Speeding fine letters
Apparently rich people (who include some well known public
figures) pay solicitors thousands of pounds to use these very
legal loopholes to get off their speeding fines.
But now Ian has published the letters so that you can use
them next time YOU get a ticket!
If you want to know that next time you receive a speeding
fine, you can just fire back a letter with the unpaid ticket and
have the thing cancelled (meaning no points and no fine), then I
strongly recommend you take a look by clicking:
http://www.JusticeForEveryone.co.uk/adamblair.htm
A motorist was caught by a speed
camera last week because he
was expected to know the distance between the lamp
posts
on the road he was driving on...
Ian Thomas, 44, believed the limit
on the single carriageway
road was 40mph – the speed at which he was driving his X-type
Jaguar.
But he has now learned that he
will be fined £60 and receive 3
points because he "should" have known the speed limit by
judging
the distance between the
lamp posts on the side of the road.
He said: “It’s crazy. How am I
supposed to judge the speed limit
by the distance between lamp posts and drive safely?"
“I saw the camera flash but I was
doing 40mph and had seen
several signs further up saying there was a 40mph limit".
“I didn’t think any more of it until
I got a letter saying I was
being fined £60. I was incensed. If there had been signs I would
have slowed down.”
Ian had had a clean driving licence
for 16 years until he was
fined £60 for doing 33mph in a 30mph zone in Towyn, North Wales
last year.
He said: “I went on a speed
awareness course after that and it
didn’t include counting the distance between lampposts.”
A Department of Transport spokesman
confirmed that
motorists are sometimes required to judge the distance between
lamp posts in order to know what the speed limit is, saying...
“a motorist can judge if it is
30mph or not by looking at the
distance between the lamp posts .”
Ian fell foul of a new speed camera
on the A629 Wortley Road
in Rotherham, South Yorks.
We have been informed that a brand new speed camera
the "PatrolVision 500" -- may be ILLEGAL .
The new camera is the most sophisticated yet and works by
linking a Pro Laser III (which the BTST detects up to 2 miles
away) with a CCTV camera that rotates 360 degrees.
The idea is to film cars and bikes from the back and then the
front as they go past so that the camera captures the drivers'
face.
But the thing is, while the Pro Laser III has been approved by
the Home Office, the CCTV camera HAS NOT BEEN
"TYPE APPROVED".
The Speed Camera Authority who are introducing the new type of
camera claim that it doesn't need to be type approved because
the camera doesn't measure speed, the laser gun does.
However, we have uncovered this to be factually incorrect.
In fact, the two devices need to be Type Approved TOGETHER
to
be legal.
The Speed Meter Handbook which is published by the Home Office
states that anything that is ATTACHED to a speed camera must be
type-approved, not just the camera itself.
Further, the 1991 Road Traffic Act states that...
"Only evedence from a Type Approved device may be used in
a
court of law."
We feel that 'Safety Camera Partnerships' and the Police may
be relying on drivers and riders admitting that they were
driving at the time of the alleged offence and actually KNOW
that the evedence gained from the PatrolVision 500 is not
acceptable as evidence in court.
...in other words, it is an intimidation tactic with the
objective of conning the motorist in to incriminating
themself.
Because once you incriminate yourself (even if it was under the
threat of prosecution), the arguement of 'if' the device is
legal
or not can not be used to save you.
In other words, never incriminate yourself (unless of course you
know that you are guilty, in which case you must!)
< |
