hi, does anyone know what can be done to question a fixed penalty charge before it is paid with the resulting 3 points? The reason I ask is that I received a letter saying that I had failed to comply with a red light. Apparently my time into the red was 0.9 seconds and my speed was 28 miles per hour, not exactly the worst of crimes. The photo they have supplied of my car is very unclear, I cannot see my registration plate or what colour the traffic lights are. Is it reasonable to ask for clearer evidence before making the dreaded payment? Also there are no signs indicating the presence of cameras on this stretch of road, although I don't know if this only applies to speed cameras. I just wondered if anyone has been in this situation. Thanks
{Made non make/model specific. Only compulsory to select this when in Technical Matters. Providing you select a category, then you're able to post in Discussion}
Edited by Dynamic Dave on 02/10/2009 at 22:33
|
You jumped a red light. Pay up and take your three points.
|
|
Thats the reason why penalties, fines, charges and fees are increased every year because no one questions anything and pays up, so in the end people will just get priced off the road through no fault of their own
|
are you saying you didnt do it?
I love the bit "fined for no fault of your own" LOLOL did someone jump the red light for you then?
Edited by Altea Ego on 02/10/2009 at 23:05
|
|
Sorry PC Altea Ego, I'll be more careful next time
|
|
|
|
I followed a friend through a traffic light once, safely of course, but bang to rights, just in the red. Saw two flashes in the mirror. 60 quid, 3 points, no escape.
I keep pushing my luck with these things of course. So far so good touch wood.
|
Lud its quite amazing how different our driving styles are: ). Just pray you're never behind me!
As for the OP I am pretty certain the photograph has to produce evidence that you went through on red because these cameras do and have gone faulty. There is plenty of motoring law forums which offer advice on such things :).
|
Just pray you're never behind me!
Believe me Rattle, I do. Your descriptions of driving make my blood run cold. Just the sort of thing to bring on a red mist moment, always risky that. Nothing amazing about the difference though. We are at different stages of development, and of course from different historical and geographical areas.
I wouldn't try driving in the West End until you've had a bit more practice.
|
|
|
|
|
If you aren't convinced you did it, I think it's justified to ask for the evidence.
If you did "fail to comply" though, there aren't really any shades of grey (well, red) so you should take it like a man (or woman, delete as applicable) and save the taxpayer some money.
|
|
How many times must it be said???? You're not being fined, you're being given a conditional offer of fixed penalty. You have 2 options: accept if you're guilty or request a court hearing. If they haven't got the evidence you'll be acquitted. Simples, innit!!
|
>>You're not being fined, you're being given a conditional offer of fixed penalty
The difference as far as I can see is about the same as between being burnt and scalded. Is your point that you can't elicit the evidence without a court hearing, or are you just being pedantic?
|
............. are you just being pedantic?
In matters concerning the law and court cases, using the right words can be of paramount importance to the outcome.
|
I presume these are early days in that NOIP/172 name and shame form just received?
You have 28 days to respond to the 172 request to name driver other wise offence leading to points/fine.
They need this 172 signed confession that you were the driver to prove their case.
You state:
" is very unclear, I cannot see my registration plate or what colour the traffic lights are. "
are you really sure it cannot be read? How did they arrive at sending you the Forms then?
If it is as bad as that consider writing back to them (politely) pointing out that you cannot read the VRM of the offending vehicle so how do you know if you were the driver.
Ask for further evidence and a reply so that you can consider matters andf still reply within the 28 days.
You yourself know whether or not you committed the offence so within the 28 days can act accordingly.
Correct as stated a CO is one that if contested has to be done so at Court.
dvd
|
|
The photograph they have sent me makes it impossible to identify my number plate. It does have a number to call to view the photographic evidence at headquarters. If they have a better photograph, why not include it in the letter? I wonder how many of these letters they are sending to people every day
|
|
|
|
>In matters concerning the law and court cases, using the right words can be of paramount
>importance to the outcome.
I didn't say pedantic was bad. But I'd still like to know if there's a relevant point. Do you know?
