PDA

View Full Version : Speedcamera Photo



coldfront
08-06-2010, 05:16 PM
Is there a standard of information that a speed camera photo must show or in this case not show?

Speed camera photo is showing a second darker vehicle behind the taget car mostly obscurred by that target car. Would that second car influenced the accuracy of the radar on the camera?

pctek
08-06-2010, 05:25 PM
You can, of course, allow it to go to court and argue the other car was responsible, but you'd probably lose anyway.

johcar
08-06-2010, 05:48 PM
If the "target" car (yours, I presume) is in front of the "second darker vehicle", I suspect that "target" car the is the one that triggered the camera.

However I understood that the normal OP was to ignore any infringements that could potentially cause confusion and be argued in court (such as a closely following vehicle snapped at the same time). Maybe the technology has improved so they are more sure of themselves?

coldfront
08-06-2010, 05:50 PM
If I said you owe me $100 would you just pay it without question?

Your right it is worth taking it to court if there is sufficant doubt that the evidence is not quite as it seems.

But then if the doubt is there then the Police wont bother to let it go to court. Worth the try before it gets to that stage thats why you have 56 days to pay ;)

I asked because I have some doubts for the person concerned I Figured that maybe someone out their may have experiance of this to know. So worth asking.

Innocent until proven guilty as they say.

Sweep
08-06-2010, 06:13 PM
I firmly believe that everyone should defend everything.

The waiting list hopefully will get very large so that you may well be dead before the matter gets to Court.

You certainly can die while waiting for surgery. :-)

R2x1
08-06-2010, 09:46 PM
Surgery doesn't have the budget that speeding is going to get after the weekend's results.

It might pay to pay the fine PDQ and keep a low profile at the moment while the Go Slow team is in full flight and snorting fire. (They will be going mad and clamouring for a nation - wide 60 KMH limit shortly.) Having announced a 4K tolerance, and got a 1 fatality weekend, it is bound to trigger a frenzy in Wellington cubicles. I suppose they will also claim that the tightened limits were also responsible for the amazing lack of congestion on the roads. There has certainly been no mention from the statistical juggling department of the overwhelming numbers of people who stayed home due to the weather debacle.

KenESmith
09-06-2010, 12:08 AM
Speed cameras are about money, money, money.
In Queensland the State Government has announced as part of its Budget fiscal plan that the number of speed cameras are to be doubled.
This move has been attacked by the Police as an example of a money hungry government chasing revenue at the expense of important law and order priorities.

wmoore
09-06-2010, 12:21 AM
Speed cameras are about money, money, money.
In Queensland the State Government has announced as part of its Budget fiscal plan that the number of speed cameras are to be doubled.
This move has been attacked by the Police as an example of a money hungry government chasing revenue at the expense of important law and order priorities.

Very true indeed. But the public will be sold a lie by those who make money from it.

pctek
09-06-2010, 09:40 AM
if the doubt is there then the Police wont bother to let it go to court.

Wrong. They have the time and money to pursue everything. They may eventually drop something but not before you have spent ages on it.

wainuitech
09-06-2010, 09:46 AM
If you can prove, or provide evidence that it was in fact the other car, then you may very well get off. Other wise its your word against their camera shot.

You can defend yourself - I know, had it happen to me many years ago - I managed to provide enough evidence it wasn't me that was speeding, as there was another explanation, and they dumped the charge. They had the speed strips on the road at the time.

coldfront
09-06-2010, 10:36 AM
I noticed an automatic assumption it was me that was driving and me that was speeding. Wrong on both counts and the car was not registered to me but was in may care due to the owner selling it. I could take the blame bit why should I? Had enough doubt on the reliabilty before seeing the photo.

No speed strips on the road another reason to doubt?

Second vehicle in photo heading opposite direction not very clear on first inspection of photo?

tweak'e
09-06-2010, 10:52 AM
no need for road sensors, they run on radar.
if its not your car then owner would have got the letter, who would have told them that you where driving hence why you have it.

easy way to fix this.......don't speed.

