trigger03

Has anyone actually got away with a camera ticket? Just got one through today, have heard that you can fill in the name etc, as yourself and then not sign the form. Apperently you are required by law to supply the name of the driver but not to sign it because you can't be required to incriminate yourself or something. Anyone actually know if this is the case or another loophole?
cheers lads

Steve777

iTrader: (8)

I think this doesn't work anymore. I belive that this excuse only got thrown out of court once

The best way is to write back asking for the evidence (Picture) , once you have that then write back and ask for the cameras calibration certificate etc etc.

I have heard that delaying like this occasionally makes them drop the case, but I wouldn't bank on it

bluto22b

Have a look on this site:
http://www.pepipoo.com/

RB5_245

Heard this is possible, also if you can prove you don't know who was driving, or send back "i am unable to supply you with the information you have requested" this is another one on the not incriminating yourself thing. Personally i'd go with fill in but don't sign it. Good luck!

I found a lot of stuff on this on the internet a couple of years ago so do some research and you should get what you need. FYI by not signing the form it makes it inadmissable as evidence, and if you're not at court, which you won't be the case is thrown out due to lack of evidence. If you are in court they can make you stand up and say it was you. But thats a bit iffy.

LanciaChris

A friend of mine is currently trying it out after he picking up a ticket in his alfa 33. Ill let you know how it works out. In future he plans to try the dont understand the caution, make them bring out a copy of the criminal justice act, sit around reading it for ages etc etc.

That said, he is looking at 9 points (3 because he was unknowingly driving with front tyres marginally past limit - they were michelin pilot exaltos and had been on the car fully 7 thousand miles, and the car had been through an mot about a month before with no warnings, and the other 6 for doing 44 in a 30 zone. Of course, if hed payed attention to my message i sent him a day before he got it warning him that police cars were hiding around the area he was caught maybe he wouldnt be seeing that!)

Anyway yeah, hes looking at 9 points, so for the next 5 years hes got nothing to lose by trying them all

Adrian F

Some thing in the Sun today about some footballer trying to get 3 points scrapped because he hadn't signed the form. he can afford the best legal people so wait and see if he gets away.

scooby_si

definately ask for all the info & they will probably say not company policy to supply till going to court then try again & u may escape
ukspeedtraps site
Si
PS how long do they have from date of offense to take u 2 court?

Mungo

If you don't sign the form you'll just get done for not returning the form on time...

Dracoro

'If you don't sign the form you'll just get done for not returning the form on time...'

eh? not if you send it in on time (unsigned of course)



You MUST state who was driving. If you don't, the registered keeper WILL get prosecuted (i.e. you in most instances). Fair enoungh if you don't know who was driving but you MUST prove you were NOT driving (i.e. you were elsewhere at the time of the offence and can prove it).
The not signing bit however IS a legal loophole and apparently it can't be 'patched up' and needs a little re-write of the law (which takes a while to get sorted!). This will probably become bigger news as more people hear about it and not sign the form. They may find other ways to prove the offence however (photo evidence etc.)which may be enough to secure a conviction but you won't legally get done for not signing that's for sure. I think this'll become quite interesting. check here for more info

Hopefully it'll become widespread and they'll have to get rif of cameras (wishful thinking) and put more police on the roads and get the driving standards up. I hardly EVER see police cars on the roads these days so people drive worse safe in the knowledge that they'll be OK as long as they don't go fast through a camera.

[Edited by Dracoro - 5/22/2003 9:33:32 PM]

DEEDEE

try reading this site, a friend at work has got caught and is following its instructions. If he gets away with it I will post result. This is with Derbyshire Police, camera in Chesterfield. Good luck M8




http://www.safespeed.org.uk/unsigned.html

skiddus_markus

Deedee-which one?I see them regularly emptying the ones around Hollingwood/Stavely.