Edited by Manatee on 03/10/2009 at 09:50
|
|
"not exactly the worst of crimes" in your opinion. 0.9 s and 28 miles an hour could have killed another driver who already had a green. They clearly have a good image of your plate as they wrote to you. You can go and see the image but you have 28 days to return your details and signed S172 or be ready for a Failure to Furnish summons and 6 points and a £300 plus fine. When they send you a COFP that is when you either pay up or decline and take it to court, but I should tell you that you have ne defence to present. The amber light is on for 3 seconds +/- 0.25 s and the camera is not armed until usually 0.4 second into red. Regards Peter
|
|
If the other driver already had a green 0.9 seconds after the red showed on my side, the lights would not be working properly, or they would be very poorly timed. Which brings me to another point. About a month before this happened, the lights were not working at all, so the cars from the other side of the junction were edging forward, trying to find a gap in order to join our flow. You tell me which is more dangerous. But yes, I suppose I'll just have to pay up and join the rapidly increasing number of people who are being used to increase the size of the governments coffers (they certainly need it), not increase road safety. Thanks for the info.
|
|
|
|
|
|
The fact that traffic lights can and will change worries me at times. I'm not joking, this is not a wind up.
I stick to speed limits and am always aware that the lights ahead might change from green. so, sometimes I drop my speed from 30 to maybe 28 as I approach a set of lights to allow a sensible and gradual stop. Often, the white van behind me, already annoyed that he has to travel at 30, gets even closer to the rear of my car as I drop my speed a little approaching traffic lights.
What do I do? Speed up again and maybe run a red light or run the risk that the van will rear-end me when I stop at the lights.
I know that this sounds like the ravings of a senile pensioner but I'm 52 and becoming fed up with looking after the needs of the "rush rush" road user whilst trying to comply with the law.
|
Doctorchris I feel the exactly the same, usually if there is a big yellow box behind me. There is nothing worse than a green light thats been on for ages the only way to be guarenteed to stop is to approach it at 15/20mph which is not ideal and probably dangerious.
The best way I find to deal with those pratts is to ignore them, if you really have to stop you have to stop. This happened to my dad down a busy dual carraige way, a Discovery was tailgating him lights had been on green for ages, dad drops back to 20/25 on approach but lights change and knowing the timings my dad had no choice to stop. Discovery ends up in boot of my dads Punto. Luckily the discovery driver admited it was fault and my dad got the car fixed via discovery's insurance.
Thankfull most of the big junctions I go across seem to all be controlled by traffic so it is easy to work out the timings as a result its very very rare I get caught out and have to go through amber.
There is one part of Manchester where I always seem to get it wrong though, every time I approach the lights suddenly change to amber must be due to sequences and the way I come.
|
|
All traffic light 'suddenly' change to amber, they do not change slowly to amber. Do you maen the gree period is short. I would remind you the amber is displayed for 3 seconds +/- 0.25 of a second. I f you are busy watchin gwhote van man up your exhaust you can easily miss the first second on amber so you are then fairly close. I would also remind you that the offence of committing an offence is if and part of the car crosses the white line after the camera is enabled. This is usually pressure sensors in, or just after the white line, these are triggered by the weight of the wheels. Regards Peter
|
|
|
Following a big fat Audi thing through St John's Wood past Lord's the other night. Unusually for that sort of car in that mimser-infested part of town it was going at a speedometer 32 or so. The traffic light at Lisson Grove was green, and I gloomily got ready for the car in front to start slowing down as many drivers do when they see a green light.
Not this one though. He did what I would have done and eased up to a speedometer 36 or so. Alhamdulillah! We both got through and the light didn't even go amber as I crossed it. Top marks that man.
It takes a lot of practice to get right. Mimsing to be on the safe side is pathetic and a no-no. On the other hand going across on the red can get you fined or, if you are really incompetent, even be dangerous. And sudden wheels-locked braking when the light goes amber 30 feet ahead of you when you're doing 35 is simply lethal, because I or someone like me is on your tail and may run into you. Just learn to get it right.
And for heaven's sake stop worrying about breaking the law. You can't drive a car and not break the law. I'm surprised more people haven't noticed that.
|
|
"If they have a better photograph, why not include it in the letter? " - because they have to establish who the suspect is first, they do not normally submit the evidence to a third party such as the registered keeper.
|
|
|
|
You're right. And it does take practice to get it right. Gets to the point when I'm watching the lights half a mile ahead and getting into third gear! I certainly wouldn't go blatantly across a red light, just got the timing slightly wrong this time!
|
>I certainly wouldn't go blatantly across a red light, just got the timing slightly wrong this time!
