Written by John Kruse, one of the leading experts on Bailiff Law, this consumer friendly guide is essential reading for anyone who comes into contact with a bailiff.
The book is easy to understand and clearly explains the rights
a bailiff has, and also what they cannot do when collecting debts and repossessing goods etc.
Re: An Interesting read about the legalities of speed cameras.
Robbie argues that prior to 1992, radar-type speed measuring devices needed only the approval of the Home Office. But from that July, the Road Traffic Act (1991) required all new makes and models of speed camera to be specified in a Parliamentary Order. This is supposed to be done using a Statutory Instrument (SI) - best described as a "mini-Act of Parliament" - and a new SI must be issued for each individual type of camera. Robbie reckons that since 1992 over 40 different devices have been approved by the Home Office and the Association of Chief Police Officers, but without the say-so of Parliament.
RTA 1991
Speeding offences etc: admissibility of certain evidence
(1) Evidence (which in Scotland shall be sufficient evidence) of a fact relevant to proceedings for an offence to which this section applies may be given by the production of—
(a) a record produced by a prescribed device, and
(b) (in the same or another document) a certificate as to the circumstances in which the record was produced signed by a constable or by a person authorised by or on behalf of the chief officer of police for the police area in which the offence is alleged to have been committed;
but subject to the following provisions of this section.
(2) This section applies to—
(a) an offence under section 16 of the [1984 c. 27.] Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 consisting in the contravention of a restriction on the speed of vehicles imposed under section 14 of that Act;
(b) an offence under subsection (4) of section 17 of that Act consisting in the contravention of a restriction on the speed of vehicles imposed under that section;
(c) an offence under section 88(7) of that Act (temporary minimum speed limits);
(d) an offence under section 89(1) of that Act (speeding offences generally);
(e) an offence under section 36(1) of the [1988 c. 52.] Road Traffic Act 1988 consisting in the failure to comply with an indication given by a light signal that vehicular traffic is not to proceed.
(3) The Secretary of State may by order amend subsection (2) above by making additions to or deletions from the list of offences for the time being set out there; and an order under this subsection may make such transitional provision as appears to him to be necessary or expedient.
(4) A record produced or measurement made by a prescribed device shall not be admissible as evidence of a fact relevant to proceedings for an offence to which this section applies unless—
(a) the device is of a type approved by the Secretary of State, and
(b) any conditions subject to which the approval was given are satisfied.
(5) Any approval given by the Secretary of State for the purposes of this section may be given subject to conditions as to the purposes for which, and the manner and other circumstances in which, any device of the type concerned is to be used.
(6) In proceedings for an offence to which this section applies, evidence (which in Scotland shall be sufficient evidence)—
(a) of a measurement made by a device, or of the circumstances in which it was made, or
(b) that a device was of a type approved for the purposes of this section, or that any conditions subject to which an approval was given were satisfied,
may be given by the production of a document which is signed as mentioned in subsection (1) above and which, as the case may be, gives particulars of the measurement or of the circumstances in which it was made, or states that the device was of such a type or that, to the best of the knowledge and belief of the person making the statement, all such conditions were satisfied.
(7) For the purposes of this section a document purporting to be a record of the kind mentioned in subsection (1) above, or to be a certificate or other document signed as mentioned in that subsection or in subsection (6) above, shall be deemed to be such a record, or to be so signed, unless the contrary is proved.
(8) Nothing in subsection (1) or (6) above makes a document admissible as evidence in proceedings for an offence unless a copy of it has, not less than seven days before the hearing or trial, been served on the person charged with the offence; and nothing in those subsections makes a document admissible as evidence of anything other than the matters shown on a record produced by a prescribed device if that person, not less than three days before the hearing or trial or within such further time as the court may in special circumstances allow, serves a notice on the prosecutor requiring attendance at the hearing or trial of the person who signed the document.
(9) In this section “prescribed device” means device of a description specified in an order made by the Secretary of State.
(10) The powers to make orders under subsections (3) and (9) above shall be exercisable by statutory instrument, which shall be subject to annulment in pursuance of a resolution of either House of Parliament.”
Approval was given to use Radar type devices in...
1992 No. 1209
ROAD TRAFFIC
The Road Traffic Offenders (Prescribed Devices) Order 1992
Made21st May 1992Laid before Parliament29th May 1992Coming into force1st July 1992
In exercise of the powers conferred upon me by section 20(9) and (10) of the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988[1], I hereby make the following Order:
1. This Order may be cited as the Road Traffic Offenders (Prescribed Devices) Order 1992 and shall come into force on 1st July 1992.
2. A device designed or adapted for measuring by radar the speed of motor vehicles is a prescribed device for the purposes of section 20 of the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988.
Kenneth Clarke
One of Her Majesty's Principal Secretaries of State Home Office
21st May 1992
EXPLANATORY NOTE
(This note is not part of the Order)
This Order prescribes radar speed detection devices for the purposes of section 20 of the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988, as substituted by section 23 of the Road Traffic Act 1991.
Re: An Interesting read about the legalities of speed cameras.
ROAD TRAFFIC
The Light Beam Speed Measuring Device Approval (No. 2) 2005
The Secretary of State, in exercise of the powers conferred on him by section 20(4) and (5) of the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988 (a) (Speeding offences etc: admissibility of certain evidence) and having prescribed for the purposes of section 20 of that Act a device designed or adapted for recording a measurement of the speed of motor vehicles activated by means of a light beam or beams (b), hereby approves as from 15th September 2005 for the purpose of detection of offences specified in section 20(2)(a), (b), (c) or (d) of that Act the type of device set out in the Schedule hereto. This Approval is subject to the condition set out in that Schedule.
Secretary of State
Home Office
September 2005
____________
________
SCHEDULE
The LASTEC Local Video System, manufactured by Laser Technology Inc. of Colorado USA and Tele-Traffic (UK) Ltd, when used in conjunction with the LTI 20.20 Ultralyte 100
Re: An Interesting read about the legalities of speed cameras.
Originally Posted by nero12
What about this part of the article mate.
Yes, come on then green & mean, what about this then?.................... ......................... ......................... ...........waiting in anticipation of a response................. ..............
Re: An Interesting read about the legalities of speed cameras.
Originally Posted by lamma
I believe that the claim is based on generic approval being given when specific approval is required.
In this section “prescribed device” means device of a description specified in an order made by the Secretary of State.
There is no suggestion in the RTA 1991 that the SoS must create an order for each individual machine just the machine described in the Order. All machines commonly used by Police forces have had SoS approval via a Statutary Instrument and do not rely on generic Home Office approval as claimed in the article.
Robbie argues that prior to 1992, radar-type speed measuring devices needed only the approval of the Home Office. But from that July, the Road Traffic Act (1991) required all new makes and models of speed camera to be specified in a Parliamentary Order. This is supposed to be done using a Statutory Instrument (SI) - best described as a "mini-Act of Parliament" - and a new SI must be issued for each individual type of camera.
The examples I have given clearly are SI for specific camera types which 'Robbie' claims do not exist.
It is not you are correct but the generic machines as stated in the RTA 1991...
In this section “prescribed device” means device of a description Specified in an order made by the Secretary of State
are covered by various versions the 'The Road Traffic Offenders (Prescribed Devices) Orders' There is no requirement under the RTA to have an SI for each 'named' camera/device. There is a version of the precribed devices order to cover all devices ie cameras, radar, cables on road etc.
Re: An Interesting read about the legalities of speed cameras.
Originally Posted by lamma
I believe that the claim is based on generic approval being given when specific approval is required.
echo...
I know what his claim is and consider it flawed I cannot see any such wording in the RTA 1991. Magistates are no experts in the law and an ill prepared CPS prosecution is not hard to outwit even on the best of days.
Re: An Interesting read about the legalities of speed cameras.
you already quoted:
" (9) In this section “prescribed device” means device of a description specified in an order made by the Secretary of State.
(10) The powers to make orders under subsections (3) and (9) above shall be exercisable by statutory instrument, which shall be subject to annulment in pursuance of a resolution of either House of Parliament.”"
Re: An Interesting read about the legalities of speed cameras.
Originally Posted by lamma
you already quoted:
" (9) In this section “prescribed device” means device of a description specified in an order made by the Secretary of State.
(10) The powers to make orders under subsections (3) and (9) above shall be exercisable by statutory instrument, which shall be subject to annulment in pursuance of a resolution of either House of Parliament.”"
Re: An Interesting read about the legalities of speed cameras.
yes, they are generic.
I believe that the claim is based on generic approval being given when specific approval is required. (echo..)
The individual devices have been approved by a lower form of order than an S.I. such as in the one you linked to.
So the S.I.s cover types of device and not the devices the themselves.
For example if this one is an approval
In exercise of the powers conferred upon me by section 20(9) and (10) of the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988[1], I hereby make the following Order:
1. This Order may be cited as the Road Traffic Offenders (Prescribed Devices) Order 1992 and shall come into force on 1st July 1992.
2. A device designed or adapted for measuring by radar the speed of motor vehicles is a prescribed device for the purposes of section 20 of the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988.
what is to stop me cobbling one together in the shed and it being used ? would that be a prescribed device ?
and the activated by light beams one may be interesting e.g. LTIs are not activated by light beams - but thats one for the courtroom, not the Mags.
An Interesting read about the legalities of speed cameras.
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by green_and_mean