Mr.Manchester

my cousin got away away with it, he asked to see the actual picture from the speed camera, they couldnt find it so they dismissed it, worth a try!

alter_ego

Test case in the High Court just now.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/l...re/3047293.stm
If you have time, wait 'till the outcome of this; if not, send the form back *unsigned*. Ignore the 'bluff and bluster' threats. If they return your unsigned NIP, retain it. More info here, http://www.safespeed.org.uk/unsigned.html

NotoriousREV

I know someone "very" well who has sent in the form unsigned. The police force in question tried several tactics:

1) returned the form asking for the form to be signed. The form was returned again, unsigned, with a covering letter explaining that if the police could point out where in law it states the form MUST be signed the driver would be more than happy to comply.

2) The police then returned the form stating that if the form was not returned signed it would automatically go to court. The form was again returned unsigned.

So far, there has been no further response (6 weeks since last letter).

Interestingly, North Wales police have just written to another friend of minen and in their letter they claim that you have no right to see the calibration certificate, and asking for it means you can no longer accept a fixed penalty notice. This is just begging to be challenged as it is a) incorrect and b) bordering on demanding money with menaces i.e. if you waive your rights we'll go easy on you.

Adrian F

I wouldn't get to excitted as i am sure the Government is already drafting legislation to close any possible loop hole and will rush it through Parlimant before all else. Other wise they would lose to much revenue from the Tax.

Dracoro

Adrian F - That's the whole problem for the govt., they can't plug this loophole, the law needs a re-write. By plugging the loophole they would contravene more serious laws/human rights laws IIRC.

scooby_si

so how long do you have from date of offense till u have escaped by wotever means? Is it 6 months then yer clear not going to court?
Si

NotoriousREV

I beleive the police have 6 months from date of offence to put the case before the magistrates, however, you can be summonsed after this time.

johnfelstead

Was the NIP sent to you recorded delivery? If not they have no proof you recieved it and cant prosecute you if you fail to return it. Some police forces send them recorded for this reason, some dont and play the numbers game to get the money in, hoping you are honest. The relevent law states they have to have proof of delivery to procecute if you dont reply.

The law states A notice shall be deemed for the purposes of subsection (1)(c) above to have been served on a person if it was sent by registered post or recorded delivery service addressed to him at his last known address, notwithstanding that the notice was returned as undelivered or was for any other reason not received by him.

There was a long thread on this on 5-O forums last year, but it seems to have disapeared.

This is all about raising money with the least effort, has nothing whatsoever to do with safety.

[Edited by johnfelstead - 5/24/2003 1:22:28 PM]

alter_ego

Don't like to rain on your parade, John, but I'm sure that's been amended. Proof of posting is now sufficient. The onus is now on you to show that it wasn't received.

johnfelstead

no, that is the law as it stands.

How do you prove you didnt receive something? imposible.

alter_ego

Humble pie time, John.

The original Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988; see section 1, sub-section 2.
The Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 (in schedule 9; scroll down to section 6, sub-section 3) added a new sub-section 1A to the 1988 Act. In particular: (c) by sending it by registered post, recorded delivery service or first class post addressed to him at his last known address.

A_E

[Edited by alter_ego - 5/24/2003 9:43:59 PM]

trigger03

Ok, l'm tempted not to reply to the NIP, then when they send a nasty reminder, object that l didn't get one, ask for recorded delivery proof, and photo evidence which won't be distinct enough to prove it was me. If they send another one saying l must supply the name of the driver l'll send it in unsigned, asking for a calibration cert and so on. If anyone has any developments on their/mates attempts let me know. My old man tried the no reply and then the letter and has got away with it so far, some months have gone by.

alter_ego

Be very careful with correspondence. You can scupper the unsigned loophole. The problem for the police with an unsigned form is that there is no evidence it was you who filled it in. By indulging in correspondence, you may inadvertently provide that evidence. So
1) Do not send an unsigned form in the same envelope as any other correspondence.
2) Do not say that you have sent in an unsigned form in other correspondence.
3) Do not sign the other correspondence either.

johnfelstead

This changes are to section 1 of the act.

the law still stands with respect to them having to send recorded delievery as section 2, which is the part i quoted still stands.

Again, how do you prove you didnt recieve something? The onus of proof has to be on those procecuting, it's basic common sense.