Erayd
09-06-2010, 11:01 AM
no need for road sensors, they run on radar.I'm pretty sure the fixed ones don't use radar - if you look at the road when you drive past one, there is always some kind of sensor embedded in the road (usually two thin lines spaced a few metres apart).

Nomad
09-06-2010, 11:03 AM
I noticed an automatic assumption it was me that was driving and me that was speeding. Wrong on both counts and the car was not registered to me but was in may care due to the owner selling it. I could take the blame bit why should I? Had enough doubt on the reliabilty before seeing the photo.

No speed strips on the road another reason to doubt?

Second vehicle in photo heading opposite direction not very clear on first inspection of photo?

So you didn't drive the car?

What I have seen is that if the car is deregistered and someone steals it, it's still your property, register does not define "ownership". A car that is unregistered does not automatically become no ones property. Technically, if the car was dumped somewhere dangerous and it had to be towed without delay or notice to the owner, there is a fine line who is responsible for the bill ......

I think unless the buyer signs the change of ownership it's still yours or until you take it to the crushers .......
Even if the car's been sitting unregistered in your backyard for 20yrs. It's still yours. It belongs to you.

This is with legal advice from the Citzens Advice Bureau - with advice from a volunteer lawyer.

prefect
09-06-2010, 12:20 PM
Money making my ass, its to deter speeding drivers. There is an opt out scheme with speed camera tickets that is dont speed and it wont trigger the camera.
I know it will require a lot of intellect to work this out but it its true.

Nomad
09-06-2010, 12:22 PM
That's what I think.
If you don't speed, you don't get a ticket.

Would you speed in your driving test?
Instead of a fine you want the slammer instead? :confused:
Maybe don't worry about if you speed? Maybe do as you wished?
Perhaps you want a cup cake if you speed?:confused:

Sweep
09-06-2010, 01:10 PM
That's what I think.
If you don't speed, you don't get a ticket.

Would you speed in your driving test?
Instead of a fine you want the slammer instead? :confused:
Maybe don't worry about if you speed? Maybe do as you wished?
Perhaps you want a cup cake if you speed?:confused:

It is also true to say that radar ( actually microwave ) can give false readings.

They can read speeds of vehicles going in the other direction and just once I picked up a low flying aircraft going about the business of top dressing. There was no car in sight so it had to be the plane.

Chilling_Silence
09-06-2010, 03:39 PM
Money making my ass, its to deter speeding drivers. There is an opt out scheme with speed camera tickets that is dont speed and it wont trigger the camera.
I know it will require a lot of intellect to work this out but it its true.

:thumbs: It's all too simple! :thumbs:

Clearly logic evades some people. It's only a "money-making scheme" if somebody deliberately breaks the law. Don't break the law, problem solved for everybody ;)

Gobe1
09-06-2010, 04:20 PM
But then where are they gonna get their money from?? If nobody speeds?
it has to come from somewhere

Scouse
09-06-2010, 04:49 PM
Re:
But then where are they gonna get their money from?? If nobody speeds?
it has to come from somewhere

That'll never be a problem. Plenty of bird-brains out there who think that rules they don't like should not apply to them.

Zippity
09-06-2010, 04:58 PM
Of course it is revenue gathering and anyone who says otherwise is an idiot.

Why do you think the pole camera on Ngauranga Gorge is such a great earner?

Cos it is on a downhill road and as most modern cars are automatics they naturally speed up going down hill.

prefect
09-06-2010, 05:06 PM
I dont much about cars with auto transmissions but I thought they had brakes. like their manual cousins.
The only idiot in my humble opinion is a person who wastes money on the consolidated fund.

coldfront
09-06-2010, 05:06 PM
It is also true to say that radar ( actually microwave ) can give false readings.

They can read speeds of vehicles going in the other direction and just once I picked up a low flying aircraft going about the business of top dressing. There was no car in sight so it had to be the plane.

Thank you thats the kind information I was looking for.

