Amateur legal advice anyone?
Jul. 14th, 2005 06:50 pmRight, well, I've just got a bit of paper from the warwick camera enforcement unit, saying basically "Busted!". 48 miles an hour in a 40. Temporary restriction, dual carriageway, at 19:30 or so when it was quiet, my speed crept up a bit down the hill. They've since taken down the camera, which is kinda annoying.
However, having read this article about speed restriction signs and this one from the AA it would seem to indicate that there _must_ be speed restriction signs on both sides of the road.
I've sort of reached the conclusion that I might have a get out.
You see, the approach road looks like this:


Now, as I read that article, there _has_ to be a speed restriction sign on both sides of the approach road. Since there wasn't, I'm home free. Or at least, not facing points. Would anyone else care to have a look and check my understanding? I appreciate that for proper legal advice, one needs to seek a proper legal professional, and unless someone says 'naa, that's bollocks' I probably will.
However, having read this article about speed restriction signs and this one from the AA it would seem to indicate that there _must_ be speed restriction signs on both sides of the road.
I've sort of reached the conclusion that I might have a get out.
You see, the approach road looks like this:
Now, as I read that article, there _has_ to be a speed restriction sign on both sides of the approach road. Since there wasn't, I'm home free. Or at least, not facing points. Would anyone else care to have a look and check my understanding? I appreciate that for proper legal advice, one needs to seek a proper legal professional, and unless someone says 'naa, that's bollocks' I probably will.
no subject
Date: 2005-07-14 08:55 pm (UTC)You might be able to find something in the news archives about it.
no subject
Date: 2005-07-14 10:39 pm (UTC)That definetaly isn't the case in the photo's you have produced, which says to me that the speed restriction was not properly displayed and thus unenforceable in this circumstance.
no subject
Date: 2005-07-14 10:45 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-07-14 10:50 pm (UTC)Apparently they got rid of that while no-one was looking. Strict limits are strict limits. :-(
no subject
Date: 2005-07-15 06:43 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-07-14 11:16 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-07-14 11:17 pm (UTC)http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/north_east/4578705.stm
no subject
Date: 2005-07-15 08:01 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-07-15 09:21 am (UTC)http://www.speed-trap.co.uk/Accused_Home/Rules_useage/The_Law.htm
no subject
Date: 2005-07-15 08:38 am (UTC)There's an interesting section on getting your spouse or solicitor to fill out your "Notice Of Intended Prosecution" form, but not sign it. Apparently legally the form has to be filled out, but there's no legal requirement for it to be signed. Since it's not signed, it's inadmissible as evidence and hence is not a legal confession of your speeding.
no subject
Date: 2005-07-15 08:45 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-07-15 02:44 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-07-18 09:14 pm (UTC)You cannot be done over for something you *might* have done, and neither can the owner of the vehicle be given points for something done by someone else. At this juncture the weight is on the Police to identify the driver so the relevent person can be prosecuted.
Someone is actually taking these notices to the Hague at the minute as in effect the Police are attepting to extort a confession out of the victim and that is against the European Human Rights we signed up to not so long back.
I have a disk around here somewhere on saving your licence, drop me a text with your addy and I'll mail it to you.
D.