a mate of mine was caught speeding other night by police in his saxo and they put him in the back of their car and gave him a ticket ect.. but they said they didnt have the equipment in the car to show him actually speeding. They did say that they filmed him speeding with a camera inside the car though???

 

he has asked them if he can view the footage as he isnt sure if he was speeding or not but no one will give him a straight answer...one says yes , another no !! he has written to them askin to view it and still nothing.

 

Problem is he dosent want to contest it and chance getting more than the 3 points and a higher fine.. what can he do if anything ????

Buy a better car :P :wack:

 

But seriously I don't think there is anything he can do, if it were any other company he could claim a copy of the tape at least under the law. But I think in the case of the police if it is pertinent to their case, you don't have a chance.

 

He must know if he was speeding, you don't get a ticket for nothing.

 

If he can think of a way to get out of it then fair play, but otherwise, I say he takes it on the chin.

 

Here's the law with regards to shop CCTV etc;

 

Q. What do I do if somebody requests to see images of themselves on my CCTV system ?

 

If your system captures images of people, those people are deemed "Data Subjects". It is the Data Subjects' right under Law to request a copy of, or be allowed to view details of themselves held by any other person.

 

You must provide all Data Subjects with the following information on request. Some of the details below are not a legal requirement but are a good practice.

 

Details of the type of images recorded and retained (legal requirement).

 

Details of the purposes for which the images are recorded and retained (legal requirement).

 

Information about the disclosure policy in relation to those images (legal requirement).

 

Subject Access Request Form (good practice)

 

Details of the rights of a Data Subject (good practice)

For further details please go to: 8 Principles of the Act Principle 6.

 

There are some limited exceptions not fully detailed on this site such as:

Disclosure of images should not be granted if the disclosure is likely to prejudice any legal proceedings.

 

Steve

a mate of mine was caught speeding other night by police in his saxo and they put him in the back of their car and gave him a ticket ect.. but they said they didnt have the equipment in the car to show him actually speeding. They did say that they filmed him speeding with a camera inside the car though???

 

he has asked them if he can view the footage as he isnt sure if he was speeding or not but no one will give him a straight answer...one says yes , another no !! he has written to them askin to view it and still nothing.

 

Problem is he dosent want to contest it and chance getting more than the 3 points and a higher fine.. what can he do if anything ????

 

I might be wrong, but if you accept the ticket on the spot does that not imply you have admitted guilt anyway? :confused:

 

David

BTW this website makes for good reading whilst we are on the subject of speeding;

 

http://www.speed-trap.co.uk/Accused_Home/Gadgets/Gadgets_Home.htm

If there was two of em nothing you can do, if it was just one copper id question it. that is if i had real doubt i was speeding anyway

:slap: He accepted the ticket so accepted the fact he was speeding.....the film will only be used in evidence in court, if it was a traffic officer / car then these vehicles will be calibrated.

So tell him to bite the bullet and take 3 points :( and take a :slap: for not knowing what speed he was doing....:nono:

this makes for handy reading if you get a ticket and they have no other evidence;

 

Loophole in Section 172 Loophole, not signing the NIP form?

A loophole does appear to exist, but it is not 100% foolproof as much of the law around the loophole is somewhat cloudy and untried. Section 172 Loophole. This loophole is based upon returning your NIP paperwork unsigned. It is not as straightforward as just returning it unsigned and whilst recent court cases have clarified some parts, they have also clouded others. In summary the situation is (January 2004):

 

If you return your form unsigned then as you have not signed the documents its contents are not considered a "statement in writing" for the purposes of Section 12 of the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988. Accordingly it is inadmissible as evidence under the Road Traffic Offenders Act.

