speeders database

[arceye]

What I got from JPB's post was that it may read a 10 percent innacuracy, but must not show a speed LESS than being travelled. i.e the speedo may show you are travelling faster than you are but not slower.

[JPB]

What I got from JPB's post was that it may read a 10 percent inaccuracy, but must not show a speed LESS than being travelled. i.e the speedo may show you are travelling faster than you are but not slower.

That's exactly how it is, yes.

[arceye]

So....... I take it that any "extenuating" circumstances argument for speedo innacuracy would fail in the event of prosecution as a prosecution under construction and use regs would be an alternative?

And, if plod (or his area chief) wants to be a jobsworth then we are doomed?

Man, how I long for the days when they looked the other way when a railway van was going off the speedo down Shap Fell (1989 Transit if you can figure what the clock shows it gives you an idea.... ), cause we all worked for Lizzie really.

Oh, and the Riley was apparently doing 70 in a sixty somewhere doon sooth but god the photo looked a lot like me.......

[TerryG]

I read it as the construction and use regs only apply to vehicles made after 1984 so 10% is still acceptable for older vehicles.
There is no compulsary testing of speedometers and the fuzz are supposed to adhere to ACPO guidelines so +/- 10% is what they should allow. For vehicles made after 1984 your speedometer should not over read.
Being "done" for 31.7 i would have had it heard in court as that is rediculous. I would also have insisted on seeing a copy of their calibration certificate that they are required to carry with them before signing anything.
There is no change in permitted accuracy at different speeds as stated earlier in the thread and the construction and use regulations do not specify speedometer accuracy. They refer to an EU regilation (link earlier in the thread) that states that speedometers must not under read and must be within 10%+4kph.

If you have a read around the web there are lots of people claiming to have won appeals as their speed was less than 10% over. Other people claiming they got 4 points for being over by 0.5.
Not speeding is always a good policy but we are all guilty of doing it at some point.

[JPB]

Not speeding is always a good policy

That's the only certain way to avoid the wrath of the angry little man in his white van. Yes, I could have asked for mine to be heard in the court, but that would have meant a) a <>100 mile round trip that would have cost almost as much in fuel (No ultra-frugal modern Diesel in my life back then) as the price of and travel to the course and b) as it happened my B1 entitlement miraculously reappeared - when my licence came back having been marked up - and [my previously restricted 3-year licence] came back valid until 2034! I'd been trying to get Swansea to put back my bike entitlement since they erroneously removed it during notification of an address change in 1992.

It's a different matter when a real human being (or a Polis, almost the same thing) stops a motorist for a minor speed-related chat, any polite and cooperative person would be able to talk their way out of that fine by the roadside at considerably less expense, but the people who work the vans (of which there are only four between the Forth and the Tyne, plus a spare-cum-service van) simply send their images straight up to the PF's office or the fines office for offences recorded on the English side, where they are processed and papers sent out, so eliminating the human element and with it, common sense and reason.

I did ask a solicitor what she reckoned my chances would be in court, but her view - based on experience - was that it would be decided that I should have been travelling within the speed limit, that my under-reading speedometer was something that they'd prosecute me for even if they had to be "constructive" in their citation of precedent and that the satnav so clearly visible in the Triumph's windscreen in the pictures provided me with an accurate means of gauging my speed, ergo I should have been referring to its display . My suggestion that I'd have claimed it wasn't switched on fell on deaf ears and I took the least stressful option. Probably the least expensive too.

[Maaarrghk]

I've held back on commenting on this thread, just to see where it leads.

If you do get a speeding ticket, I would strongly recomend visits to both the Safespeed and Pepipoo sites. Both have advice and a couple of useful "Wizards" that can help you out with the best way to dealing with camera generated tickets.

Safespeed alone is well worth a visit (along with the ABD) for the truth about how speed cameras have had an entirely negative impact on UK road safety.

I have yet to be caught by a camera, but am sure it will happen eventually. One thing I can be certain of is that I will not be driving in a manner that is in any way dangerous when I eventually am caught.

I have been flashed by both marked and un-marked Police cars on motorways and A1 motorway sections at speeds of up to 100mph. The fact that I have simply slowed down has been enough for them to not bother pulling me over. On the few occasions that I have been pulled over, I have been able to give a reasonable enough account of my driving (in a poilite and respectful manner) for the matter to end in my being let off with a simple warning. This is the way it should be.

[suffolkpete]

There is no compulsary testing of speedometers and the fuzz are supposed to adhere to ACPO guidelines so +/- 10% is what they should allow.

ACPO guidelines are just that and it's up to individual chief officers whether they follow them. Thankfully, common sense prevails in most forces and they are adhered to.

For vehicles made after 1984 your speedometer should not over read.

No. It should not under read. That is, the speed indicated must not be less than the true velocity.

[TerryG]

For vehicles made after 1984 your speedometer should not over read.

No. It should not under read. That is, the speed indicated must not be less than the true velocity.

That's the one, I blame too many late nights.

[OneCarefulOwner]

Bollocks or otherwise, reading the previous pages would have served you well as that ways; you'd have known that I mentioned having been convicted for 31.7mph in a 30 limit, this was a result of a camera van's evidence and I believe that a human being would have used discretion.

I've read it all, but I admit I forgot most of it after I was called into fault & went on the defensive. Even so, this still doesn't fit the example I was deriding, which was that of being tailed by the police & pulled over for 71 in a 70...

Vans are another beast entirely; the only points I've received in 21 years came from a van parked between trees on a single carriageway that had only recently been changed from the national limit to 40, and I only drove that way once or twice a year & had missed the signs. I was over 40 but still well under 60 due to traffic (so I was one of dozens or hundreds this van caught that day); ironically I didn't get the training course option because my excess speed wasn't high enough for that constabulary's rules!

[Mrotwoman]

It was a 30 zone as well

Anyone got any other snaps of them getting pinched in their classics?