9,645
- Location
- Cumbria UK
I had an interesting speeding event a few years back, there is a section of double lane road that climbs a long gradient, there is often a speed camera operating near the top and I travel this road a lot and know about it.
Whilst on the road I was passed by a Subaru which totally howled past at I guess well in excess of 100mph, a week later I got a ticket for doing 78mph, there is no way I was breaking the limit...not even by 1mph never mind nearly 20mph over the limit.
I was daft and paid because I thought I would have wasted a day and paid even more with court costs if I challenged it, I still regret that decision.
Whilst on the road I was passed by a Subaru which totally howled past at I guess well in excess of 100mph, a week later I got a ticket for doing 78mph, there is no way I was breaking the limit...not even by 1mph never mind nearly 20mph over the limit.
I was daft and paid because I thought I would have wasted a day and paid even more with court costs if I challenged it, I still regret that decision.
skotl
Forum Supporter
- Messages
- 10,109
- Location
- Edinburgh, UK
My understanding is that many driving offences do not require corroboration by a second officer.
To return to the topic of speeding, in Edinburgh the camera vans are manned by a single person, and that person is a civilian employee of the police service - not even a police officer! - and they only need the photo evidence.
