Caught by Gatso van

Atomic Pineapple

I've never seen a gatso camera placed anywhere but on a straight piece of road, there are hundreds of black spots around the northeast with nothin but maybe a sign with black spot written on it, why arent there cameras here?
Because the volume of traffic is too low to make a profit from it

Guy:Incognito

if its your car then you should know whos driving it. Yhe law should be that the owner gets the fine and/or points unless they say someone else was driving at which point the person shoul;d confess, if they dont it should fall back on the owner,ull soon stop letting unreliable people drive ur car if they r costing u money.

Tommy Vercetti

Originally posted by Stekelly
if its your car then you should know whos driving it. Yhe law should be that the owner gets the fine and/or points unless they say someone else was driving at which point the person shoul;d confess, if they dont it should fall back on the owner,ull soon stop letting unreliable people drive ur car if they r costing u money.

That's all very well but as far as I'm concerned, it's up to the Gardai to prove who was driving, not me. I often let my father use my car, and vice versa, and I don't think it is fair to expect me to remember who was driving it 6 weeks after an alleged offence. I know he is insured, isn't a dangerous driver, and doesn't drink drive.

My main problems with speed cameras are that they are obviously not targeting areas and stretches of road which have a high level of accidents/fatalities. One would naturally question their purpose; are they revenue gathering or promoting road safety?

Secondly, they are entirely one dimensional. They can in theory prosecute me for driving 5mph over the limit while not doing a damn thing about the drunk/stoned/dangerous/uninsured/untaxed/unlicensed driver I was passing. Given that I don't drive drunk/stoned/dangerous/uninsured/untaxed/unlicensed, then I would feel hard done by.

Thirdly, as a taxpayer, I feel ripped off that the people who are paid to enforce the laws of this country are sitting in a van snapping away and making money instead of doing a real job.

I could go on all night.

Our man in Havana

Do they caution you if you are actaully stopped by a garda? Found this:

Section 47 deals with exceeding the speed limit

Section 104 Road traffic act 1961

104.—Where a person is charged with an offence, under section 47, 52 or 53 of this Act, he shall not be convicted of the offence unless either—

( a ) he was warned at the time at which the offence is alleged to have been committed, or within twenty-four hours there, after, that the question of prosecuting him for an offence under some one of those sections would be considered, or

( b ) within fourteen days after the commission of the offence a summons for the offence was served on him, or

( c ) within those fourteen days a notice in writing stating the time and place at which the offence is alleged to have been committed and stating briefly the act or acts alleged to constitute the offence and stating the intention to prosecute him therefor was served personally or by registered post on him or (in the case of a mechanically propelled vehicle) on the registered owner of the vehicle in relation to which the offence is alleged to have been committed:

Provided that—

(i) failure to comply with this requirement shall not be a bar to conviction in a case in which the court is satisfied that—
(I) the accused by his own conduct contributed to the failure, or
(II) in case the offence alleged to have been committed is in relation to a mechanically propelled vehicle, neither the name and address of the accused nor the name and address of the registered owner of the vehicle could with reasonable diligence have been ascertained in time for a summons to be served or for a notice to be served as aforesaid, or
(III) in case the offence alleged to have been committed is not in relation to a mechanically propelled vehicle, the name and address of the accused could not with reasonable diligence have been ascertained in time for a summons to be served or a notice to be sent as aforesaid, and
(ii) it shall be presumed, until the contrary is shown by the defendant, that the requirement of this section has been complied with.

From my reading of section c they have only 14 days to send out the notice. 6 weeks would invalidate any prosecution under section 47.

Would make a nice defence.

Rodney Trotter

..............as far as I'm concerned, it's up to the Gardai to prove who was driving, not me.

In your dreams! This is Ireland.

The onus is on the registered owner to prove who was driving. You are guilty until proven innocent. I know one man who has 2 points on his licence even though his wife was driving the car at the time. Hardly fair to put any person in that position.

Solution? Put foreign based cousin down as named driver. 'Twas him, your honour!

or

register the car in the name of an unknown company at an unknown address!

