Speed Camera Vans

[crem]

Do the speed camera vans always run tandem ANPR cameras as well? Perhaps times are getting hard for them to keep their income up and they are trying to keep the quota up by having the 2 systems running together.

 

I went past the van the other day at one of his favourite income spots (just over the brow of a small dip on a 30 road). Obviously I wasn't speeding (gives halo an extra polish) but then I get a letter today saying I've been reported for the spacing on my number plate!

 

Granted the space between the 2 groups of letters is a little small (well whats the point of having a private plate if you can't nudge them a tad ), but they are standard size, colour, font, etc etc, and have been on my car for the past 9 years! Now they decide they can't read the damn thing apparently.

 

Got threatened with a 60quid fine and an s172.

 

As it was only a warning letter I don't have to send the s172 back unless I was no longer the keeper so it says (but I'll hang on to the letter just in case they try going for the 1000quid fine).

[green_and_mean]

Often the vans are hard to tell apart every van I have seen in the last year has been purely ANPR admitedly I don't get out of London much but they seem to be using them a great deal.

[gwc1000]

Now they decide they can't read the damn thing apparently.

 

They must have been able to read them well enough to be able to send you a letter!

[Rooster-UK]

They must have been able to read them well enough to be able to send you a letter!

 

There's your defence !

[green_and_mean]

There's your defence !

 

I doubt very much that it did read it, more likely is that it flags up non recognised plates which are then manually read and then a letter sent. Being able to a read a plate is neither here nor there if its not as prescribed its an offence.

[crem]

Often the vans are hard to tell apart every van I have seen in the last year has been purely ANPR admitedly I don't get out of London much but they seem to be using them a great deal.

 

The only van we have in this area is the council (or speed partnership whatever that they go under now) operated one which parks up in easy victim territory (oops I meant serious accident blackspots ) so I am sure it is the same one which must have both cameras in now.

 

They must have been able to read them well enough to be able to send you a letter!

True, but OK to be fair, they didn't claim it was unreadable just "non compliant" coz all the letters are spaced at 11mm instead of having the 33mm between the 2 groups. But as you say, it clearly is still perfectly readable by their machines and in no way configured to mislead or deceive anyone. It's been fine for 9 years so far but I've had to change it today of course. I'm not overchuffed that they think this is the biggest crime they need to be dealing with at the moment.

[green_and_mean]

I'm not overchuffed that they think this is the biggest crime they need to be dealing with at the moment.

 

I'm sure they don't consider it a major crime but it's still an offence, which in all honesty has no excuse. Its easy to fail to notice a worn tyre or blown bulb but it's not like a reg. plate suddely changes from the legal format that came with the car all on it's own is it?

Edited August 1, 2009 by green_and_mean

[patdavies]

They can be co-located, but there is little point to having a mobile ANPR unit without Police presence to stop vehicles. Else how would they catch un-registered vehicles, etc. if they don't stop at the time, they only know about it.

 

Also, AIUI, the fixed penalty for VRM irregularity is £30.

[crem]

Also, AIUI, the fixed penalty for VRM irregularity is £30.

 

...has been reported for the alleged offence of the vehicle reg mark not complying with the standard format due to spacing.

 

This offence carries a penalty of £60 fine, however, on this occasion a written warning is deemed appropriate........

 

..

[crem]

They can be co-located, but there is little point to having a mobile ANPR unit without Police presence to stop vehicles. Else how would they catch un-registered vehicles, etc. if they don't stop at the time, they only know about it.

 

You are right that they will fail to resolve unregistered vehicles, but they will be able to record all the ones that are supposed to be SORN, flag up as no insurance or no MOT etc. where they can just send the fines out to the RKs address. Of course. it depends on where you think they are intending to take the cars off the road or are just happy enough to maintain the revenue flow.

[green_and_mean]

You are right that they will fail to resolve unregistered vehicles, but they will be able to record all the ones that are supposed to be SORN, flag up as no insurance or no MOT etc. where they can just send the fines out to the RKs address. Of course. it depends on where you think they are intending to take the cars off the road or are just happy enough to maintain the revenue flow.

 

I may be mistaken but I'm sure that fines for no insurance or tax cannot be given by purely camera evidence.

Edited August 2, 2009 by green_and_mean

[patdavies]

I may be mistaken but I'm sure that fines for no insurance or tax can be given by purely camera evidence.

 

Not that I'm aware of.

 

A camera has no way whatsoever of knowing about a vehicle being driven on DOC for insurance or as a exempt vehicle for tax. Anyway, as there is no requirement for the RK to hold a driving licence; there can be, ipso facto, no require for the RK to have insurance to drive the vehicle. In this country, the law requires that the driver be insured, not the vehicle.

 

There is a requirement for the vehicle to be stopped at the time in order to ascertain the above.

 

Even for speeding, a camera cannot issue a fine. It only triggers a NIP to be sent to the RK requiring the identification of the driver. The camera provides only half the necessary evidence for a speeding conviction.

[green_and_mean]

Not that I'm aware of.

 

A camera has no way whatsoever of knowing about a vehicle being driven on DOC for insurance or as a exempt vehicle for tax. Anyway, as there is no requirement for the RK to hold a driving licence; there can be, ipso facto, no require for the RK to have insurance to drive the vehicle. In this country, the law requires that the driver be insured, not the vehicle.

