Was driving down a street in glasgow (huge, long wide and empty) and the sun was in my eyes so couldn't see a camera. Was doing 50 when i noticed I was on the road markers and so I slammed on the breaks and stopped half way up the markers. (I did make sure there was nothing behind me!). So... does it only flash if you go over them all? Or have I got away with it?

Did you see it flash ? It tends to be fairly obvious when they flash, even in bright sun...

...as to why you where driving at 50 when your vision was impaired by bright sun, well that's another issue...

...if the sun was stopping you from seeing the speed camera, what else couldn't you see ?

Yes I know its another issue. However this road is possibly the widest, straightest, most deserted road ever. I'd never do that speed on a 'normal' road. Not ever. I could see the road ahead was clear and so put my foot down a bit then the sun came through a break in the buildings.

And no, I didn't see a flash but I wasn't really looking in my mirror (apart from to briefly check if it was safe to stop quickly).

I'm fairly sure that if you really were doing 50mph and didn't notice until you were on the markers that you wouldn't be able to stop that quickly, unless the road had a high enough speed limit such that the markers were spread out... in which case 50mph wouldn't trip the camera anyway.

In other words, I think you're ok. I think you spotted the camera earlier than you thought and slowed down in time.

[lecture]
But Andy makes a good point. How do you know the road was empty? Slow down!
[/lecture]

If it's a standard GATSO camera, then I think it works like this:

Under the road on the approach is a pair of detector wires, which detect the inductance change caused by a big hunk of metal (your car) passing over them. By comparing the time between each wire detecting your car, it can tell how fast you're going.

This causes the camera to take two pictures at a fixed interval. The guy who develops the film (probably not Boots or Jessops) notes down your number plate from the photos and generates the ticket.

Now, at this point, you're already speeding, and you're gonna get a ticket (assuming that there's a camera in the box, and film left in the camera).

The precisely spaced lines painted on the road, and the precisely timed flashes of the camera are used to work out exactly how fast you were going, in case its borderline, or you contest it in court.

So, essentially, assuming that this was an old GATSO, you'd already have triggered the double-flash by driving over the detector, and the only thing that slowing down did was muddy the waters a bit. If you came to a complete stop, while still on the lines, you probably spoofed it.

Now, odds are that the box (even if it did flash) didn't have a camera or film in it, and you've got away with it.

The newer cameras (the ones that face you) are calibrated accurately enough that, if they take a picture, you were speeding, and it's game over.

I don't think the GATSO uses inductive cables, it uses radar. The truvelos use inductive cables in the road.

The GATSO will also be to the rear of you, to catch your rear number plate and also make sure your not dazzled by the flash. The camera and flash unit are combined so if were flashed then there was a camera inside, you still might get away if it ran out of film which, if it's a busy road is a possibility. You can spot an empty GATSO because the flash unit is quite visible in the little hole in casing.

The truvelo is digital, so it never runs out of film ('cos there isn't any) it's also IR so there's no flash. It also faces you so it stands a chance of getting your face in the picture. If you go past one above the limit you'll have no idea wether it's got you or not until the letter arrives in the post.

here in the US, at least in AZ, a ticket does not count unless the individual receiving it acknowledges that they received it. is that so over there, too?

http://www.azcentral.com/community/scottsdale/articles/1019sr-judges19Z8.html

http://www.highwayrobbery.net/TickRedCamArmeycasesazappeal.asp

Not quite, the NIP (Notice of Intended Prosecution) must be sent within 14 days, otherwise you can theoretically send it back. However I've never had the pleasure (I was stopped by a police officer) so I'm not entirely sure.

In the US you can refuse mail unopened, can you do that? What happens?

I read most of the speed camera sites and contribute fairly regularly now and then. For UK readers here is the essential list:

http://pepipoo.com/NewForums2/ - legal and technical discussions - several high court appeals in motion, populated by probably the best non-legal speed experts in the UK.

http://www.cumbriasafetycameras.co.uk/forum - Forum run by CSCP, marvel at all the ignored questions, like "how many collisions are caused by vehicles exceeding the speed limit" and "what control sites are used to compare statistics"

http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/forum.asp?f=10&h=0 - Pistonheads - Speeding, Plod & The Law forum

http://www.safespeed.org.uk/forum/ - Safe Speed - forum run by Paul Smith, the man Brunstrom tried to gag (Chief of N.Wales police).

Gareth (no points TOUCH WOOD!)

If served by royal mail with signed-on-delivery and signed at your current address, it is considered served, even if it wasn't you that signed for it.

Allegedly ( ), the way to avoid the fine is to wait until the last possible moment, then write to them to appologise for not paying the fine sooner, but you have been out of the country. Keep working along similar lines avoiding a summons but also avoiding paying the fine until 6 months has passed since the original offence. Once six months has passed, they can't prosecute.

Other ways to avoid apparently include insisting on seeing the evidence including both the photos with actual timimgs printed (and check that the timings are to the required accuracy) and requesting a calibration certificate with a date within 6 months or 1 year (can't recall which).

If in a 30mph speed limit, check the spacing between lamp posts is correct (quite often they get installed to the wrong spacing) and in all cases, check that the speed limit signs and repeaters are in place, made of the appropriate material and not defaced.
Also, check that the speed limit * 10% + 2mph is less than the speed you were clocked at and demand proof that the camera was correctly calibrated at the time if not.

Finally check that the camera itself is normally clearly visible and has the yellow high-vis panels stuck on it and that their are speed camera warning signs within 2 miles of the camera along the route you took. These last few won't get the charge dropped on their own, but can help your case.

Right, I was served by an officer, and my wife a few months later by a constable, as witnesses in a DUI trial. (It was settled, apparently, which is a shame, because the prosecution had no case, and dealt with us, their prospective witnesses, in bad faith.)

If I'd know they wanted to serve me, I wouldn't have answered the door.

I heard a rumour about speeding tickets in Australia perhaps someone could tell me wether this is true.

Apparently if you get caught speeding and are ticketed, you don't pay straight away and instead mail a cheque off. If you over pay they refund you the difference, NOW, if you don't cash their refund cheque the endorsement never goes on your licence.

Now is this bollocks or what?

BZZT.

Pepipoo do have some very good advice - sadly most people still won't go to court as there is always that risk. I got a NIP through for 91 in a 70 zone (A9 dual carriageway near Gleneagles) and the offer was a 3 point 60 quid, or go to court.

Although I think I was absolutely in the right - I usually speed up to overtake, and I couldn't slam on the anchors as there was a BMW quite close behind me and he may not have responded in time - I just wouldn't be able to afford it if a court judgement went against me.

What I would rather see is more traffic police who can make the call as to whether someone is driving dangerously or not - regardless of their speed, and less cameras which do nothing to help safety but just rake in the cash.

Wow. I'd find it really offensive that the government is essentially blackmailing you into paying the ticket. In the US, at least in NC, if you want to contest a ticket, you're not liable to get a bigger penalty just because you didn't agree. You're just arguing whether or not the ticket was accurate.

I'm fine with the current system. If you truely believe that you were in the right then go for it and take it to court. It's to stop everybody contesting the tickets to try and get out of them and tying up the courts.

You'd think that tying up a significant portion of your day in court would be a decent preventative.

Apparently not it seems. People will try anything to get out of it.