what speed do 30mph cameras flash at?
11 February 2010, 12:43 PM
#1
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
iTrader: (20)
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: n/a
Posts: 5,304
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
what speed do 30mph cameras flash at?
just on my normal route to work day dreaming and went through, at 33mph 34 max.. not sure if it flashed and pressed brake before i got off the road markings..
anybody been done at 31/32 mph on these?
Eddy
anybody been done at 31/32 mph on these?
Eddy
11 February 2010, 12:50 PM
#2
I know someone who got done at 31, but was caught by a Scamera van.
AFAIK, cameras can be set to trigger at ANY speed. ACPO guidelines state that an allowance of 10% +2mph, so 35 ought NOT to get you done, but my eldest got a speed seminar or 3pts and £60 fine for 35 in a 30, last year while out looking for work.
AFAIK, cameras can be set to trigger at ANY speed. ACPO guidelines state that an allowance of 10% +2mph, so 35 ought NOT to get you done, but my eldest got a speed seminar or 3pts and £60 fine for 35 in a 30, last year while out looking for work.
11 February 2010, 01:01 PM
#3
Scooby Regular
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 3,957
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thing is, if your check your satnav mph readout compared to your speedo, they are out by quite a bit anyway. My Vectra doing 90 on the speedo is doing 79ish on the satnav, which I assume is more accurate
11 February 2010, 01:41 PM
#5
Owner of SNet
iTrader: (7)
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Berkshire
Posts: 11,513
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Eh?! Not sure how that's possible as they have to allow +10% re margin of error on car speedo's then as you say + another 2mph just in case. If you get a ticket below 35mph I suggest contesting it in Court.
I work on the principle that my speedo under reads by 10% so 77 in a 70 limit is no problem. I then factor in another 10% increase for reasons stated above so tend to drive at 85mph on the speedo safe in the knowledge that I'll not get caught
TX.
I work on the principle that my speedo under reads by 10% so 77 in a 70 limit is no problem. I then factor in another 10% increase for reasons stated above so tend to drive at 85mph on the speedo safe in the knowledge that I'll not get caught
TX.
Last edited by Terminator X; 11 February 2010 at 01:44 PM.
11 February 2010, 01:53 PM
#7
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
iTrader: (20)
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: n/a
Posts: 5,304
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
thanks guys i should be safe then.. also i heard they flash twice, so one at begining and one at end i take it? already got points, dont want more, i drive sensibly these days too.. just day dreaming after an argument at home 
Trending Topics
11 February 2010, 01:59 PM
#8
Owner of SNet
iTrader: (7)
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Berkshire
Posts: 11,513
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
^^ 2 flashes ... one to catch you as you go through 2nd to catch you on the road markings hence they can calculate your speed an alternative way as a check against what the speed camera says. Cheeky ******* 
TX.
TX.
11 February 2010, 02:12 PM
#9
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
iTrader: (20)
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: n/a
Posts: 5,304
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
fair enough, i brakes before the lines ended, well tapped the brakes it was only a lil over the 30 mark, so should be fine, hope i dont get done for 31/32
11 February 2010, 04:30 PM
#10
Eh?! Not sure how that's possible as they have to allow +10% re margin of error on car speedo's then as you say + another 2mph just in case. If you get a ticket below 35mph I suggest contesting it in Court.
I work on the principle that my speedo under reads by 10% so 77 in a 70 limit is no problem. I then factor in another 10% increase for reasons stated above so tend to drive at 85mph on the speedo safe in the knowledge that I'll not get caught
TX.
I work on the principle that my speedo under reads by 10% so 77 in a 70 limit is no problem. I then factor in another 10% increase for reasons stated above so tend to drive at 85mph on the speedo safe in the knowledge that I'll not get caught
TX.
The police DO NOT have to allow you anything. They both can, and do operate zero tolerance schemes.
And take it from me: I DON'T advise anyone to go to court unless you have a cast iron excuse. Otherwise you WILL get a bigger fine, plus costs against you plus, these days, another piece of Lying Labour theft known as a "victim surcharge", another £15 to pay out. It just isn't worth it.
11 February 2010, 05:32 PM
#12
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: use the Marauder's Map to find out.
Posts: 2,041
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
11 February 2010, 08:42 PM
#13
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: liverpool
Posts: 2,440
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
no- one has also mentioned that you may just touch lucky anyway with film. i did once in morecombe, flew through one at about 40plus in a 30, same as you early morning empty roads , daydreaming on autopilot. by the time i realised it was too late. granted you will flap for a week or two but if you dont hear anything in say 3 weeks then happy days. also afaik up to 35 mph (in a 30)they offer you the option of the course.
11 February 2010, 09:10 PM
#14
Owner of SNet
iTrader: (7)
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Berkshire
Posts: 11,513
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not enough people take these fools to Court, they just roll over & plead guilty ie pay the ticket It's difficult for the rozzers to prove guilt for umpteen different reasons.
TX.
It's difficult for the rozzers to prove guilt for umpteen different reasons.TX.
Sorry but the ACPO guidelines are just that: guideleines.
The police DO NOT have to allow you anything. They both can, and do operate zero tolerance schemes.
And take it from me: I DON'T advise anyone to go to court unless you have a cast iron excuse. Otherwise you WILL get a bigger fine, plus costs against you plus, these days, another piece of Lying Labour theft known as a "victim surcharge", another £15 to pay out. It just isn't worth it.
The police DO NOT have to allow you anything. They both can, and do operate zero tolerance schemes.
And take it from me: I DON'T advise anyone to go to court unless you have a cast iron excuse. Otherwise you WILL get a bigger fine, plus costs against you plus, these days, another piece of Lying Labour theft known as a "victim surcharge", another £15 to pay out. It just isn't worth it.