 

There is a requirement for the vehicle to be stopped at the time in order to ascertain the above.

 

Even for speeding, a camera cannot issue a fine. It only triggers a NIP to be sent to the RK requiring the identification of the driver. The camera provides only half the necessary evidence for a speeding conviction.

 

 

I meant NOT be given, lol lol!!

[crem]

Strange then, taking all of the above into account, do you think there was an ANPR running in the van, or has the little man in the back just written my plate down coz he didn't like the look of it as I passed?

[green_and_mean]

Strange then, taking all of the above into account, do you think there was an ANPR running in the van, or has the little man in the back just written my plate down coz he didn't like the look of it as I passed?

 

As I mentioned earlier ANPR will flag up unrecognised plates these can either be stored and reveiwed later or noted at the time by the operator in the van.

[TD27]

..

 

It may be with the recent change in the penalty amount for VRM's and Seatbelts (now £60) they are having a crackdown to make the point?

[rickyd]

This is a new hot topic north of the border. There's been a huge clampdown recently on non conforming number plates in and around Glasgow recently. I have a pal who works for Strathclyde Police who told me thatsoon virtually every car in the force will have an ANPR camera fitted.

 

In the area cars this links real-time into the PNC and alert the police driver to anomalies as they are spotted, others will simply record the details for analysis later. Its proving to be really useful for detecting untaxed and uninsured vehicles.

 

He went on to say that they wouldn't usually stop someone just because the letters were mis-spaced, but if there's anything else going on they will add the number plate to the list of offences.

 

Glasgow Council also operate Community Warden vans which drive around neighbourhoods at night and these will also have ANPR systems, primarily looking for untaxed vehicles and there are already a couple of ANPR cameras on the M8, although he wouldn't tell me where!

[patdavies]

Its proving to be really useful for detecting .... uninsured vehicles.

 

 

Here we go again.

 

How does ANPR detect an uninsured vehicle? It can certainly compare the VRM with MID, but can't know that a vehicle is being driven on DOC or trade policy for example.

 

Furthermore, there is no requirement whatsoever for a vehicle to be insured. The RTA requires the driver to be insured to use the vehicle.

 

(And it's an urban myth that other insurance must already exist on a vehicle for DOC to be used)

[rickyd]

ANPR can only detect an untaxed vehicle but using the various databases it can help to determine whether or not any insurance is registered for the vehicle and will alert the police driver that further information is required if none is found, if it were covered under a trade policy for example.

 

Ok - although is is technically incorrect to refer to the vehicle as being uninsured, it is a term commonly used where people do not have insurance to cover the vehicle they are driving.

 

The point I was making was that the use of ANPR cameras are becoming more widespread and now in Glasgow at least, they are being used in fixed positions.

 

One other thing - if there's no requirement for an RK to be insured, how would the car get a tax disk? I only ask because I have just taken my other car off a SORN and because my NCD is used on my main car, the premium for the scond car was quite high. My partner offered to get insurance instead but was told by several insurance companies only RK's can do this.

 

So without an insurance document in my name for that vehicle I couldn't get it taxed. Because we didn't want to transfer the car to her name we ended up going to a specialist insurer on a limited miles policy.

[lamma]

Drivers are insured not vehicles. The claimed basis for use of ANPR for this is false.

[green_and_mean]

A vehicle must be insured by someone if its ever left on the highway which would cover the tax issue. A 'DOC' policy cannot be used other than whilst the car is being used by the insured person. Your wife cannot insure her car and claim her DOC policy covers your car parked at home if she is at work with her car parked outside.

[green_and_mean]

Drivers are insured not vehicles. The claimed basis for use of ANPR for this is false.

 

Which is why cars are stopped and the driver questioned if no insurance is shown, they cannot convict on ANPR evidence its to aid the police in identifying vehicles that may be uninsured just as the roadside breath test indicates drivers that MAY be over the limit.

[crem]

 

One other thing - if there's no requirement for an RK to be insured, how would the car get a tax disk? I only ask because I have just taken my other car off a SORN and because my NCD is used on my main car, the premium for the scond car was quite high. My partner offered to get insurance instead but was told by several insurance companies only RK's can do this.

 

So without an insurance document in my name for that vehicle I couldn't get it taxed. Because we didn't want to transfer the car to her name we ended up going to a specialist insurer on a limited miles policy.

 

The insurance companies are mis-informing you, or you didn't understand what they were saying, or they didn't want your business for some reason.

 

I have 2 cars in the house where I am the RK. but I mainly drive one and my wife drives the other. What the insurance companies expect, and in fact demand, is that the insurance policy is taken out in the name of the main driver of the vehicle. Therefore, my wife's policy is perfectly legal and correct even though she is not the RK of the vehicle.

[rickyd]

That's an interesting point. I had been with them for several years and there was no misunderstanding on my part. They clearly said that they need the car to be registered in the name of the insured. Needless to say I'm not with them any more.

[green_and_mean]

That's an interesting point. I had been with them for several years and there was no misunderstanding on my part. They clearly said that they need the car to be registered in the name of the insured. Needless to say I'm not with them any more.

 

There are countless instances where the RK would not be insured. If you got banned for drink driving and hired a chauffer with a clean licence to drive you about in YOUR Bentley why would you need to insure the vehicle or transfer the V5 to him/her, you could insure car in their name?