unclear speed camera photo

Our man in Havana

Clare_Guy wrote: »

they'll ask Mr. A Frenchman...

What happens if someone else was driving my vehicle?

In cases where the driving offence was detected by camera, the fixed charge notice is sent to the registered owner of the vehicle. If the registered owner was not driving at the time of the offence they should complete the form attached to the notice, giving details of the person who was driving. This should then be returned to the relevant Garda Station with the original fixed charge notice. (Do not enclose payment). The Gardaí will then issue a fixed charge notice to the driver.

http://www.citizensinformation.ie/categories/travel-and-recreation/motoring-1/driving-offences/penalty-points-for-driving-offences

Of course when the letter addressed to Mr A Frenchman is returned to the Gardaí undelivered or he denys driving the fun will start.

Clare_Guy

miju wrote: »

well the reality is also that your wrong. they do have a full sized photo of the whole car and the driver.

i'm afraid i'm not wrong, i've been in court in a similar situation and i've seen the gardai's evidence, it's exactly the same.

miju wrote: »

again the reality is your very wrong. it's actually very easy to pull of all different types of info from the NVDB especially when the reg is only going to be a varying 10 numbers at max :rolleyes:

again i'm not wrong, i'm not questioning whether it's easy to get this info from a database, the reality is, the prosecuting garda will not go to those lengths...

Clare_Guy

Bond-007 wrote: »

Of course when the letter addressed to Mr A Frenchman is returned to the Gardaí undelivered or he denys driving the fun will start.

the fun will be between frenchie and the dept. of justice...

mondeo

Did I read somthing before that in the UK if a the reg plate is not clear on the original photo that it cannot be pursued by other means to find the culprit?
The original data is the only thing that can be used in court etc etc...
Then again we live in ireland, if a garda says it's you then it's YOU! no questions no quibbling.....

I will post back here and let ye know what route she takes. If it were me I'd
deny it's me.

I was unaware that mobile camera vans took pictures from the front of the van also? I assumed it was just from the rear in which they were taken...
The front of her car was caught on the N81. Maybe they have a rear picture of her car also since they record from the front of the van too?

Clare_Guy

mondeo wrote: »

Did I read somthing before that in the UK if a the reg plate is not clear on the original photo that it cannot be pursued by other means to find the culprit?
The original data is the only thing that can be used in court etc etc...
Then again we live in ireland, if a garda says it's you then it's YOU! no questions no quibbling.....

I will post back here and let ye know what route she takes. If it were me I'd
deny it's me.

I was unaware that mobile camera vans took pictures from the front of the van also? I assumed it was just from the rear in which they were taken...
The front of her car was caught on the N81. Maybe they have a rear picture of her car also since they record from the front of the van too?

if they had 2 pictures (front and back) they'd send copies of both. this really is very simple. if it's questionable what number is shown, question it. what's the worst that could happen? there are no laws against questioning this. if they have a rock-solid case they'll let her know in uncertain terms and she'll be in exactly the same position that she is today, she'll be able pay her fine and take the points.

miju

Clare_Guy wrote: »

i'm afraid i'm not wrong, i've been in court in a similar situation and i've seen the gardai's evidence, it's exactly the same.

You can think what you like but you are very wrong. Specifically the photo is taken at a distance either from the GATSO or fixed camera. The photo shows the full car and the driver clearly. The photo is then cropped , zoomed and rasterised to see the reg even clearer if memory serves me correctly.

Clare_Guy wrote: »

again i'm not wrong, i'm not questioning whether it's easy to get this info from a database, the reality is, the prosecuting garda will not go to those lengths...

Your wrong again as anyone who works in a motor tax office will tell you but believe what you like.