Nuttzz

In England students volunteer their licence details to take points for motorists for a fee, (£100 a point), any of you student boys interested in such a "scheme"

MrPudding

Originally posted by kbannon
[B..... (this is also complimented by the fact that the national speed limit will increase in speed from 60mph to 100kph).
........ [/B]

This is only an increase of 2 MPH, not really enough to make a point. I agree that it is irritating that they only syop on nice long streaches of road with stupid speed limits. Onreflection though I think there may be some truth in the arguement that it is dangerous to stop traffic on small crappy roads, (where they need to be speed trapping) even gatso van where you get the fine in the post could have trouble finding a safe place to locate on the roads where they shoud be placed.

All in all I think they are takin the piss busting people for doing 45mph on the 3 lane Naas road (in my case). And before anyone starts with the "wah wah wah you broke the law" sh*t catch a grip, that kind of speed inforcment has a questionable effect on road safety.

MrP

MrPudding

Originally posted by Rodney Trotter
Solution? Put foreign based cousin down as named driver. 'Twas him, your honour!

or

register the car in the name of an unknown company at an unknown address!

Fifth gear did an article on the myths of getting off speeding tickets. It was very interesting. The dead bloke one did work but it will only work once. The foreign relation one is also good but apparently they have been known to chase up the alledged foreign speeder to confirm travel details and stuff. Their conclusion was that there really was no way around it.

Even the good old "Right to remain silent" argument was thrown out of court although your could, if you were loaded, probably fight that one in Europe.

MrP

Tommy Vercetti

Originally posted by Rodney Trotter
In your dreams! This is Ireland.

The onus is on the registered owner to prove who was driving. You are guilty until proven innocent. I know one man who has 2 points on his licence even though his wife was driving the car at the time. Hardly fair to put any person in that position.

I'd be more than happy to take it to court in that case:)

Nuttzz

Road Traffic Act 2002
Section 11, Subsection (11)

Subsection (11) provides that unless another person is identified by the registered owner as the driver, it will be assumed that the registered owner was driving the vehicle at the time of the occurrence of the alleged offence.

This means that if a company cannot identify the driver who committed the offence, the registered owner of the company vehicle (which may be the company director or secretary) will be the one liable for the offence and who incurs the penalty points and pays the fine.

http://www.nifast.ie/pdfs/Company%20Policy%20HR.pdf

RainyDay

Originally posted by Rodney Trotter
register the car in the name of an unknown company at an unknown address!

Oh Rodney, you really are a plonker. Putting the ownership of what is probably your biggest (or 2nd biggest, if you have a house) asset into a fictional entity is not a smart move. Remember that little question on your insurance proposal form that asks 'Do you own the vehicle'? Once you answer 'no', you going to raise a pile of red flags in the insurance company. If you lie and answer 'yes', you are in breach of contract and would be effectively driving without insurance. What happens if your car is nicked and you have to prove ownership to get it back? This is NOT a good idea.

Can I make a suggestion to all of those who are concerned about the amount of time spend by Gardai chasing speeders? Slow Down - In doing so, you will free up Garda resources to focus on the many other important offences highlighted in this thread. [That is of course assuming that the concerns expressed about all those other offences are genuine, and not simply a diversionary tactic].

The points system was brought in on 31st Oct 2002. I you look at those Garda fatality figures for recent years on a Nov to following Oct basis, they show remarkable consistency for the period prior to the introduction of the points system and a substantial drop from there onwards, i.e.

12 months to 31 Oct 2000 401
12 months to 31 Oct 2001 402
12 months to 31 Oct 2002 409
12 months to 31 Oct 2003 334

There are about 100 people alive today who would be dead without the penalty points system.

Sherlock

"Can I make a suggestion to all of those who are concerned about the amount of time spend by Gardai chasing speeders? Slow Down - In doing so, you will free up Garda resources to focus on the many other important offences highlighted in this thread."

