If the cameras were a significant distance apart I would think it would have
to count as three offences but I believe that the courts do have some
discretion. Your daughter would almost certainly have to go to court to
stand a chance of getting a reduced penalty.
You may find more info here.
Under Paragraph 6, any such decision must be justified in open court,
which would leave it open to later challenge if it did not fall within
the sentencing guidelines.
For a Magistrate's Court, the guidelines for exceeding a 70mph limit are
70-90mph 3 points, plus a Band A fine. 91-100mph 4-6 points OR 7-28
days' disqualification and, in either case, a Band B fine. 101-110mph
7-56 days' disqualification OR 6 points and, in either case, a Band B
fine. Pleading guilty may get a reduction in sentence. Other factors,
such as bad weather or heavy traffic may result in a higher sentence.
Band A fines are 25%-75% of relevant weekly income, which is based upon
a declaration by the offender, with a minimum RWI of £100. Band B fines
are 75%-125% of RWI.
I suspect "same occasion" would mean something like going through
a red light whilst speeding. I really doubt it would mean tripping
3 different speed cameras in the same day, which might well be
prosecuted separately by different police authorities anyway.
[email address is not usable -- followup in the newsgroup]
If the defendant could plausibly claim that she didn't slow down to
below the limit between detections, it seems to me to be one offence,
regardless of the paragraph in question, and regardless of how far apart
those detections were.
Unless the offence is bounded by travelling below the limit before and
after, it would be possible to charge anyone with a very large number of
offences based on one detection and the incontrovertible *deduction* of
speeding for (say) every one of the next million microseconds.
some years ago, our local paper reported a court case where someone was
charged with 3 separate motoring offences which resulted in his
disqualification: 1. Not showing obligatory red rear lights; 2. not showing
obligatory white front light 3. not illuminating the rear number plate.
The idiot had a single blown fuse and managed to upset the traffic patrol.
I have to ask, in a light-hearted way of course, is your daughter
blonde by any chance?
To notice the first flash would make me think 'Shit, the fekkin'
cameras are working and I've just been caught - suppose I'd better slow
down for the next camera'.
To go on and be flashed a further TWO times is just beyond belief 8-o
In my book it would be three separate offences each carrying the default
fine and points. If the points total ends up meaning a ban well that's
That's my book though, the one the magistrates appear to use seems a bit
lenient IMHO. Still she will have to take it to court to get the
magistrates opinion, who may well decide to follow my book. B-)
Even when I had a speed camera detector I never came across 3 gantry cameras
within a couple of miles of each other. Of couse if you can repeat the
journey in the other direction and you can remember where you were flashed
than you can actually have a look up at the gantry to see if there is a
camera on there.
Are there any managed motorways north of Birmingham? Can't say I've
noticed any but I do try an avoid Manchester if I can...
I'm more used to motorways that aren't lit at night and after about 2300
to 0500 you might have one set of tail lights in the far distance and one
set of headlights way behind you. B-)
HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.