Clare_Guy

miju wrote: »

You can think what you like but you are very wrong. Specifically the photo is taken at a distance either from the GATSO or fixed camera. The photo shows the full car and the driver clearly. The photo is then cropped , zoomed and rasterised to see the reg even clearer if memory serves me correctly.

seriously, i've been in court in a very similar situation, i've seen the picture the garda has in court, it's the exact same as the notification they send the "defendant".

miju wrote: »

Your wrong again as anyone who works in a motor tax office will tell you but believe what you like.

i'm not questioning whether the information exists and in a higher profile case where they were building a block of evidence i'm sure they would access it but the reality is, in traffic offences where it's a traffic camera evidence, the notifications are sent out from a processing office and the ones that end up in court are plonked on some random garda's lap to attend in court with. if something is questioned the case may get adjorned to another date and the garda could go and search out additional evidence but the simple fact is, because of work-load and lack of connection with the case the garda simply won't search for that evidence. i have experience of this.

atlantean

mondeo wrote: »

The original data is the only thing that can be used in court etc etc...

This could still be used against you. Using your example 03WW691. If the 9 is missing but the car is a Ford Fusion all they need to do is look up the other numbers.

601 is a Kia Sedona
611 is a Nissan Primers
621 is a Audi A4
631 is a DAF CF85
641 is a Relault Megan Scenic
651 is a VW Van
661 is a Toyota Dyna
671 is a Hyundai Santa Fe
681 is a VW Polo

Quite easy to tell from a photo that none of the above look anything like a Ford Fusion.

I am assuming the number given was not the actual number of the car so there is an element of a chance that another car of the same make, colour and model could be in the list but I would not like to bet on it!

alias no.9

mondeo wrote: »

I was unaware that mobile camera vans took pictures from the front of the van also? I assumed it was just from the rear in which they were taken...
The front of her car was caught on the N81. Maybe they have a rear picture of her car also since they record from the front of the van too?

Take a look the next time you pass one, there is a video camera sitting on the dashboard.

Clare_Guy wrote: »

if they had 2 pictures (front and back) they'd send copies of both. this really is very simple. if it's questionable what number is shown, question it. what's the worst that could happen? there are no laws against questioning this. if they have a rock-solid case they'll let her know in uncertain terms and she'll be in exactly the same position that she is today, she'll be able pay her fine and take the points.

Fixed cameras take two photos (two flashes in the rear view mirror) to show the change in position of the car over a fixed period of time as they pass the graduated road markings, verifying the speed and identifying the faster of two cars if a second one is passing at the same time. The vans have a video camera in the front as well as the camera in the back, specifically for motorcycles, which can't be identified from the front, but it's running all the time so no doubt it could be used to verify the rear registration plate. Miju is also correct in his assertion that a larger picture of the car that shows the driver is taken by the vans.

mondeo

atlantean wrote: »

This could still be used against you. Using your example 03WW691. If the 9 is missing but the car is a Ford Fusion all they need to do is look up the other numbers.

601 is a Kia Sedona
611 is a Nissan Primers
621 is a Audi A4
631 is a DAF CF85
641 is a Relault Megan Scenic
651 is a VW Van
661 is a Toyota Dyna
671 is a Hyundai Santa Fe
681 is a VW Polo

Quite easy to tell from a photo that none of the above look anything like a Ford Fusion.

I am assuming the number given was not the actual number of the car so there is an element of a chance that another car of the same make, colour and model could be in the list but I would not like to bet on it!

Yes the number I gave was just from the top of my head.. I agree with you that she may be forced to except it. As someone stated earlier it is no harm in questioning the system on this one.

atlantean

mondeo wrote: »

As someone stated earlier it is no harm in questioning the system on this one.

Absolutely

alias no.9

mondeo wrote: »

Yes the number I gave was just from the top of my head.. I agree with you that she may be forced to except it. As someone stated earlier it is no harm in questioning the system on this one.