 

BUT

 

If the form was completed by the defendant then it could amount to a confession under the Police and Criminal Evidence Act (PACE). This has been tested in a number of cases and been thrown out. In Bristol Crown court (Case # A20020257) on 13th December 2002 the case against John Pickford was dropped as the court concluded that as the form was unsigned it could not be taken as a confession as there was no evidence that the defendant had made it. Judge Ticehurst then went on to famously describe the situation as a lacuna in the law and that parliament will need to update the law.

 

SO to you will need to get someone else to complete the form for you on your behalf. This will need to be someone who can't be called to give evidence against you - so your solicitor or your spouse. You should not give them specific advice on how the form should be completed, other than asking them to ensure the legal requirements are complied with. And don't sign the form. This approach has worked in the past in a number of high profile "celebrity" cases. The person who completes the form should write a brief note explaining that they have filled out the form on your behalf acting as your agent. They should retain this note as it will be needed by you if the case goes to court.

 

It is highly likely that you will then receive an aggressive letter in response to your unsigned form. It is almost certain that they will refer to a ruling in a case DPP vs Broomfield 2002 and claim that this case confirmed that you must return the form completed and signed. You can read full details of this case here

 

 

We would suggest that you write back to them and point out a few key facts and ask them for clarification.

 

In DPP v Broomfield, Judge Wilkie concluded that a Police "Authority could include reasonable instructions as to the manner in which information was to be provided" in relation to Section 172 and that this could include written information. Judge Wilkie did not state that written information should be signed.

 

 

On the 13th December 2002 at Bristol Crown Court in the case of DPP v Pickford, Judge Ticehurst stated that a lacuna in the law does exist.

 

As neither Judge Wilkie or Judge Ticehurst have highlighted the law that makes it obligatory to sign the form, please can you tell me specifically where in law it states that it is obligatory to sign the form and I would of course be happy to obey.

The above text will often make the case go away as they realise that you are aware of the law. In some cases the police will continue and next threaten you with going to court. They could try a number of approaches and most of these enter into grey/untried areas of the law, so you'll need a solicitor to progress further.

 

For example they could use Section 172 against you as it says that the registered keeper of the vehicle must provide the information.

 

Or they could use PACE to try and make a case that your form is a confession. However if they take this route then they fall into another grey area as if they try and use PACE then they must comply with it themselves and would have needed to either cautioned you or offered a full explanation of your rights prior to being required to complete a voluntary confession. As they have not done this then you have been deprived of your rights (under PACE) and under Article 6 of the ECHR to a fair trial and that what they are trying to do would fall under the category of a malicious prosecution. We do not believe that PACE applies in Scottish law.

 

So in summary, if you receive a NiP

 

Get your legal representative or spouse to complete the form

Get them to write a dated statement confirming that they have completed the form and don't send this back with the form

Return the form unsigned

Await a response and if they refer to DPP vs Broomfield 2002 then send them a response clarifiying this situation

If they still continue with the case you will need a solicitor to support you as part of the next step will be proceeding to court and being represented. This representation will cost you a few hundred pounds and it may not work the first time around and may need to go to appeal before you get the result you are aiming for.

Steve-o, that loop hole is now closed, dont even bother trying it any more. youll just end up VERY much out of pocket.

Steve-o, that loop hole is now closed, dont even bother trying it any more. youll just end up VERY much out of pocket.

 

how come? explain..... ;)

So was it a trafpol? They dont need video evidence afaik, dont know why they would have said that? They can nick him just by using their own speedo reading.

Having said that, if they said they have video footage I dont think it's unreasonable to ask to see it, especially if your mates speedo wasn't working at the time, just for his own peace of mind. If they deffo said they have it and it turns out they dont, it could be a technicality to work with.

If it was a serious speed I would see a good speeding solicitor.

how come? explain..... ;)

 

 

Read pistonheads and see plenty of people have tired it now and its just being throw back at then with much worse outcomes.

cheers for all the advise , il pass it on , think he may as well except it though.

Read pistonheads and see plenty of people have tired it now and its just being throw back at then with much worse outcomes.

 

gutted, sounded like a goodun too :(