stv555

Been caught on a GATSO on dual carriageway whilst another vehicle overtook me on the nearside - honest Guv.

I have challenged the summons and requested evidence to support their claims, since I am entitled to sees any photos etc.

Have received two photos one is the standard image which shows the camera details in the upper right hand of the photo - speed, date, time and I presume GATSO serial no. Plus a vehicle, which resembles mine but you cannot read the reg. The plate is over exposed.

Then there is another picture which is an enlargement of the first one, shows no details of the camera, the vehicle image is all washed out but the number plate now shows the vague details of the reg.

I believe that it is inadmissaible to use the second image to identify a vehicle in this way. Based on a case some two years ago which threw out about a 300 speeding offences since the original photo (which can be used to identify a vehicle) had been enhanced, altered/tampered with. The defence argued and won saying that the only image that could beused was a positive taken from the GATSO negative and that any alteration to the original could not be used to identify a vehicle or its keeper and more importantly could not be used to support a speeding offence.

Also, in this case, there appears to be no way to link the enlarged image to the first one which has got the camera details on it.

Any lawyers out there prepared to comment, if not anyone prepared to name the case.

I am determined to fight this one since most people just pay up with out investigating the facts. From recent press reports a lot of drivers could in fact escape GATSO fines since the evidence is so weak or has been fiddled with.

Anyone else seen their car on a GATSO still ?

Amusingly, in support of my claim of the other vehicle overtaking me, although the other vehicle can't be seen, its reflection can be seen in the panelwork of the photographed car !

Dave T-S

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:<HR>Originally posted by stv555:

Amusingly, in support of my claim of the other vehicle overtaking me, although the other vehicle can't be seen, its reflection can be seen in the panelwork of the photographed car !

[/B]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

WaxWizard strikes again???

stv555

Dave...you are, of course, perfectly correct !

Jza

Try

stv555

Jza

you're a bloody genius......this has got to be a Get Out of Jail Card.

I will keep you posted.

jjk

Is it worth waxing your number plate then???

Jza

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:<HR>Originally posted by stv555:
<B>Jza

you're a bloody genius......this has got to be a Get Out of Jail Card.

I will keep you posted.[/quote]

Well shucks..........

Glad it helped - get your letter off to the buggers!!

Jza

MorayMackenzie

Surely, if the other vehicle triggered the trap it would be ahead of the camera? I would have expected both cars to be visible in both shots taken by the gatso... then you just point out how much further the car on the inside travelled between frames than your vehicle did. This is what the lines on the road are there for, a simple backup to check which vehicle is doing what speed.

brickboy

If you can wait 48 hours, try

carl

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:<HR>Originally posted by MorayMackenzie:
<B>Surely, if the other vehicle triggered the trap it would be ahead of the camera?[/quote]

I'm not sure you can aim the radar that well -- there's a lot of dispersion. You certainly couldn't get the radar footprint to line up exactly with the lanes.

However, I agree with your other point -- a check can be made by measuring how far your car's moved on the photo between the frames (number of stripes it's covered) and then as long as you know the interframe gap you can calculate the speed.

stv555

Thanks brickboy I'll give them a whirl...

Moray/Carl....strangely enough I have only been supplied an image with the trap details and an enlargement/enhancement of the same shot....so I am unable to work out if this is the first of the two shots or the second and then do the measurement. I now believe I can make an appoitment at the Camera Unit to examine all photos and that the enlargement cannot be used to identify the reg. and subsequently the keeper.

vmax

Just a quick question,

If the photograph of your reg plate was so crap, How did they track you down as the keeper of that car.

Neil Smalley

I suspect what has happend is that they cannot identify the car that zoomed past you so they are doing you instead and not bothering to try and trace the other car. Maybe the other car's plates were even less visible than the the one that could be you and so they are going for the easy option.

Ian Griffiths

Cases certainly got thrown out because the photos were tampered with although I'm not sure if the 'loophole' is closed? They wouldn't still alter images if they're inadmissable surely?

I always thought you needed two images to calculate the distance travelled in a set time frame and thus the speed. Maybe you're not in the other pic!

Begs the question though, were you speeding?

Beer Monster

Try fitting a belltronics radar detector tells you if the gatso is on or not. the best £300 ive spent, every driver should haveone

stv555

Ian....two responses to your question

(1) No comment

(2) As quoted by great heads of state - "I cannot recall the exact details of the incident"

and yes there should be two images in order to manually check the distance travelled between photos. I have only seen one plus its enlargement.

nevr

and yes there should be two images in order to manually check the distance travelled between photos. I have only seen one plus its enlargement. [/B][/QUOTE]

you are entitled to all the evidence that is available which should be two clear photos showing the whole of your vehicle in relation to the calibration marks on the road, if the other vehicle has covered these then they should not proceed . They need to supply the evidence so that you can make a balanced decision on how to proceed. phone the Fixed penalty Office concerned and ask to speak to the office Manager.