The worst that could happen would be for her to be done for perjury or contempt of court, not to mind the two extra penalty points and bigger fine.

miju

Clare_Guy wrote: »

seriously, i've been in court in a very similar situation, i've seen the picture the garda has in court, it's the exact same as the notification they send the "defendant".

well i've also seen them when they are being processed so go figure

alias no.9 wrote: »

Miju is also correct in his assertion that a larger picture of the car that shows the driver is taken by the vans.

cheers for confirming what I already knew alias no.9 ;););););)

Eru

Clare_Guy wrote: »

again i'm not wrong, i'm not questioning whether it's easy to get this info from a database, the reality is, the prosecuting garda will not go to those lengths...

What Garda? Its the penalty points office that prosecute these cases. The tax office sends owner information automatically and voila, the information is in the court.

Like its been said, all a Garda need do is ask the motor tax office for registration print out for all possible matches which is less than 10. That will take all of 1 minute, you then hand that into the court with the photo and the judge slaps an increased fine and points on you then the Garda prosecutes you for perjury just because you called him a liar under oath.

Clare_Guy wrote: »

the fun will be between frenchie and the dept. of justice...

Check the law again, if he fails to accept the ticket or its returned it reverts back to the owner of the vehicle. You could also be prosecuted for making a false declaration if the person doesnt exist or he states that he never drove the car.

You honestly think your the first person that has looked for a loophole and an easy way out?

Clare_Guy

Karlitosway1978 wrote: »

What Garda? Its the penalty points office that prosecute these cases. The tax office sends owner information automatically and voila, the information is in the court.

Like its been said, all a Garda need do is ask the motor tax office for registration print out for all possible matches which is less than 10. That will take all of 1 minute, you then hand that into the court with the photo and the judge slaps an increased fine and points on you then the Garda prosecutes you for perjury just because you called him a liar under oath.

in court it is a named garda who is giving evidence on behalf of the D.P.P. against you not a "penalty points office". For the last time, i agree, it is easy for the garda to get the required info but the reality is, he will not. If you deny it is your car you are not calling the garda a liar. It is your word against his.

Karlitosway1978 wrote: »

Check the law again, if he fails to accept the ticket or its returned it reverts back to the owner of the vehicle. You could also be prosecuted for making a false declaration if the person doesnt exist or he states that he never drove the car.

You honestly think your the first person that has looked for a loophole and an easy way out?

I never suggested giving some random name, i suggested that some kind-hearted friend or relative, perhaps living outside the jurisdiction (someone else suggested "Mr. A. Frenchman), would accept the points on your behalf. Read the posts.

Marcus.Aurelius

I have indeed checked some registrations with an unclear digit, and found the correct car by comparing the possibilites with the car make.

OP, I seriously doubt the ticket was 67 in a 60 zone, that's ridiculous.

Mr. Presentable

Not content with speeding, she wants to lie about it being her. She should challenge it!

And take the doubles she has coming to her.

mondeo

Marcus.Aurelius wrote: »

I have indeed checked some registrations with an unclear digit, and found the correct car by comparing the possibilites with the car make.

OP, I seriously doubt the ticket was 67 in a 60 zone, that's ridiculous.

Your right it is rediculous...

Savman

Well it certainly didn't take the Motors forum long to descend back into this crap again. The OP or whoever it was who received the fine is well within their rights to contest the issue.

Personally I absolutely hate this "you broke the law scumbag" crap that people come out with. Questioning a fairly questionable issue is not calling anybody a liar.

It's entirely up to the person involved to decide whether to follow it up, asking on here is always gonna attract the high horse brigade who are seemingly always waiting to pounce :rolleyes:

I guess it boils down to 2 groups, the camp that would chase the issue themselves and those who say they wouldn't. OP, take each opinion at face value and make up your own mind.

TheNog

Savman wrote: »

Well it certainly didn't take the Motors forum long to descend back into this crap again. The OP or whoever it was who received the fine is well within their rights to contest the issue.

No one siad the OP relative doesn't have the right to challenge it.

Savman wrote: »

Personally I absolutely hate this "you broke the law scumbag" crap that people come out with. Questioning a fairly questionable issue is not calling anybody a liar.