:clap

PaulD
09-06-2010, 05:46 PM
Thank you thats the kind information I was looking for.

:clap

You need to ask Sweep whether it was a Tiger Moth top dresser or relatively recent. One of the NZ radar detector sales sites refers to speed camera radar now being low power narrow beam which would make it less likely to false trigger from distant objects. Angled across the road rather than down the road the camera can monitor both directions. The photo should indicate which direction triggered the camera.

Sweep
09-06-2010, 06:44 PM
TR6 Radar on a patrol car and a Fletcher top dresser.

coldfront
09-06-2010, 10:40 PM
You need to ask Sweep whether it was a Tiger Moth top dresser or relatively recent. One of the NZ radar detector sales sites refers to speed camera radar now being low power narrow beam which would make it less likely to false trigger from distant objects. Angled across the road rather than down the road the camera can monitor both directions. The photo should indicate which direction triggered the camera.

Well its worth challenging on the grounds of possible interferance from the other vehicle. Just in case the "quality control people" missed it when they sorted the images.

I do hope Nomad never gets called for Jury service :badpc:

Sweep
09-06-2010, 11:56 PM
But then where are they gonna get their money from?? If nobody speeds?
it has to come from somewhere

Funding comes from the taxpayer including those who don't get fines.

R2x1
10-06-2010, 03:25 AM
Dammit, I gave at the office.

Nomad
10-06-2010, 01:47 PM
IMO, how should one deter speeding if we did not use fines? Go to jail or community service or some other thing? 3 strikes and you lose the license for a year or something? Or just say no worries carry on ..... sorry to bother you, you have an importance to speed.

That aside if you use fines, then it is a debate if it is money gathering.

The same old, you might be less likely to speed if you see a police car, you might not speed in your driving test so why do it?

Nomad
10-06-2010, 01:49 PM
Well its worth challenging on the grounds of possible interferance from the other vehicle. Just in case the "quality control people" missed it when they sorted the images.

I do hope Nomad never gets called for Jury service :badpc:

I think you have the right for a review.

Nomad
10-06-2010, 01:54 PM
I noticed an automatic assumption it was me that was driving and me that was speeding. Wrong on both counts and the car was not registered to me but was in may care due to the owner selling it. I could take the blame bit why should I? Had enough doubt on the reliabilty before seeing the photo.

No speed strips on the road another reason to doubt?

Second vehicle in photo heading opposite direction not very clear on first inspection of photo?

Can you clarify?


I noticed an automatic assumption it was me that was driving and me that was speeding. Wrong on both counts


but was in may care due to the owner selling it.

Scouse
10-06-2010, 03:26 PM
Well .... there you are coldfront. Problem solved.

Just call Sweep as a witness on your behalf to destroy the credibility of all radars and you're on a winner.

Let us know how you get on. :rolleyes:

pctek
10-06-2010, 04:28 PM
Cos it is on a downhill road and as most modern cars are automatics they naturally speed up going down hill.

What?? Most are not actually. Some are, some are not.
I now have an auto and I drive past a certain camera place regularly. It's on a hill, can't say I ever noticed myself speeding accidentally because I forgot to apply the brakes.
Twit.

Zippity
10-06-2010, 05:40 PM
In the good old manual shift gear box cars, you could rely on engine braking when going down hill by selecting a lower gear.

Most drivers today in automatics do not chnage down to a lower gear.

You can tell this by watching the continual red brake lights appearing when following an automatic. :)

Nomad
10-06-2010, 06:00 PM
lol i don't find myself forgetting to use the brakes.

coldfront
10-06-2010, 06:50 PM
Can you clarify?

Yes but would you still want even more clarification? Is it relevant? No

Photo shows two cars in the image, not that clear on first glance that a second car exists. So on that basis how do you know the reading is accurate? Thats all that is important on the facts once thats cleared up some one can pay the bill if there is any.

coldfront
10-06-2010, 06:55 PM
I challenge anyone to drive with a hidden GPS and not have that GPS show a time when they have accidentally gone over the speed limit for the briefest of time. It better to ask someone to plant the GPS on you when your not aware of it. The results will surprise even the doubters.

