Speeding - Just 1 or 2 mph over limit

LupoLover · 8 Dec 2014 at 13:37

Armageus said:
so not 30.1 at all - nearer 32....

either way though - given that a quick google shows most speed guns are only accurate to ±1mph anyway, I highly doubt anyone has ever been done for 0.1mph

Either way still less then the 10% people seem to "dream up" of being "allowed over"

Dogbreath · 8 Dec 2014 at 13:46

LupoLover said:
I was done for 31.86 or something like that in a 30. Me saying 30.1 was just an example.

No you weren't, they don't measure speed to a resolution of 0.01mph and they certainly aren't accurate to that level.

Do you get a thrill from making things up?

Yaayuh! · 8 Dec 2014 at 13:48

LupoLover said:
Either way still less then the 10% people seem to "dream up" of being "allowed over"

I don't believe it's dreamt up at all. It's a tolerance guideline (10% +2mph? or something like that).
However, it is just a guidline. It's going to be the officer's judgement.

See here: http://www.acpo.police.uk/documents/uniformed/2013/201305-uoba-joining-forces-safer-roads.pdf

Alienfish360 · 8 Dec 2014 at 13:49

Burnsy2023 said:
I've heard many people swear blind that they were caught doing 31MPH and given a ticket, yet I've never seen any evidence of this.

Unfortunately, until someone actually does show something, this thread is pointless.

Edit: And regardless, it can't happen since the 2011 ACPO guidance on speed limit enforcement.

Guidance, is exactly as it says, it CAN happen, they don't HAVE to follow guidance. But it's massively unlikely.

GhostWKD · 8 Dec 2014 at 13:49

geekman said:
The whole point I was making is that loads of people claim to have been done for 31/32 in a 30 but not a single person has been able to provide any proof.

Tedious link but I got a $160 fine for doing 102km/h in a 100km/h zone a few years ago in Melbourne. Damn Micra hire car had far too much power

Tedious link as I'm sure you meant in the UK

InvaderGIR · 8 Dec 2014 at 13:50

Rossi~ said:
I don't believe it's dreamt up at all. It's a tolerance guideline (-/+3mph? or something like that).
However, it is just a guidline. It's going to be the officer's judgement.

See here: http://www.acpo.police.uk/documents/uniformed/2013/201305-uoba-joining-forces-safer-roads.pdf

It also only applies to those forces signed up to the guidelines too.

Armageus · 8 Dec 2014 at 13:50

LupoLover said:
Either way still less then the 10% people seem to "dream up" of being "allowed over"

it's not about "dreaming anything up" - you can't prosecute on an absolute when both the normal method of measuring your speed (i.e. your speedo), and the enforcement method (e.g. speed gun), both have tolerances.

30mph zones tend to be treated more severely though, due to the reasons as to why they are 30's in the first place e.g. outside schools, blind corners etc where there is more risk of an accident.

Similarly why speeding on motorways isn't enforced anywhere near as much - as long as you aren't blantantly doing much more than everyone else, and not driving like an idiot, why would you attract attention.

Burnsy2023 · 8 Dec 2014 at 13:50

InvaderGIR said:
You'd think he knew that given he's a special, but given many of his posts about the law I'm not too surprised that he doesn't know.

Well I'm sorry for not knowing every force's policy like the back of my hand, but where I am you can't go outside of the ACPO guidance.

Anyway, I think that most forces will abide by the ACPO guidance, but I'll do some FOI requests to see how right I actually am - and consequently, how right or wrong you are.

Dogbreath said:
No you weren't, they don't measure speed to a resolution of 0.01mph and they certainly aren't accurate to that level.

Do you get a thrill from making things up?

Indeed. The certified tolerance is often only +/- 2MPH.

Burnsy2023 · 8 Dec 2014 at 13:52

Alienfish360 said:
Guidance, is exactly as it says, it CAN happen, they don't HAVE to follow guidance. But it's massively unlikely.

The reason my force only allows prosecutions within the ACPO guidelines is because when cases fall through at court because tolerances etc were called into question is wastes a lot of money that the force wants to avoid.

Scottland · 8 Dec 2014 at 13:54

I've always understood there to be guidelines that stated some sort of leeway (e.g. 10%), but that doesn't mean the force or officer has to follow them.

FWIW - I went on a speed awareness course where someone was (allegedly) done for doing 32 in a 30.

LupoLover · 8 Dec 2014 at 13:54

Dogbreath said:
No you weren't, they don't measure speed to a resolution of 0.01mph and they certainly aren't accurate to that level.

Do you get a thrill from making things up?

100% You are talking Don't swear now! I was sat in the back of a Volvo Estate and it did show to 2 decimal places (I was amazed hence 100% they do). Infact go on google and google speed guns LOADS do :rolleyes:

Its distance time measured by a police traffic car so could be to 100 places if they wished

Janesy B · 8 Dec 2014 at 13:57

LupoLover said:
100% You are talking *****now! I was sat in the back of a Volvo Estate and it did show to 2 decimal places (I was amazed hence 100% they do). Infact go on google and google speed guns LOADS do

Just because it shows the value it doesn't mean the accuracy of the device is down to 2 decimal place.

Burnsy2023 · 8 Dec 2014 at 13:58

LupoLover said:
100% You are talking ***** now! I was sat in the back of a Volvo Estate and it did show to 2 decimal places (I was amazed hence 100% they do). Infact go on google and google speed guns LOADS do

Perhaps, but they won't be certified to Home Office standards at that resolution.

Armageus · 8 Dec 2014 at 14:00

Burnsy2023 said:
Perhaps, but they won't be certified to Home Office standards at that resolution.

and indeed most of the manufacturers specify that they are only accurate to ± 1mph as already mentioned.

LupoLover · 8 Dec 2014 at 14:00

Janesy B said:
Just because it shows the value it doesn't mean the accuracy of the device is down to 2 decimal place.

My point was that was what the screen in the Volvo showed

The reason I got so defensive was that */** said I was making it up.
I totally agree they have tolerances but that doesn't mean the screen in the Volvo didn't show that

Skalaberg · 8 Dec 2014 at 15:06

Rossi~ said:
I don't believe it's dreamt up at all. It's a tolerance guideline (10% +2mph? or something like that).
However, it is just a guidline. It's going to be the officer's judgement.

See here: http://www.acpo.police.uk/documents/uniformed/2013/201305-uoba-joining-forces-safer-roads.pdf

Yup.. Humberside uses the 10%+2 calculation. It does vary from force to force though.

Alienfish360 · 8 Dec 2014 at 15:13

Burnsy2023 said:
The reason my force only allows prosecutions within the ACPO guidelines is because when cases fall through at court because tolerances etc were called into question is wastes a lot of money that the force wants to avoid.

As I said, you're very unlikely to be done for them, but that's different to being "allowed" up to those guideline speeds.

Joe T · 8 Dec 2014 at 16:56

Janesy B said:
Just because it shows the value it doesn't mean the accuracy of the device is down to 2 decimal place.

Indeed. Precision v accuracy. Two very different concepts, that people get confused.

LupoLover · 9 Dec 2014 at 08:46

Joe T said:
Indeed. Precision v accuracy. Two very different concepts, that people get confused.

Thank You!

mejinks · 9 Dec 2014 at 10:48

In my experience, you might be travelling at 31mph, but they will lie and claim 35mph instead. Or in the case of Dyfed Powys plod, 70+ mph in stationary traffic! Their "proof" being three of exactly the same picture with *error* on the bottom.

The first case was disproven thanks in part to a tracker system built into the van I was driving. My actual speed was 27mph.