Free Traffic Legal Advice

I have received a NIP for the alleged offence of travelling at 37mph in a 30mph zone at 16:31 and 9 seconds on 6th May 2024. The photograph for this shows the vehcile travelling towards the camera.
I have received a further NIP for the alleged offence of travelling at 45mph in a 30 mph zone at 16:31 and 58 seconds on 6th May 2024. The photograph for this shows the vehicle travelling away from the camera.

The location was on the A21 at John Cross (just north of Hastings). We can not identify the exact location. (It was a mobile camera, not fixed). The online NIP refers to this website for identifying the location of the Camera. https://ssrp.shinyapps.io/dataportal/ I can see Site ID 1158 in John Cross, but no sign of Site 686 referenced in this case.

I understand that it should be a single offence, so long as the driver didn't reduce speed below 30mph. The driver doesn't have any reason to believe that this is the case, and no evidence has been offered to suggest that this is the case.

However some quick maths shows something appears amiss.
Photo 1 was taken at a distance of 94.6 metres. Photo 2 was taken at a distance of 91.0 metres. Add on 5 metres (estimate) for the length of the vehicle and a total of 190.6 metres was travelled in 49 seconds. This converts to an average speed (if my maths is right) of under 9mph. (Different cameras with unsyncronised times?)

My layman thoughts are for the driver to deal with and pay the 37mph (Band A) offence as fast as possible, and for the 45mph (Band B) offence to be delayed and then appealed as settled when the 37mph offence was dealt with and the driver can't be reprosecuted for the same crime. However all feedback welcomed.

For full disclosure, the driver has no penalty points on their licence currently, however has already completed a speed awareness course within the last 3 years.

[ Guests cannot view attachments ] [ Guests cannot view attachments ]

Did the driver turn around in between the captures?

The driver was travelling southbound and did not travel back on themselves.

For clarity, I am neither the registered keeper, nor the driver, but posting on their behalf.

Send three and fourpence, we're going to a dance!

We have 2 legitimately issued NIP is 49 seconds that both need to be accepted and dealt with properly?

It isn't a question of "accepting" anything as there is nothing to accept. Both of the accompanying "Requests for Driver's Details" must be responded to, naming the driver. The driver could ask the police to consider the two as a single offence but, if they really did turn round, I doubt very much they will do that.

A course should be offered for the 37mph offence and a fixed penalty (£100 and 3 points) for the other.

Quote from: Fr3ddi3 on May 19, 2024, 11:24:16 am

Quote from: NewJudge on May 19, 2024, 10:54:06 am

Quote

We have 2 legitimately issued NIP is 49 seconds that both need to be accepted and dealt with properly?

It isn't a question of "accepting" anything as there is nothing to accept. Both of the accompanying "Requests for Driver's Details" must be responded to, naming the driver. The driver could ask the police to consider the two as a single offence but, if they really did turn round, I doubt very much they will do that.

A course should be offered for the 37mph offence and a fixed penalty (£100 and 3 points) for the other.

I have completed both NIP and posted them. I have also requested that they be considered as a single offence.

Are you able to ask for the two allegations to be treated as one if you weren't the driver and weren't there?  Isn't that down to the driver to do?

As a no doubt irrelevant aside the "Explanation of photographic evidence" in the two photos is confusing.  The second line of the explanations refers to "N/R - New recording followed by the film frame number" but that isn't what is shown on the photo.

If they don't need to give an explanation why give one that is confusing...

When I say "I" did it, the forms were completed by the keeper, with my guidance. He wrote on the form and he signed it.
For the request for it to be completed as a single offence, I wrote the email, then read it out to the keeper for his approval, before sending it from the keepers email address.

Yes, like you, I couldn't understand the reference to New Recording, which is not what was shown in the photos.

A plea for clemency is a plea for clemency regardless of how it might be categorized if it gets to court. The police have a discretion in the disposal of offences/allegations that the courts do not. Whilst the police are statistically unlikely to show leniency, it costs nothing to ask.

As the driver is adamant that he didn't double back on himself, I would suggest that the chances of him being able to give compelling evidence that he maintained a speed in excess of 30mph throughout the roundabout that he never doubled back on himself on, is even more remote than the chances that he did so - so it is almost certain that he had separately exceeded the speed limit on both occasions, so not a single continuing offence.

For multiple offences committed on the same occasion, the court should fine for each offence but only give points for the most serious - in which case he would almost certainly be better off with a fixed penalty and a course, assuming that the police don't decide to play nice.

Several thing were disclosed in the OP, mainly about a dance which had an admission charge of 3 shillings and four pence.
That said, I probably should have re-read it before offering irrelevant advice.

If a course is not on the cards, if the best option, as always is if the police will drop on of the allegations. If not, then it would seem to be a choice of accepting 2 fixed penalties, or going to court to argue the same occasion. Not sure whether the same occasion legislation has a provision for fixed penalties - IOW whether it is viable to accept a fixed penalty for one and only be fined in court for the other.