Conference terri::cars_uk

    I knew a guy who always carried a small tape recorder. He was an ex cop
    himself, used to reach for it if ever the police stopped him. They 
    inevitably asked him what he was doing, to which he would reply;
    
    "Well it's just so there won't be any confusion about statements later"
    
    He reckoned this put them off and they would simply let him off with a
    warning!
    
    I reckon a camera has to be a good idea....
    
    NR

    	There are some places in the world where even a video recording
    	of the event taking place isn't sufficient!
    
        Ian.

Well in my accident, I took *lots* of photographs.   They proved my case 
without doubt, so the Judge dismissed them as evidence.

(he'd already decided who he was going to find for before he'd heard any
evidence)


if the photographs were correct then they proved that she was telling porkies 
all the way !!!

    >>	There are some places in the world where even a video recording
    >>	of the event taking place isn't sufficient!
    
    Yes! Saudi Arabia for one..
    
    The *logic* is ...
    
    "If you had'nt been in our country then the ten cars that hit you,
    whilst your car was parked, would'nt have happened."
    
    Dave 
    

    Re Video's in some countries,
    
    
    By that I take it you mean the U.S.!!

    The UK police now use photographs as evidence on Joe-public. The idea
    behind this being to free up policemen having to attend costly law
    court sessions. Plus it makes it easier to book idiots in built up
    traffic situations.
    
    If you cross certain junctions on the A40 before or after you're
    supposed to (ie jump the lights) a camera automatically takes a
    photograph of your car; this photograph will clearly identify your car,
    the fact that you jumped the lights and the speed you were doing at the
    time will also be recorded.
    
    You can then either receive a summons or a fine through the post along
    with the afore-mentioned photographic evidence. 
    
    Also about to come into force on some stretches of UK motorway is
    similar camera type setups. The camera will photopgarph your vehicle 
    should you pass the camera above (I think) 79mph. Once again the camera
    clearly identifies your car along with recording your speed. The first
    you may know of this is once again via the post, complete with fine and
    the relevant number of points knocked of your licence.
    
    The motorway version, is in my opinion, ludicrous... It'll encourage
    bunching for one thing... and the camera is in operation regardless of
    the time of day... So if you're driving along, say, the M3 at 2am doing
    80mph past one of these cameras, you'll be nicked. Meanwhile, back in
    town some plonker overtakes you in a 30mph zone, doing about 50mph, and
    gets away with it scot free.
    
    Reargards,
    
    Stephen

    Interestingly my radar detector bleeps it's little head off when going
    through traffic lights with (what look like little cameras) on the tops
    of them. Range isn't so goos though and the bleeps only start when you
    are about 3 Escort RS Turbo lenghts from the lights. I wonder what way
    they actaully work ?? Seems as though the camera type odjects are
    firing out some sort of radar, which when reflected, will probably
    detect you speed and decide whether or not they take a nice "action"
    shot of you... which reminds me, I must put the front number plate back
    on my car soon :-)
    
    Gary.

	I know they use radar in the pure speed detectors planned for 
	the motorways...

	However when they put the Gatso cameras in at the bottom of
	Southampton St.,  they put lots of induction loops in the road
	to detect when you were over the line,  I thought you could 
	calculate speed from a pair of these...?

	Perhaps they do use radar...?

	I also heard they use infra red film and infra red flashguns,  it
	would seem what you need is infra red flashguns around your reg
	plate,  which are triggered when infra red light falls upon them,
	thereby over exposing the film.... ;-)

	_Richard

re.6:

regarding cameras on motorway bridges. Can you imagine what it will do for
safety when all the traffic slams on the anchors just before every bridge
with anything like a camera strapped to it? Travelling to Leeds and back
yesterday, via M4/M25/M1, I estimate 50% all cars observed were exceeding
80mph. 

/Dave.

Re: .7

Gary,

usually the boxes on the top of traffic lights (or more often, Pelican crossing
lights) are simple detectors to determine if someone is approaching the lights.