It's entirely up to the person involved to decide whether to follow it up, asking on here is always gonna attract the high horse brigade who are seemingly always waiting to pounce :rolleyes:

I guess it boils down to 2 groups, the camp that would chase the issue themselves and those who say they wouldn't. OP, take each opinion at face value and make up your own mind.

Again no one called the OPs relative a scumbag and as far as I can see no one got onto any high horse except you. The relative has the right to challenge it but people are just giving their opinion on how she could be caught out. Simple as. No need to be junping down anyones neck over it.

jhegarty

Look up every car with the missing digit on http://www.cartell.ie/ and if there isn't another car with the same make/model it's time to pay up

unkel

TheNog wrote: »

The relative has the right to challenge it but people are just giving their opinion on how she could be caught out. Simple as. No need to be junping down anyones neck over it.

A balanced and stable view. I couldn't agree more.

FX Meister

mate got fine with a picture of his reg. Said it was his dad driving. Got a picture with him driving and asking was this really the 62 year old nominated driver

Savman

TheNog wrote: »

Again no one called the OPs relative a scumbag and as far as I can see no one got onto any high horse except you. The relative has the right to challenge it but people are just giving their opinion on how she could be caught out. Simple as. No need to be junping down anyones neck over it.

Here's one example:

R_H_C_P wrote:

Imo she broke the law, she should pay the consequences instead of trying to find a loophole out of it.

Loopholes are there to be exploited.

I'm sure the enlightened folks who suggest otherwise have never declared a vehicle off the road to save some tax arrears.

eringobragh

miju wrote: »

You can think what you like but you are very wrong. Specifically the photo is taken at a distance either from the GATSO or fixed camera. The photo shows the full car and the driver clearly. The photo is then cropped , zoomed and rasterised to see the reg even clearer if memory serves me correctly.

Completely Correct

craichoe

A wildcard search on pulse is simple and is done most of the time to find the owner of a vehicle.

Such as 99C165* .. will bring up all starting with the following, they can enter other details such as model, color, type (Saloon/Hatchback/Estate)

One digit on the end is easy to rule out.

Vertakill

Clare_Guy wrote: »

remind us... what is the law against a dirty number-plate?

Your reg plate must be readable and not misleading to the Gardai or else it's technically illegal.
A lot of people in more rural areas used to just mucky up their reg plate on their jeep beyond all recognition.
This is also why there's very strict rules about reg plates now.

craichoe wrote: »

A wildcard search on pulse is simple and is done most of the time to find the owner of a vehicle.

Such as 99C165* .. will bring up all starting with the following, they can enter other details such as model, color, type (Saloon/Hatchback/Estate)

One digit on the end is easy to rule out.

Definitely agree. It's very easy to do a wildcard search on pretty much any database. If the grounds of the appeal are that it's not your car, and they know the make/model of the car and they're only missing 1 digit... they're going to really get you by the balls.

But I'd recommend that the OP's friend does appeal. I'd love to see them get a hefty fine and more points (or worse). Nothing worse than people trying to weasel out of points for whatever reason. Almost as bad as the other people encouraging it on here. Take some bloody responsibility for your actions people..

galwaytt

BTDT.

Got a pic of my reg - and there is no way in hell I was anywhere near there, and I asked for the full pic, duly received in the post.

I have to say, herself was not at all happy that evening.......:D:D

So yes, all you've received is a partial. Start easy -ask for the full pic. If it is you, resplendant in Black and White...........you're going to need a blind judge........:D

kayos

Clare_Guy wrote: »

remind us... what is the law against a dirty number-plate?

There is something that says your reg plates must be of the correct type/font/size and clearly readable at all times. I'm no law head but I am pretty damn sure you have to keep them readable.

Vertakill

RE: Dirty number plates:

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/motors/2008/0305/1204240536835.html

Have heard about unreadable reg plate stories for years though.