R2x1
10-06-2010, 07:07 PM
In the good old manual shift gear box cars, you could rely on engine braking when going down hill by selecting a lower gear.

Most drivers today in automatics do not chnage down to a lower gear.

You can tell this by watching the continual red brake lights appearing when following an automatic. :)
With a certain ethnicity a continual flickering of the brake lights is normal motoring practice, manual or auto, uphill or down, accelerating or slowing. The same ethnics do not maintain a steady speed, regardless of road condition the accelerator is only ever up or down, and the braking foot appears to beat out it's own rhythm in sympathy, even if not in phase. :angry

Zippity
10-06-2010, 07:17 PM
What the hell has ethnicity got to do with it?

The revenue hunters knew what they were doing when they placed the pole mounted speed cameras on down hill roads.

The revenue take is are much higher that for those on flat roads - period!!

tweak'e
10-06-2010, 07:23 PM
Yes but would you still want even more clarification? Is it relevant? No

Photo shows two cars in the image, not that clear on first glance that a second car exists. So on that basis how do you know the reading is accurate? Thats all that is important on the facts once thats cleared up some one can pay the bill if there is any.


With a certain ethnicity a continual flickering of the brake lights is normal motoring practice, manual or auto, uphill or down, accelerating or slowing. The same ethnics do not maintain a steady speed, regardless of road condition the accelerator is only ever up or down, and the braking foot appears to beat out it's own rhythm in sympathy, even if not in phase. :angry

the flickering of stop lights are generally because they are tailgating :(
or they are left foot braking and resting foot on the brake. ie not really braking just touching it enough that the brake light comes on.

coldfront
10-06-2010, 08:34 PM
The revenue hunters knew what they were doing when they placed the pole mounted speed cameras on down hill roads.

The revenue take is are much higher that for those on flat roads - period!!

Basic principle of car control, have a hill in front take foot off right pedal and place right foot in a position to cover and depress brake pedal when required (Note the bit when required).
Alternatively think in advance and reduce speed, kind of thing that is important when driving a truck down a hill, not talking the dinky toys I am refering to those your Car Licence does not cover.

Second point is if you can not see a Fixed mounted pole and know it is there then what you going to do if something unexpected comes at you from the side of the road? You deserve that camera fine if those two tasks are difficult especially when its a fixed mounted camera.

coldfront
10-06-2010, 08:39 PM
the flickering of stop lights are generally because they are tailgating :(
or they are left foot braking and resting foot on the brake. ie not really braking just touching it enough that the brake light comes on.

Distance perception a common affliction not just based on certain ethnic backgrounds. It works on the racetrack but not very good on the open road. The funny thing is those muppets end up this time of year coming down mountain roads covered with ice and snow thinking the brakes will save them.

Nomad
10-06-2010, 08:46 PM
Yes but would you still want even more clarification? Is it relevant? No

Photo shows two cars in the image, not that clear on first glance that a second car exists. So on that basis how do you know the reading is accurate? Thats all that is important on the facts once thats cleared up some one can pay the bill if there is any.

In my view you are basing your argument on technicality of evidence.

Were you in the drivers seat? Did you speed?

You said it was incorrect on both counts then you said you "may" of been in due care with the seller selling it? Which is it?

I been driving for since 1995 and I had no ticket ever, surely cannot be that hard.

Money issue or otherwise. Instead of issuing fines is there a better method? I like to hear it. If you abolish fines would education work? Do we introduced community service instead of fines? Take their cars away?

Nomad
10-06-2010, 08:47 PM
All your posts of this are on a computing forum, surely there are better places to post this.

tweak'e
10-06-2010, 09:03 PM
Distance perception a common affliction not just based on certain ethnic backgrounds. It works on the racetrack but not very good on the open road. The funny thing is those muppets end up this time of year coming down mountain roads covered with ice and snow thinking the brakes will save them.

thats just it, they think the vehicles have great brakes etc but totally forget theres reaction time and you require traction for them to even work !

tailgating is not a distance perception problem. they travel perfect distance when ever they go past a cop. they know they can get away with harassment because yet again cops don't do any enforcement.

PaulD
10-06-2010, 09:21 PM
All your posts of this are on a computing forum, surely there are better places to post this.

How much of PC World Chat has much relevance to computers?

Sweep
10-06-2010, 09:32 PM
All your posts of this are on a computing forum, surely there are better places to post this.

Pot calling kettle black?

What has a heat pump to do with computing?

http://pressf1.co.nz/showthread.php?t=109826

:2cents:

Nomad
10-06-2010, 10:06 PM
Pot calling kettle black?

What has a heat pump to do with computing?

http://pressf1.co.nz/showthread.php?t=109826

:2cents:

I know that Sweep but his/her first (and all) post was about this car thing.

I didn't join PC World at the time to talk about off topic.

Sweep
10-06-2010, 10:40 PM
I know that Sweep but his/her first (and all) post was about this car thing.

I didn't join PC World at the time to talk about off topic.

Neither did I for that matter. But the chat forum is "off topic" which would mean anything you like I would hope so long as you abide by the rules.

coldfront
10-06-2010, 11:39 PM
I know that Sweep but his/her first (and all) post was about this car thing.

I didn't join PC World at the time to talk about off topic.

Technology in use? query relating to technology? If you dont like the subject why respond?

coldfront
10-06-2010, 11:59 PM
In my view you are basing your argument on technicality of evidence.

Were you in the drivers seat? Dunno hence the photo request

Did you speed? Not as far as I am concerned hence the challenge to accurate information based on technology used

You said it was incorrect on both counts then you said you "may" of been in due care with the seller selling it? Which is it?

Transfer of ownership and authorised parties using vehicle

I been driving for since 1995 and I had no ticket ever, surely cannot be that hard.

Congratualtions I have been drivng since 1988 and the first ticket issued, Not a saint or nana just have had the benefit of Police Officers recognising the driving ability when and indiscretion has occured

Money issue or otherwise. Instead of issuing fines is there a better method? I like to hear it. If you abolish fines would education work? Do we introduced community service instead of fines? Take their cars away?

Yes there is better option for one demerit points for Speed Camera photos, second more visible policing on the roads, zero tolerance on deliberate excessive speed over prolonged distances, less reliance on covert technology and option of driver re-training. But also stricter standards and checking of speedometer calibration thru the WOF system.

PaulD
11-06-2010, 12:27 AM
But also stricter standards and checking of speedometer calibration thru the WOF system.

How expensive do you want the warrant to be?

The standard for speedometers allows for reporting higher speeds than actual with no tolerance for under reporting. In my case at an indicated 50 a roadside display reads 46, I don't trust those displays to be 100% but it shows that I'd be more likely to be under the camera limits unless deliberately speeding.

Nomad
11-06-2010, 08:54 AM
Yes there is better option for one demerit points for Speed Camera photos, second more visible policing on the roads, zero tolerance on deliberate excessive speed over prolonged distances, less reliance on covert technology and option of driver re-training. But also stricter standards and checking of speedometer calibration thru the WOF system.

LOL. So no money fines but just demerit points, some people may just wack up the points cos they know they won't be financially penalised but at most just a telling off. And, when theri points are high then they learn to behave for the next yr or so until the points are reset.

May I suggest you start lobbying.

But lol, just cos you didn't see your own face on it you have doubts it was you, haha. I dunno but don't they give you the date and time :confused:

I bet many more people won't have their face on it. Maybe they should all be excused too, ROFL.

Nomad
11-06-2010, 08:56 AM
How expensive do you want the warrant to be?

The standard for speedometers allows for reporting higher speeds than actual with no tolerance for under reporting. In my case at an indicated 50 a roadside display reads 46, I don't trust those displays to be 100% but it shows that I'd be more likely to be under the camera limits unless deliberately speeding.