Whats so dangerous about doing 45 or 50 on a 3 lane carraigeway?.Its a ridiculously low limit and it doesn't say much for the guards that they concentrate some of of their speed monitoring there.If Seamus Brennan follows through with his plans to up the limits on roads like the Naas road, lucan bypass and Stillorgan road drivers who would have been deemed speeders last year will now be safe drivers.
Last year the Tallaght bypass limit went up from 40 to 50 mph even the road was unchanged.
I've been driving for 25 years and haven't a single speeding conviction to my name but it annoys me to see guards "shooting fish in a barrel" while down the road you'll see all kinds of dangerous driving.

Victor

Maybe I'm wrong but:
* The section of road is between traffic lights and a traffic light controlled roundabout.
* There are a number of side roads and side entrances.
* Muppets think because there is a central median, they are on an autobahn.

In such circumstances, isn't a get tough régime understandable?

Originally posted by Rodney Trotter
The onus is on the registered owner to prove who was driving. You are guilty until proven innocent. I know one man who has 2 points on his licence even though his wife was driving the car at the time. Hardly fair to put any person in that position.

But it was his wife who put him in that position.

Atomic Pineapple

Valid points Victor but the amount of traffic coming onto the road is minimal (except at the traffic lights of course)

Muppets think there on an autobahn the whole time no matter how wide the road is, some idiot in a civic with plastic bits stuck on overtook me on a complete blind bend and missed a car by about 5inches there a few weeks ago

I think a speed limit of 50miles an hour would be more appropiate between the lights and roundabout its not too slow and not too fast

MadsL

I accept that speeding is an issue but if we are serious about preventing road deaths;

Then..

1. When did you last see a camera in a residential area where kids play.
2. Why not Gatso's outside schools at school starting and leaving times
3. 15 mph limit past schools at these times.
4. Ban bull bars - these must be a BIG killer - I even saw a set on a Carina FFS!
5. Make overtaking buses illegal
6. Anti Jaywalking campaign and on-the-spot fines.

Any more ideas...???

Atomic Pineapple

better roads would be a good idea, if there was a dual carriageway between every major town in Ireland then there'd be far less accidents, I know it would cost alot but the goverment take €4billion a year from motorists and thats excluding speeding fines and the like, where is it all being spent?

Luas? dublin port tunnel? M50 at carrickmines?

the money wasted on these would have gone a long way to make our road network atleast a little better.

What about the 12% increase in vrt? wheres that gonna go?
well the goverment took a 12% pay increase the same time this was announced so i guess it'll be goin into there own pockets?

Tommy Vercetti

Some proper driver education would be a good place to start. How about learning the rules of the road in school? The driving test is a joke too (if you actually do it), why not retest every 5 or 10 years? Why not introduce a compulsory advanced driving scheme, where people will learn how to cope in real situations, not reverse around a corner.

Guy:Incognito

why is everyone trying to justify their speed by saying the road can handle higher speeds or the gard shud be in another spot, the fact of the matter is the law is the law for as long as it stands till its either changed or abolished so while its there, the descision to adhere to it falls on you and if you get caught breaking it its no1's fault but your own and you have no comeback so either 1) slow down to the speed dictated by law or 2) keep speeding and get caught and fined. but either way, accept the concequenses.

Our man in Havana

Originally posted by Stekelly
why is everyone trying to justify their speed by saying the road can handle higher speeds or the gard shud be in another spot, the fact of the matter is the law is the law for as long as it stands till its either changed or abolished so while its there, the descision to adhere to it falls on you and if you get caught breaking it its no1's fault but your own and you have no comeback so either 1) slow down to the speed dictated by law or 2) keep speeding and get caught and fined. but either way, accept the concequenses.

You are Micheal mc Dowell and I claim my five euro.

You don't realise that the gardai which for you the sun shines out of their asses, are not even enforcing their own laws properly. They dont get speeding fines out within 14 days as per sect. 104 (C) and then proceed to frighten the masses into paying and accepting points.

If section 104 was wisely known then the vast majority of speed camera fines would be struck out. Its all the posturing and fright talk that puts the majority off fighting these fines.

May day riots need I say more.

Seth Brundle

Originally posted by Bond-James Bond
May day riots need I say more.

Oh go on, just a little

Seth Brundle

Just to confirm, is this 14 day rule (as per the Section 104 Road traffic act 1961) still valid for fines recieved in the post?
Is the offence void if you don't recieve notification within 14 days?

Our man in Havana

Originally posted by kbannon
Just to confirm, is this 14 day rule (as per the Section 104 Road traffic act 1961) still valid for fines recieved in the post?
Is the offence void if you don't recieve notification within 14 days?

Section 104 appiles only to the offences of speeding and careless/dangerous driving.

( c ) within those fourteen days a notice in writing stating the time and place at which the offence is alleged to have been committed and stating briefly the act or acts alleged to constitute the offence and stating the intention to prosecute him therefor was served personally or by registered post on him or (in the case of a mechanically propelled vehicle) on the registered owner of the vehicle in relation to which the offence is alleged to have been committed:

I cannot find any ammendment to this section, so I would summise that they must nofify the registered owner within 14 days. They have to post it within the 14 days and then allow a few days for the post.

So if you got a fine dated 14 days after the alleged offence then there is no case to answer.

Sherlock

"why is everyone trying to justify their speed by saying the road can handle higher speeds or the gard shud be in another spot, the fact of the matter is the law is the law for as long as it stands till its either changed or abolished so while its there, the descision to adhere to it falls on you and if you get caught breaking it its no1's fault but your own and you have no comeback so either 1) slow down to the speed dictated by law or 2) keep speeding and get caught and fined. but either way, accept the concequenses."

Obviously you believe that everything the government says is law and we shouldn't question it.This year the Naas road is 40 mph, next year it might be 50 mph but either way we must obey our leaders.Yes, you're quite right whatever Bertie and his collegues say is right and we have no right to question them.

RainyDay

Originally posted by Sherlock
Obviously you believe that everything the government says is law and we shouldn't question it.This year the Naas road is 40 mph, next year it might be 50 mph but either way we must obey our leaders.Yes, you're quite right whatever Bertie and his collegues say is right and we have no right to question them.

It is very healthy that individuals question all Government decisions. It is very unhealthy that individuals take the law into their own hands and ignore speed limits when it doesn't suit them.

Victor

Originally posted by Bond-James Bond
They dont get speeding fines out within 14 days as per sect. 104 (C) and then proceed to frighten the masses into paying and accepting points. If section 104 was wisely known then the vast majority of speed camera fines would be struck out. Its all the posturing and fright talk that puts the majority off fighting these fines.

sect. 104 (C) was repealed by sect. 25 (2) of the Road Traffic Act, 2002

Guy:Incognito

Originally posted by Sherlock

Obviously you believe that everything the government says is law and we shouldn't question it.This year the Naas road is 40 mph, next year it might be 50 mph but either way we must obey our leaders.Yes, you're quite right whatever Bertie and his collegues say is right and we have no right to question them.

wen a government makes a law thats exactly what it is a LAW and it MUST be obeyed or else face the consequences.
If they decide to change the speed limit every year then we had to abide by it if we dont want to get fine. We elect them to make these descisions for us, otherwise we would have to have a referendum to decide each speed limit .

Our man in Havana

Originally posted by Victor
sect. 104 (C) was repealed by sect. 25 (2) of the Road Traffic Act, 2002

What are the time limits now? Sounds like an abuse of process to leave people hanging on indefinitely.

RainyDay

Originally posted by Bond-James Bond
Sounds like an abuse of process to leave people hanging on indefinitely.

The REAL abuse of process is by those who put the lives of other road users at risk through speeding.

Seth Brundle

Originally posted by RainyDay
The REAL abuse of process is by those who put the lives of other road users at risk through speeding.

You omitted the word 'inappropriate'in front of 'speeding'.

Victor

Originally posted by Bond-James Bond
What are the time limits now? Sounds like an abuse of process to leave people hanging on indefinitely.

I expect it is the usual 6/12 months for most other simple prosecutions.

Originally posted by kbannon
You omitted the word 'inappropriate'in front of 'speeding'.

Inappropriate speeds cause more accidents. All speed kills.