Red light camera - NIP received

Dunks said:
Just as well no one was crossing, you could've easily hit them.
Click to expand...
To be honest, that's probably unlikely.

Firstly, he probably stopped a fraction after the lights went red, so someone would have had to literally launch in to the road as the lights were on amber.

Secondly, he's near the middle of a dual carriageway with four lanes on that side. Not only would that person have had to launch across on amber, they'd have had to make it all the way to the middle of the road.

Thirdly, this person who runs across dual carriageways, at night, when the lights are amber, must do so in the clear view of a pair of headlights screeching to a stop.

Fourthly, a car can avoid things, and also make noises. The OP could have used the horn or steered out of the way, maybe even 'emergency stopped' earlier; there's certainly been times where I've come close to going over the line because I haven't wanted to yank the anchors on fully. If someone was in the way, I would.

So, let's be serious for a moment - he might have run over a total idiot.
 
Last edited:
All of the above are assumtions, lets look at the other side of assumptions.

look at the other side of the road, looks like a road of stopped cars, so maybe the lights have been on red for a while, its night there probably isnt much traffic about so thats why theres no other cars on his side. All the lights in front are red too, who knows what speed hes going. He has his brake lights on but that doesnt exactly mean hes stopped there, could still be doing some speed.
 
For what it's worth, I checked the highway code quickly:

http://www.direct.gov.uk/prod_consu.../@dg/@en/documents/digitalasset/dg_070561.pdf

Don't know how or even if the Highway Code is used in court, but one would assume that, despite you actually being stopped, your entire car has crossed the white line, so you've committed the offence.

Also, it looks like you're blocking a pedestrian crossing as well, which would probably also count against you.

Not a legal expert in the slightest, so feel free to correct me on anything :p
 
Haha, you willy. Why try and contest it? It's always someone else's fault, accept it and move on. Oh, and look where you're going next time. You could have hit someone crossing.
 
The Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2002

Regulation 36(1)(e):

the amber signal shall, when shown alone, convey the same prohibition as the red signal, except that, as respects any vehicle which is so close to the stop line that it cannot safely be stopped without proceeding beyond the stop line, it shall convey the same indication as the green signal or green arrow signal which was shown immediately before it;
 
Last edited:
section 1 of the road traffic offenders act 1988 requires that the defendant must have been either warned at the time of the offence of possible prosecution or within 14 days via NIP.
 
Undeterred said:
The Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2002

Regulation 36(1)(e):

the amber signal shall, when shown alone, convey the same prohibition as the red signal, except that, as respects any vehicle which is so close to the stop line that it cannot safely be stopped without proceeding beyond the stop line, it shall convey the same indication as the green signal or green arrow signal which was shown immediately before it;
Click to expand...

So what? It was showing red when he crossed the line, not amber.
 
Your arrogance shocks me Fox.

The photo does not show he crossed the line when red. The photo shows a vehicle past the stop line with a red light. It is hard to tell whether the vehicle is stationary or not?

If the vehicle crossed the line at amber and then stopped then Regulation 36(1)(e) is highly relevant.
 
Undeterred said:
Your arrogance shocks me Fox.

The photo does not show he crossed the line when red. The photo shows a vehicle past the stop line with a red light. It is hard to tell whether the vehicle is stationary or not?

If the vehicle crossed the line at amber and then stopped then Regulation 36(1)(e) is highly relevant.
Click to expand...

The camera only triggers when the light is red.

The camera triggered.

Assuming

a) No fault in the camera
and
b) No fault in the lights

Then your quotation is utterly irrelevant.
 
The camera takes a series of stills. The police rely on the most incriminating still in order to proceed wit the prosecution.

If the police have only provided you with one still I would request the initial photograph which is commonly described as the 'marker' photograph.

Otherwise you could fall back onto the s1 RTO 1988.
 
Undeterred said:
Your arrogance shocks me Fox.

The photo does not show he crossed the line when red. The photo shows a vehicle past the stop line with a red light. It is hard to tell whether the vehicle is stationary or not?

If the vehicle crossed the line at amber and then stopped then Regulation 36(1)(e) is highly relevant.
Click to expand...

If the vehicle crossed the line at amber and then stopped the photographs wouldn't exist.
 
[TW]Fox;21570736 said:
If the vehicle crossed the line at amber and then stopped the photographs wouldn't exist.
Click to expand...

true, but in any event the offence is not one of strict liability. The fact that a person crosses the stop line does not make the offence complete.

There are defences available in certain situations for crossing stop line at red light.

In any event there is still the 14 day NIP issue although I'll bet it was in time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom