Received 2 NIPs from different police forces after being caught by speed cameras, one in one force area, the 2nd in another force area. Was continuing a journey on the same motorway in the middle of the night, temp roadworks - unmanned - speed not excessive but over the limit, but each one was within the speed thresholds.

One force offered me a speed awareness course, but the other refused and instead issued me with the more severe *Conditional Offer Of Fixed Penalty*, i.e. £100 fine plus 3 points.

I did the course, cost me £76. I contend that the other force should not have issued me with the conditional fixed penalty and that both offences were only seen as separate because - unknowingly to me - the 2 speed cameras were in different force areas, even although I was still on the same motorway.

Seems excessive punishment and a technicality is being used in order to deny me another speed awareness course offer, i.e. that only one can be done every 3 years.

I've checked all the guidelines and the force in question has apparently breached them. I now stand to get a court summons because I've refused to accept the *COOFP* and would claim that both offences should not be separate but ought to be seen as one only.

Seems like they want two bites of the same cherry? A tricky one where it seems as if their guidelines can't cope with my circumstances, so instead of either treating them as a continuation of the first offence, or taking no action,

they seem hell bent on prosecuting me.

Any thoughts ??

How far apart were the speed cameras?

20 minutes apart means that they're going to argue you have breached the speed limit on more than one occasion, unless you say that you kept over the limit for the 20 minutes and it is the same offence.

Tricky one, I wonder what other more expert caggers think.

How fast. How far apart.

 

I've checked all the guidelines and the force in question has apparently breached them. I now stand to get a court summons because I've refused to accept the *COOFP* and would claim that both offences should not be separate but ought to be seen as one only.

 

Which guideline have they breached??

Are the alleged offences for the same location at the same time?

Are you saying if you get caught by the same camera every day for a week it is the same offence merely because it is the same place, although at different times.....

Or if caught by a camera in London and in Yorkshire it is the same offence because "I was speeding on the M1, and it was the same journey and I sped all the way"?

If you had been stopped by a police officer & been caught by a camera for the same site at the same time you may well have an argument ; Otherwise how can it be "the same offence"?.

Unless they put up 2 cameras at the same site, each either side of the force boundary ; they'll be at 2 different locations.

You say "less than 20 minutes apart" in the title.

How long apart are the times stated? How far apart are the sites??

By your own admittance you were caught in 2 different Police areas. You committed 2 seperate offences in 2 different areas so as BazzaS has stated, you have committed 2 seperate offences so what guidelines have the Police service breached? The onus and responsibility is on yoy to comply with the limits and for minor offences Police forces and prosecution departments are not going to be phoning each other asking if any of their staff have booked so and so.

I once reported the same driver 3 times in the same day for excess speed. Now those 3 offences were amalgamated to convict once, but the driver received a few less points (7 instead of 9) but clobbered on fines, but they were still 3 seperate offences but committed n the same Police area.

If you had been caught in the same Police area, then the chances are that your name would have popped up on the database and someone may have put 2 and 2 together. But then it would have exempted you from attending the speed awareness course or a fixed penalty and you would have been looking at a court appearance instead with the risk of a heavier penalty

You can complain, but being 2 seperate Police areas, I can virtually guarantee it will do you no good.

2 different areas - well having been caught once = ignored warning etc then caught again in such a short time = says it all! afraid not much leg to stand on! ??? Magistrates would look at events at the time of happening no doubt (two different cases at that in separate courts - unless you can get heard in one>) just a thought!

You would have been very hard pushed indeed to make a case that this is a single continuing offence. Twenty minutes (and presumably 20-ish miles) is a bit of a stretch.

However, it doesn’t matter. The first offence has been dealt with by way of the course. The second is now in the court system and cannot revert to either a course (which you couldn’t do anyway because you can only do one in three years) or a fixed penalty.

You have two options when the second offence reaches court (which might be a “Single Justice” procedure). You can ask the court to consider your argument that the second offence was a continuation of the first and ask them to find that there are “Special Reasons” not to endorse your licence. The second is that you might (and it’s a very big might) be able to persuade the court to sentence at a level equivalent to the fixed penalty. Magistrates have the discretion to do this and their guidance suggests that it should be done where there are (for example) Administrative reasons, unconnected to the offence, which prevented you accepting a fixed penalty (e.g. if your licence was unavailable and you could not send it in). Your reason is not unconnected to the offence. You declined the FP because you believed it was unjust.

I think both these options are extremely unlikely to succeed. Since your main argument seems to rest around a “continuing offence” you should focus on that. What was the speed alleged in the second offence (the one you face court for)? I don’t know what you mean by “each one was within the speed thresholds”. You will be asking the court to accept that you exceeded the speed limit continuously for twenty miles or so and that you did so without reducing your speed to below the limit in that time. This is not something I would care to admit to and I believe it is not something the court will accept as a single continuing offence.

I don’t think you will get anywhere challenging the police procedures. There is no right to a course (or indeed to a fixed penalty) and I’m not sure what guidelines you suggest have been broken.

I’m away for a day or two so may not be able to respond until towards the end of the week.

well having been caught once = ignored warning etc then caught again in such a short time

Was there a 'warning'?. Sure, if a speed camera 'flashed', but if the first was e.g. an average speed camera (rather than, say, a Gatso) there would have been no additional 'warning' from 'having been caught once' during the same journey....

I doubt the OP will get the second ticket cancelled.

The OP should also have seen that there were speed camera warnings.

However, I'm not sure it is fair to say "well, having been caught once ....."

You got caught speeding twice. 20 mins/miles apart. Just own up to it because a judge isnt going to blieve your excuse unless you get a very very leniant judge. If found guilty the punishment will be more severe.

Let's look at the implication of claiming this to be one continuous speeding incident.

Long distance road works on motorways generally have limits of 50mph.

Assuming both Police forces were following the unofficial guideline of limit+10%+2mph, means the speed would have averaged, as a very minimum, 58mph.

58 mph for 20 minutes would cover a distance of 19.3 miles.

Offering a defense that confesses to have been speeding continuously for more than 19 miles would be hardly likely to sway Magistrates toward giving the benefit of doubt over any procedural irregularity.

Let's look at the implication of claiming this to be one continuous speeding incident.

Long distance road works on motorways generally have limits of 50mph.

 

Assuming both Police forces were following the unofficial guideline of limit+10%+2mph, means the speed would have averaged, as a very minimum, 58mph.

 

58 mph for 20 minutes would cover a distance of 19.3 miles.

 

Offering a defense that confesses to have been speeding continuously for more than 19 miles would be hardly likely to sway Magistrates toward giving the benefit of doubt over any procedural irregularity.

We don't know it was 20 minutes, just 2 different force areas, as the OP has said "less than 20 minutes".

However, I agree : likely 2 different locations:

Unless they put up 2 cameras at the same site, each either side of the force boundary ; they'll be at 2 different locations.

You say "less than 20 minutes apart" in the title.

How long apart are the times stated? How far apart are the sites??

The OP hasn't come back to tell us the details, and I agree : it seems likely that if they try to use a "one continuous incident" defence, they'll likely just confirm they were speeding for a while, past 2 different camera sites ........

I got the impression that "less than 20 minutes" meant close to 20 minutes. Otherwise I think it may have been stated as ""5 minutes" or whatever.

yep, if its in a different enforcement (boundary) area, then if its not subject to any national regs, then its each to its own.

20 mins (even 5 mins) is enough time to slow down.

were they fixed hadecs? one poss technicality cld be re fixed ones recently being required to have been painted yellow.