11 February 2010, 09:26 PM
#15
LOL at the above post.
If you think that way, I suggest you try it. Your loss.
The police/CPS DO NOT have to prove anything, the whole process is set up so you are GUILTY, the magistrates will just go along with whatever the police/CPS say.
Don't forget that magistrates are part of the same scamming "Safety Camera Partnership", it's in THEIR interests to find you guilty too.
If you think that way, I suggest you try it. Your loss.
The police/CPS DO NOT have to prove anything, the whole process is set up so you are GUILTY, the magistrates will just go along with whatever the police/CPS say.
Don't forget that magistrates are part of the same scamming "Safety Camera Partnership", it's in THEIR interests to find you guilty too.
11 February 2010, 10:16 PM
#19
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 5,280
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'd say about 38mph. I have a meeting regularly at 6am once a week and have been known to trigger one off going the 'other' way on the deserted dual carrigeway at this time. When there are kids about I do 20mph. Such revolutionary wisdom comes with age not fines D
D
11 February 2010, 10:28 PM
#20
Scooby Regular
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 3,957
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LOL at the above post.
If you think that way, I suggest you try it. Your loss.
The police/CPS DO NOT have to prove anything, the whole process is set up so you are GUILTY, the magistrates will just go along with whatever the police/CPS say.
Don't forget that magistrates are part of the same scamming "Safety Camera Partnership", it's in THEIR interests to find you guilty too.
If you think that way, I suggest you try it. Your loss.
The police/CPS DO NOT have to prove anything, the whole process is set up so you are GUILTY, the magistrates will just go along with whatever the police/CPS say.
Don't forget that magistrates are part of the same scamming "Safety Camera Partnership", it's in THEIR interests to find you guilty too.
A person shall not be guilty of an offence by virtue of paragraph (a) of subsection (2) above if he shows that he did not know and could not with reasonable diligence have ascertained who the driver of the vehicle was
12 February 2010, 10:20 AM
#23
How are you so certain?
That if it goes to court, you'll lose unless you have a cast iron case, and get more than you would have? I was that man
A person shall not be guilty of an offence by virtue of paragraph (a) of subsection (2) above if he shows that he did not know and could not with reasonable diligence have ascertained who the driver of the vehicle was
It's almost impossible to do, and the fines for NOT saying who was driving are huge, up to £1000 with SIX points!
There are people in our local rag who try it every week, and get done, big timeBelieve me, both of you, I've been there and lost. I said I couldn't remember who was driving. Magistrate said, "It looks like you so it was you."
I asked for the guy who sent the original NIP to be in court because he lied about having spoken to me on the phone and I could prove it. He never turned up. When I complained, I was told it was hard luck and that I was guilty anyway.
I ended up with FOUR points and £100 fine, plus £150 costs.
The magistrate even told the CPS witnesses to stay and see me sentenced so THEY could see justice done.
All this is totally irrelevant though. You either choose to believe me, or not.
As I said before, go on and give it a go yourself. You can't say you haven't been warned
12 February 2010, 10:54 AM
#25
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 5,280
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Alcazar - for tyranny to prevail it takes only good men to do nothing. Glad you have given it a go like me. I'd rather have failed trying and know I'm right than not to have tried at all...
These are the same gang as try to knobble blokes defending their family and home from armed thugs/burglars - they do not have the morality/righteousness of those doing it to protect society any more. Its just a numbers and odds 9-5 game to them. They punish misdemeanors and any cheeky quest for logical fair justice (like yours) harsher than they do actual crime that really hurts people.
Hasta la victoria sempre (as El Che used to say)
D
These are the same gang as try to knobble blokes defending their family and home from armed thugs/burglars - they do not have the morality/righteousness of those doing it to protect society any more. Its just a numbers and odds 9-5 game to them. They punish misdemeanors and any cheeky quest for logical fair justice (like yours) harsher than they do actual crime that really hurts people.
Hasta la victoria sempre (as El Che used to say)
D
12 February 2010, 12:38 PM
#26
Yes..and the worrying thing is that they are moving now to make it the law that if you choose to go to court, for example to fight a speeding ticket, you'll end up paying ALL the costs even if you win!
Motoring offences really are a lose-lose situation. You get punished three times, (including insurance) if you accept the points and fine, but if you go to court and lose, you get points + bigger fine + costs + victim surcharge + insurance = FIVE punishments!
Even if you WIN you have to pay costs..........disgusting. Lying Labour B@stards!
Motoring offences really are a lose-lose situation. You get punished three times, (including insurance) if you accept the points and fine, but if you go to court and lose, you get points + bigger fine + costs + victim surcharge + insurance = FIVE punishments!
Even if you WIN you have to pay costs..........disgusting. Lying Labour B@stards!
12 February 2010, 01:56 PM
#27
Owner of SNet
iTrader: (7)
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Berkshire
Posts: 11,513
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
^^ I don't really understand how they can get away with that though ... surely something that is un-just or goes against Natural Justice will / should just get kicked back by [insert whoever it is that is able to challenge the Govt when they introduce stuff that goes against it!!]? I know that the Govt are slowly turning "innocent until proven guilty" around to "guilty until you prove your innocence", I'm just not sure how they actually get away with it
TX.
TX.
12 February 2010, 02:37 PM
#28
Scooby Regular
well a friend of mine has had one put outside his house on a major road and they sent him a letter saying how fast you can go through them before a conviction is thought possible. his letter said whatever the speed limit is its 10% + 1 mph so a 30 mph limit would be 34 and so on if this helps but i would ask for the calibration certificate of the camera for that day as they are supposed to be calibrated before use every day so i have read
12 February 2010, 02:52 PM
#29
Scooby Regular
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 3,957
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I will scan and post my court bundle later on for people to have a gander at, I can't post my last one due to it being subject to a NDA.