Gutted

Haven't people got off on loopholes before re: when the equipment was last calibrated?

If it was me, I would contest it, but if the OP is averse to cost then fair enough :p

Sneaky coppers tbh.
 
Nothing really useful to add apart from that like others have said you should contest it.

But just take a step back and look how ridiculous this is - this whole debacle of speeding upto 40 just before the sign, the rigmarole it causes .. surely there is something more constructive the police can be doing with their time ffs:rolleyes:How can they live with themselves !!!
 
Nothing really useful to add apart from that like others have said you should contest it.

But just take a step back and look how ridiculous this is - this whole debacle of speeding upto 40 just before the sign, the rigmarole it causes .. surely there is something more constructive the police can be doing with their time ffs:rolleyes:How can they live with themselves !!!

Because we live in a fluffy utopia where Grannies don't get raped, teenagers don't get stabbed, and there is no other serious crime to concentrate on :rolleyes:
 
Is the road on live maps with the high res aerial photos? I cant work out why the camera sign is the wrong way round on the police cam pic.
 
i had a simmilar offence. not worth the 3 points imo. my second offence was much more worth it so i didnt feel so grudged paying the money out
 
scum bag speeder

kk.JPG


:mad:
 
From the first picture it looks like you are very close to or even in the 40 zone already.

Long zoom lens compress the perspective though, look how close he looks to the junction sign on the right of the speed camera picture, yet in the other photo it looks like its 100-200 yards away. He's probably just inside the 30 zone still.
 
Is the road on live maps with the high res aerial photos? I cant work out why the camera sign is the wrong way round on the police cam pic.

i reckon in the police picture the car is well past the 40 sign, so much so that the 40 sign on the right of the road is in the left of the picture, if you know what i mean.
 
that one's worth contesting. They're trying to be clever catching people accellerating into the 40. It sure looks like you're there already :)
 
So harsh. How anyone with an open mind could say this was about safety is unbelievable.

Personally I don't think you will get anywhere if you contest it. You have a good case but that's not enough. Police will say you were speeding in the 30 and that's that unfortunately
 
If it was me I would feel ****** off.

There's a road in S-o-T that links Leek with Cheadle (well sort of) and the speed zone changes are quite frequent with a camera behind each of them (i.e. 50 then 40 then 50 then 40 then 30 then 50 etc).

Now from my understanding when I change a speed zone I am meant to be doing that speed so if I drop into a 30 zone from a 40 zone then straight away I'm meant to be doing 30 so I have to slow down earlier. Surely this should apply to going up in zones.

Absolutely stupid in my opinion and I'd probably contest that one.



M.
 
that picture isnt valid

clearly says TIMEOUT at the bottom

means invalid reading, they cant endorse you based on that evidence

EDIT: read rest of thread - i think you've got a strong case but to answer a couple of questions above me:

The speed camera sign basically means "we check speeds within half a mile of this sign" (or thats what i was told on my speed awareness course)

in my opinion you are beyond the 40mph zone on the picture you have posted, but as that picture says timeout, it's irrelevent, are you beyond the sign on the other two photographs - these are the important ones.
 
Last edited:
Police picture shows the car was before the hedges, which means you were before the road sign so unfortunatly you were speeding. However how pedantic, its a police officer not a camera so it should be able to show some discretion, that was unfortunate imo.
 
I've signed the NIP and will be sending it back tomorrow.

It's going to be £60 and 3 points, I won't be contesting it.
 
Back
Top Bottom