You will notice the radars on mobile roadworks temporary traffic lights, which
allow the lights to change early when you approach them. They can't start
burying cables for a bit of digging.

Traffic light cameras are usually in green (or grey) boxes, around 20ft up on
a pole, and the box has (at least) two orifices, one for the camera/flash, and
one for the radar. Nine times out of ten, the box is empty, and is used for the
deterrent effect. There are several of these in the Tipton area of Brum!

Re: Motorway speed cameras

This really p*sses me off, a car doing 80mph (10mph over the limit) gets nicked,
even though this is FAR safer then the HGV doing 78mph (18mph above the limit,
28mph above the dual carriageway limit!), who gets away with it.

Re: on topic

I always carry one of those disposable cameras, just in case!

mb

    Why don't you guys just STOP at red lights, KEEP the speed limit and
    drive more carefully and then you wouldn't have to worry about radars,
    infra red lights etc.!!!

>>even though this is FAR safer then the HGV doing 78mph (18mph above the limit,
>>28mph above the dual carriageway limit!), who gets away with it.
    
    The national speed limit on a dual carriageway is still 70mph.  Single
    carriageways are 60mps.
    
    
    Shaun.

RE: .12

	>> The national speed limit on a dual carriageway is still 70mph.
   	>> Single carriageways are 60mps.

Speed limit is 60mph on dual carriageway for HGV's

	_Richard

That's right. Rathole my topic. See if I care ...

Dougie

    When they put a camera on one of the M27 bridges near Romsey a few
    years ago, one of the locals blew it away with his 12-bore, now that's
    what I call positive action! ;-)
    NR
    

Re: .13

> Speed limit is 60mph on dual carriageway for HGV's

The speed limit for HGVs is 50mph on dual carriageways, and 60mph on motorways
(i think)

Has someone got a Highway code handy to check?

mb

    Not Highway code, but the latest vesion of Talkbacks nice company car
    driver guide:
    				built up	single	dual	motorways 
    				area's		carriageways
    
    CARS			30		60	70	70
    
    CARS TOWING CARAVANS	30		50	60	60
    OR TRAILERS
    
    BUSES AND COACHES		30		50	60	70
    
    GOODS VEHICLES		30		50	60	70
    (not exceeding 7.5 tons 
    laden weight)
    AND VANS (exceeding
    2 tons laden weight)
    
    HEAVY GOODS VEHICLES	30		40	50	60
    (exceeding 7.5 tons
    laden weight) 
    
    
    Richard

Hi Dougie,

I don't think your topic is ratholed. They tried doing
it with the case of U.S. law and it's black citizens,
and that didn't work.

Looks like people are still talking about cameras.

Mark.

P.S. I've been thinking about carrying a camera, but
am afraid the heat inside the car might damage the film.

I was really annoyed, when in an accident where I consider
that I wasn't at fault. I forgot to use the camera in my
car. This would have helped my case.

    Hi Dougie,
    
    I took photos of an 'incident' I was involved in, with an artic on a 
    country lane bend a few years ago. The lorry's tyre marks were clearly
    visible 2 feet over the centre line. As I was driving a company car, I
    handed over all the details (but not photos at this stage) to the
    Insurance Dept. A year or so later, the photos came in very useful when
    the lorry driver's insurance company were fighting the claim - I even
    got a cheque in compensation for a neck injury that was aggravated.
    
    
    Interesting that courts don't seem to accept them though.....:-(
    
    Mike

    I think the camera would need to be one of those ones that print the
    date and time on the photo, otherwise "who's to say that the photo was
    of the incident in question" might be the view of a court of law. 
    People settling out of court, however, might not risk that
    interpretation, and cave in at the sight of a photo even though undated?
    
    Ken

Re: .10

> Re: Motorway speed cameras
>
> This really p*sses me off, a car doing 80mph (10mph over the limit) gets
> nicked, even though this is FAR safer then the HGV doing 78mph (18mph above
> the limit, 28mph above the dual carriageway limit!), who gets away with it.

