Show Posts - 3phase

Of course - yes - very true NJ - that would be the best option too if all the paperwork shows the lease co. is at fault & no need to even plead to the underlying offence.

I'd wait until the 6 months are up from offence date before contacting the camera unit.Purely speculative but two options may have happened & someone somewhere will likely be prosecuted for an FTP charge as the process seems to have started.1) Lease Co. reply nominating you was never received back to the camera unit - Lease Co. are then on the hook for the offence - they may not even know it.2) Your own S.172 never reached you for whatever admin or logistical reasons. You will then have a possible defence but will need to attend court to ask to be sentenced for the original underlying offence rather than the more serious 6 points for FTP.

Time Int(secs) on your HADECS3 data relates to the time between the two camera flashes. It's short for "Time interval"Cameras are triggered 200m distance apart and this is a secondary check for speed only - as if the timing on the flash was wrong it would also calculate the wrong speed.It does not relate to how long the sign has been displayed.For a red X they don't need the speed to prosecute, just evidence that you passed under it which they seem to have. Image 4 with the two red lines overlaid.You could contact National Highways to get a log of when the x was first displayed.My understanding is type approval is still 60 seconds after display until enforcement & that applies to red X too.

Quote from: 666 on 13 Mar, 2025 17:38OP, neither you nor any of the other "thousands" could have known it was actually safe to move left. The incident before the gantry might not have been the only one.Due to the cars funnelling slowly past the scene one at a time using the only available outside lane, It was a virtually empty maybe 1 mile straight stretch of clear sunny motorway after the incident.I was on the opposite carriageway by the way, that's how I could see the constant flashes.

Thanks Dave for the exact TSRDG - logic says that is the case, but if they play hardball with no exemptions, then I'd expect starting in the next few weeks or so at least a few of those poor sods who were flashed after moving back to the left on an empty motorway ahead to find their way to this forum with active cases.I reckon it would have caught well over a thousand based on the amount of constant flashes I saw and the miles long queues who were still to travel through.

Interesting case summary - thxIn this day and age it almost beggars belief that TFL are still sending out DVD's - I thought authorities were supposed to be cutting down on environmental waste and streamlining services - how much extra effort does it take to burn a DVD from a file & then post it out? Maybe they have 60,000 unused & unwritten RW DVD's they have to get rid of? Who knows

Hello Andy - that's exactly my Q - I don't know if anyone on here knows the actual legalities of it regarding red x. We've seen many cases of people passing directly under obvious red x gantries - that's not the case here for sure, but that HADECS was going off like a strobe..I guess if auto generated, there will be a few thousand people at least getting an S.172 after today. Pretty much all HGV's were flashed as soon as they moved out of the outside lane almost immediately after as common sense would dictate.Should they have stayed in outside lane at 56mph for next 3 miles until next gantry showing all clear to avoid the flash, or will common sense come into play? Who knows..

Hello learned minds.Strange one today and posting as I'm curious for your thoughts.We all know that if a gantry has for example 50 displayed - that is valid until the next gantry displays anything other. If you are caught before a change by say a van on a bridge you have no legal legs.Red X though? Usually yes - wait until the next gantry as there is a reason. Or can you move back once passed the gantry? this is the Q...Scenario today was a lorry fire on the M1 Northbound - inside 3 lanes displaying red x and physically blocked - outside lane only available to pass directly under the gantry.This was near Chesterfield between 28 & 29.Key to this is that the incident happened maybe 10m before the gantry & no one could actually drive under the inside 3 lanes red X due to fire services still damping down.I was travelling southbound slowly crawling at 0 - 5mph due to rubberneckers with a good 1/2 mile & maybe 15 mins straight visibility of the scene.The HADECS was flashing non stop - almost every vehicle - apart I guess those who stayed in the outside lane.Every truck, and most cars once passed the scene/gantry started slowly moving back to the inside lane of a clear motorway ahead and 'flash'I know common sense isn't so common anymore, but the camera unit must have had several thousands today at that location - but what is the legal stance on a red X being enforced if anyone knows? I know none of the drivers physically passed under it - but the camera's were snap happy assuming they had.Pic below from a news report where you can see the proximity to the gantry.Cheers all

If it's HADECS, then they have the 'money shot' from the cams on the pole in advance of the gantry showing the limit. So they would show the 60 as you passed so NFA I'd reckon - even if auto processed you could prove it was 60 clear as day.I don't know the specific answer to your Q regarding time delays though - you'd hope the software was instantaneous going up, a bit of leeway reducing.Interesting Q though, as I'm just about to start a new thread ref. what I saw today with red X on the M1

I'd say it's a scare tactic if you have walked the length and confirmed - Any devices would need to be sited in view of the lights anyway. Although ironically, it looks like you have caught the dude on the bike using his phone - ha you are the enforcement camera in this pic

Quote from: M60NJP on 11 Oct, 2023 11:25Particularly as the NIP was from Devon & Cornwall - so one hell of a (memorable!) detour on the route from Norfolk to the Highlands!You have the OP mixed up with ManxTom's reply.. OP went to Cornwall