My experience about the same, my speedo is about 3 or 4km faster than my quoted GPS indicated speed. So if you are using the speedo, you would have to speed 3-4km over plus the 5km Police threshold before you get ticketed.

prefect
11-06-2010, 09:14 AM
Most speedos are optimistic and over-read.
All you have to do is check your speedo against a gps or one of those speed signs.
If you one of these unlucky people with an over-reading speedo man up if you havent checked it against one of these signs and take the consequences.

coldfront
11-06-2010, 05:25 PM
LOL. So no money fines but just demerit points, some people may just wack up the points cos they know they won't be financially penalised but at most just a telling off. And, when theri points are high then they learn to behave for the next yr or so until the points are reset.


You missread! But I make it clearer for you, the same penalty for being stopped by a cop as from being photographed by a camera i.e Cop stops you you get points plus financial penalty. As it stands the penalty for a camera is just a slap on the wrist financially. The risk of having the licence taken away would be a deterant. You might want to look at an overseas model the UK for example on how they do it.



But lol, just cos you didn't see your own face on it you have doubts it was you, haha. I dunno but don't they give you the date and time :confused:


Smart arse :) Can you tell me what you were doing three weeks ago at 2:15pm? Thats assuming you do not follow a daily routine that makes it so much easier?

coldfront
11-06-2010, 05:31 PM
How expensive do you want the warrant to be?

The standard for speedometers allows for reporting higher speeds than actual with no tolerance for under reporting. In my case at an indicated 50 a roadside display reads 46, I don't trust those displays to be 100% but it shows that I'd be more likely to be under the camera limits unless deliberately speeding.

Maybe a bit drastic given the test are bi annual in this country and there is no accepatable standard for imported cars to comply with a level of accuracy unlike European Countries who insist on a set percentage of error to be observed on new cars. Policy could be tightened on car retailers who sell/import cars to check the accuracy of a speedometer?

coldfront
11-06-2010, 05:36 PM
My experience about the same, my speedo is about 3 or 4km faster than my quoted GPS indicated speed. So if you are using the speedo, you would have to speed 3-4km over plus the 5km Police threshold before you get ticketed.

Easy to do though right? Let me ask you if you slow down before the lower speedlimit or accelerate after the higher limit?

coldfront
11-06-2010, 05:53 PM
Most speedos are optimistic and over-read.
All you have to do is check your speedo against a gps or one of those speed signs.
If you one of these unlucky people with an over-reading speedo man up if you havent checked it against one of these signs and take the consequences.

Have a read of this

http://www.consumer.org.nz/news/view/speedometer-accuracy/page/1

How common are those road sign speedcheck signs? I my daily drive I dont see any I do know where there is one but it is in a 70kph area and with the vehicles I have used to pass it the error has been around 2kph either way which is nothing.

Of the vehicles I drive I became concerned that the distance recorded did not match with the actual distance so had it checked by a firm in Wanganui who check the Police Speedometers. Interesting result was at the checked speed of 30 kph the cekc speed showed 28kph (good) at 50kph it was spot on but for every 10kph after that the speed was out by 1kph per every 10above 50 giving a reading of 105kph when the speedometer showed 100kph.

Meanwhile a second vehicle checked showed 10kph out consitantly which explains why vehicles were often passing it!

Therefore both vehicles travelling at 100kph on the speedomter yet one was gaining on the other by 15kph. Driver A thinking driver B driving to fast whicle driver B figured driver A travelling slow. Third vehicle checked was spot on the speeds.

So you think thats not going to cause some problems on the single lane roads of New Zealand?

I am quite happy for a zero tolerance on speeding! I fact I thought there was already but it turns out to be well known fact the Police can exercise a 10kph tolerance so waiving any penaltys up to 11kph over the limits. Especially in light that most speedometers show a higher speed than actually travelled.

coldfront
12-06-2010, 11:36 AM
RESULT !!!!:clap

Letter in the Post today, No reasons given.