So you make a habit of jumping amber then? And then you have the cheek to bleat about getting caught and asking for ways you can get off the 3 points and fine?
|
|
When lights are used by TPTB as a weapon of hate against the ordinary people, I fully support people who go through red ones sensibly. We have lots of lights now which are completely unnecessary installed on roads where we can see for a mile clearly that the road is empty and yet they are set up in conjunction with induction loops for the sole purpose of bringing you to a pointless standstill.
|
I dont trust anyone whos skills are so rubbish they cant see the camera to jump a set of traffic lights at 28mph
Edited by Altea Ego on 03/10/2009 at 17:19
|
skills are so rubbish they cant see the camera to jump a set of traffic lights at 28mph
Steady on AE. Cameras at many junctions are practically invisible among all the other clutter up there and all around. Speaking as someone who has been running amber and a few red lights for more than half a century, I would say the important thing is to know what actual vehicles, bicycles and pedestrians are threatening to wander into your path. That means eyes down and flicking with extreme rapidity from side to side, not head up looking for quite small cameras which may be behind you already and often don't even look like cameras.
It's safe to assume they are there on major light-controlled junctions in this town though. I run fewer reds than I used to. Hardly any these days actually. Must be getting old. Or has the bullying, cane-wielding supernanny got to me at last?
|
Lud, you check out the cameras first. They are easily visible from 50 yards before the junction once you know what to look for. Then if you decide to gamble on the amber you go into hawkeye mode to check for others crossing. Tho frankly if visibility is that bad that you have to keep checking, or you are depending on others actions to not do something, then its a bad choice to gamble that amber at that place at that time.
There are some lights I jump. Those on the roundabout above the A3 at the A245, I ignore with abandon. Its a roundabout. I know how to negotiate roundabouts, I dont need lights to tell me,
|
how to negotiate roundabouts, I dont need lights to tell me,
Likewise. But lights make them dangerous. There's a light-controlled pedestrian crossing actually at a roundabout at the South end of Dorking. Absolutely lethal to someone who doesn't know the place.
And it's never a 'gamble' when I run a light. If it's going to be one of those I don't do it.
Edited by Lud on 03/10/2009 at 17:59
|
|
|
"I fully support people who go through red ones sensibly" have you been drinking. Next you'll be telling us that you support the three that went through a red at the open level crossing in norhter Scotland this week. Regards Peter
|
|
|
|
|
So glad to see you're back. And you're holier than thou of course. Thanks to everyone else for an interesting thread.
|
>And you're holier than thou of course.
good job you dont know the truth.
|
"Next you'll be telling us that you support the three that went through a red at the open level crossing in norhter Scotland this week."
I don't read that sort of 'news', but if there was an accident, or a camera that was not seen, or even the Police observing and these were not noticed, then I do not support them at all. When I approach lights, I include a scan for cameras and community enforcement personnel in my routine well ahead, it soon becomes a subconscious and thus effortless action.
|
community enforcement personnel
Vey call em ver filf where I come from mate
|
|
They all died. Get a life, and stop on amber, red can be dead. Regards Peter
|
They all died.
Three victims all in the same suicidally driven car Peter D? I thought you meant three vehicles.
Really is amazing the way some people carry on. Had the driver decided on the spur of the moment to end it all for himself and his two passengers, or was he taking what AE might call a 'gamble'? No way of finding out now.
I must say I wouldn't try to jump the lights across a main line level crossing unless the visibility was very good in both directions for quite a long way. But then I am quite careful.
|
I must say I wouldn't try to jump the lights across a main line level crossing unless the visibility was very good in both directions for quite a long way.
You might just avoid the train doing 100+mph, but hopefully not the camera.
Edited by Old Navy on 04/10/2009 at 19:19
|
Hopefully you're more careful than the bloke on this link lud. Always makes me laugh
www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mwd7qwNgPLE
|
Heh heh.
Looking under the bonnet to see what was wrong with it too.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