Most automatic speed-triggered cameras incorporate a device to detect the
approximate height of the vehicle.  If it is over about 2m high the speed
that triggers the camera is adjusted downwards.

jb

RE: -.1

Sorry about my ignorance - but I'm out of touch with the UK's traffic policing
(cardboard cut-out cars etc.) How about tall non-HGVs? For example, my VW
Camper is 2m 60cm tall, but is entitled to run at 70 mph. Is the actual speed
stamped on the photograph so that a bit of intelligence can be applied to the
evidence?

Steve

    The actual speed must be indicated on the picture, otherwise you would
    have the same fine for 105 as for 85. Some of these cameras take 2
    pictures at a fixed time apart, so you can see that the vehicle has
    indeed moved the appropriate distance as well as getting the radar
    speed. This gives much stronger evidence - the driver can't easily
    claim that some other car was the one that was speeding.
    
     (And anyone who hopes to dazzle the camera with a flash gun
    triggered by the camera's flash had better make sure their flash can
    recycle quickly enough to dazzle the second exposure as well !)
    
    Andrew

Berkshire Road safety had a stand at the GTI International Show.

One of the people there had a photo album, with about 5 favourite snaps.

Volvo and BMW are the ones I remember.  The Volvo crossing some cross 
road lights after they had been red for 5 seconds, literally slotting 
through the evening traffic flowing past at normal speed!

The BMW was crossing the line at 60 MPH after the lights were red for 
2 seconds.

She didn't have a piccy of a Hot Hatch though.  Do you think the good 
acceleration or brakes are mostly responsible for stopping at or 
making the amber lights? 8-))

There are some mad, mad people in this world.

Rob.

Ahhh Gi'day...

    Police use some AMAZING film.  They can develop it to get ANYTHING they
    want off it. You'd need a VERY bright flash to overexpose it.

    Hi,
    
    	If I was a devious sort of person, and intended to make a regular
    habit of breaking the speed limit on motorways watched over by speed
    recording cameras I would do the following:-.
    
    
    1. Keep an eye out for a car of the same type and colour as mine, note
    the registration number
    
    2. Visit my friendly cars spares shop, and get a pair of plates made
    with the other cars registration marks.
    
    3. Arrange a set of quick fit/release screws, to quickly fit the false
    plates, even better would be a "James Bond" job with rotating plates!
    
    4. Drive with comparative impunity with regard to the fixed cameras, 
    (have to watch out for the unmarked patrols tho)
    
    Since I am a law abiding person, I certainly would not do such a thing,
    
    BUT what happens to me, if I receive a missive through the post,
    because someone has done the above using my reg number?
    
    The burden of proof is now on you to prove you are innocent and not
    for the police to prove you are guilty!
    
    Another point ---- what happens if you lend your car to someone, and he
    gets his picture taken? The motorway camera only takes a rear view. Its
    the registered keeper of the car gets fined! 
    
    What happens with hire cars?
    
    re .0 I think its a good idea to keep both a cheap camera and a tape
    recorder in the car,....... although they wont be there long if you
    park in DEC_RIP_IT_OFF PARK car park.!
    
    Pat Keane.
    

 RE : Last few.

 Who needs to worry about having an I.R flash gun around their rear number
plate to over-expose police radar cameras ?

 In the paper a couple of days ago there was a report of a rear number plate 
being manufactured by some 'irresponsible body' ( as the ECILOP put it ) which
has black letters made of a certain material which filters out all infra-red
light - thus the photo's produced come out with a totally white/blank number
plate. Perfectly legal by all accounts & all for the sum of 40quid if I 
remember correctly.

 All I need is an address.

    MArk.     

    re .26
    
    Several years ago I recieved a letter (reocorded delivery) from the
    police asking me to pay a fixed penalty for not having a tax disk on a
    car that I had never had anything to do with.  The name and address
    were both slightly scrambled, so I rang the Police admin people
    immediately and explained that I had never even seen this car.
    
