Free Traffic Legal Advice
Live cases legal advice => Speeding and other criminal offences => Topic started by: Lynch004 on February 01, 2026, 02:30:12 am
-
...was just seeing if there was a quick resolution.
Absent any actual defence (nothing you've said so far hints at one) then the quickest resolution will be a course to avoid the points or a fixed penalty (3 points £100).
-
There was a popular misconception many years ago, that there was a requirement for speed cameras to be conspicuous in order for the speeding offence to be prosecuted. This was largely due to Tony Blair saying that that was going to be the case. Surprisingly enough, it was a big fat lie.
What the rules actually were, before they were rescinded many years ago, at first glance at least, that in order for the safety camera partnerships to be able to retain the income from the fixed penalties (and return any surplus they hadn't managed to fiddle to the exchequer), 85% of enforcement sites had to meet the conspicuity requirements. This had no bearing whatsoever on the admissibility of the evidence, it was just a rule regarding keeping the money. Except that the rules were enforced by the safety camera partnerships themselves - if they became aware that they were not complying with the rules, they had the power to report themselves to themselves and then decide whether or not they still ought to keep the money.
-
Morning,
Basically, I have received a NIP for Speeding - exceed 70mph Motorway limit - Manned equipment. Vehicle speed 80mph.
The stretch of the M50 in question has no Speed Camera/warning signage. Haven driven this stretch of road a few times since, the manned camera appears to be a Male operating out of a Grey people carrier, on the opposite side of the road, with no Hi-Viz signage, both personally or on vehicle.
Happy to scan and post correspondence, was just seeing if there was a quick resolution.
Many thanks
Lynch