    I was rather supprised when they just said that I needn't do anything
    except return the documents with the same explanation on paper and they
    would sort it out.  They explained that it was rather common practice
    for cars to be mis-registered and then used without bothering about
    things as parking tickets/tax disks etc.
    
    Now if I'd have been a smart-alec then I could have got myself a new
    car - but I guess I could ahve ended up with a visit from 
    'the-lads-whot-owns-the-car'.
    
    Rob

    	With the 'photo-boxes' here in Geneva, you can easily see whether
    it is you or not driving the car.
    
    	I know of a few people here who have been 'flashed' with French
    cars, and blame it on a 'hitch-hiker'... not a problem as long as you
    have insurance for them! ;-)

I think that along with photo-traps becoming legal, fines increasing, points
increasing etc, the law was also changed forcing you to disclose the identity
of "the other driver" if you said it was not you in the photo. If you don't
"name that (wo)man" then you are probably guilty of some other offence as well
as the original traffic offence.

Thus you are guilty unless you can prove yourself innocent!!!!!

mb

Maybe i will "go green" and get a horse, they normally seem above the law anyway
;-)

Re: .30

It is some years since the law came into force that requires the registered
keeper to disclose who was either driving or in charge of the car when some
types of offence were committed.  The penalty for failure to disclose is
that the keeper will be taken to be the person in question.

jb

Re .back-a-bit

In the case of hire cars, the Hire Company will tell the police the
name of the person who hired the car for that day.  Car Hire agreements
have a clause like this one from the Avis Rental Agreement:

"I acknowledge my liability as owner, during the currency of this
agreement, in respect of those offences..." 

Jon

	Yes, about 15 years ago I drove through a photo radar trap in Geneva in an
Avis car when I lived in Switzerland and I was traced and fined.

	At about the same time a colleague received a postal summons for a speed
offence but he was unaware of the photo-radar boxes. He thought it was a mistake
as he had not been stopped by anybody so he disputed the fine. He was invited
along to the police station where he was taken into a very comfortable room, given
coffee and shown one of the devices in detail. The police then projected the
photograph of his car onto a large screen, showing the number plate and clearly 
showing him at the wheel of the car. He admitted his guilt, shook hands and the
police doubled his fine for their trouble! And that was 15 years ago.

    re -1
    
    Typical Swiss!

    Has anyone actually been caught in the U.K by these GATSO guns ?
    
    re. Motorway Cameras : If you travelled at a steady 80 or 90 on a long
    journey and passed a few cameras can you lose your license as a result
    of one journey ?
    
    Jason.

> I think it was established that it is indeed possible to lose
> your licence on one wreckless journey.

Is a wreckless journey one during which you don't crash?

Jon

Apologies if this was deliberately humourous.

    Well guess what. Somebody mistook my car for a large amount of empty
    air this morning and whacked into me in an alarmingly spectacular
    manner. 
    
    He was a nice enough chap, obligingly wearing his work i.d. badge
    around his neck so I knew where he worked. Imagine his surprise when I
    produced my Canon AE1 with Zoom lens and got clicking. He thoughtfully
    stood out of the way so that I could get a better shot of the cars, but
    I didn't want him to be left out so I wandered about a bit to get him
    in.
    
    It seems everyone has got a story about the difference in damage caused
    to cars in accidents. I've got a crumply rear bumper, and this poor
    chap's Pug has got crumply headlights and vast amounts of steam hissing
    towards the skies. I offered him a lift to a phone box, as I obligingly
    pointed out to him that he wasn't going to be going anywhere fast, or
    anywhere at all for that matter. But he seemed content to stay on the
    roundabout. Luckily I saw the funny side.
    
    re: .19 - you didn't produce your photos right away. Any particular
    reason for holding them back?
    
    Dougie