|
|
Post by Administrator on Jul 16, 2017 11:20:50 GMT
Speed camera accuracy test 3:07pm Hares lane, Snape Green, Southport 13th july 2017
|
|
|
|
Post by Administrator on Jul 16, 2017 11:25:20 GMT
Well you wont believe this but i have Recieved an N.I.P. From West Yorkshire police for 02 July 2017.  But i was not trying to trigger a camera, and i dont believe i was driving at 36mph which was the recorded speed from a fixed Truvelo camera. I WAS recording literally about 30 seconds to 1 minute before the event! but i had just stopped recording!  I had been getting evidence of speeding quad bikes in connection with the other week.. as i saw another.. then i was doing a talk about it and the petition .. also still sign surveying as well... But i stopped recording just before the camera was triggered! i did not test that one! So... Ive had to go and do a road evaluation and there is unlawfull road signage. Which is not Lawfull.  |
|
|
|
Post by Administrator on Jul 19, 2017 23:04:53 GMT
Ok. so we have got both speed now.. on the 2nd July i was driving AWAY from the fixed camera and im pretty certain my speed was about 34/35mph... the camera says 36mph. unfortunately i did not record the event as i had stopped recording about 30 seconds before the event.  On the 13th July, i went to test the camera, driving the opposite direction TOWARDS it... at Exactly 40mph.. this i recorded will full video of speedometer and road... the speed has come back reported by the device apparently they claim 36mph hmmmm... So.... i am very certain i was NOT driving at 36mph on the 1st occasion on the 2nd July. im not saying i was only driving at 30mph, but it certainly was not 36mph, im pretty certain... So now should i test it a 3rd time?!  What about the calibration certificate? what about the road signs? Can i get the vans speedometer checked to precision?? I will update you soon. But i certainly dont think the radar gets the same reading depending on what direction you are driving in, towards it or away from it..   With speedometer shown at time of event. They claim 36mph.. so 4mph different, which is quite a lot (i still think they can toy with the settings either way)  So now need to see how accurate the van speedometer is, which is extremely difficult, as nowhere tests or adjust them these days. Here is the Calibration certificate i was issued with by West Yorkshire police in relation to this camera.. It says its camera #212.  Yet the camera is Marked as camera #776 on site  and used to be camera #447 before it was upgraded to the new truvelo D-Cam and the old ladder markings burned off the road.  Also the Street lighting is not maintained correctly for visibility as trees are all grown around it..   Ive dont a full video on the Road signage as well, which i have submitted to both West Yorkshire Police and the CPS Here are the Data Track records.. seems like the NEW version only records speed every 2 minutes not every 1 minute like the old version. Police N.I.P. from 02 July 2017 02 July 2017 13th July 2017 Unlawfull road signs not enforceable, in connection with the Hudersfield A616, Lockwood, Woodhead Road Enforcement cameras, Entering the road from both sides and in the middle of the sections.... video to follow to explain... www.bentcop.biz/900DSC_0010.JPGwww.bentcop.biz/900DSC_0011.JPGwww.bentcop.biz/900DSC_0015.JPGwww.bentcop.biz/900DSC_0017.JPGwww.bentcop.biz/DSC_z0002.JPGwww.bentcop.biz/DSC_z0003.JPGwww.bentcop.biz/DSC_z0004.JPGwww.bentcop.biz/DSC_z0040.JPGwww.bentcop.biz/DSC_z0049.JPGwww.bentcop.biz/DSC_z0050.JPGwww.bentcop.biz/DSC_z0052.JPGwww.bentcop.biz/DSC_z0055.JPGwww.bentcop.biz/DSC_z0057.JPGwww.bentcop.biz/DSC_z0061.JPGwww.bentcop.biz/DSC_z0062.JPGwww.bentcop.biz/DSC_z0063.JPGwww.bentcop.biz/DSC_z0064.JPGwww.bentcop.biz/notlawDSC_0036.JPGwww.bentcop.biz/notlawDSC_0037.JPGwww.bentcop.biz/notlawDSC_0038.JPGwww.bentcop.biz/notlawDSC_0041.JPGwww.bentcop.biz/oddDSC_0046.JPGSorry if these take forever to load... i prefer to post original resolution photos... not shrink them. |
|
|
|
Post by Administrator on Jul 19, 2017 23:18:37 GMT
But what i would like to know is this.... If the above is correct... Why is it that, there was a 40MPH limit on the M1 motorway by the Cargate police college.. and i was driving at 40mph on the motorway... and a car drove past me at approx 43mph and the camera went off.... 43mph minus 4mph is only 39mph.  I believe there is something fishy going on and we will never get answers with the police blocking and obstructing access to the equipment .. i believe there is foul play with the settings. I believe the Authorities are corrupted. |
|
|
|
Post by Administrator on Jul 21, 2017 17:24:06 GMT
Ive heard from a Taxi driver that apparently they have recently installed some new upgraded "Truvelo" cameras D-Cams on Manchester Road in Huddersfield, and they cost £40,000 each... a solicitor told the taxi driver... so the council & police are really going the other way.. and pressing on with the cameras. I know that i was not doing 40mph by the speedometer on the 02 July 2017 on the A616... so it must have been a set-up. I think they most likely set it up to get me, like they did with the Macclesfield traffic light camera... and then changed the settings. Also 4mph less than true speed speedo is going to really throw out traffic light approach calculations over distance as well. Its like they just "expect you to know your speed and distance as a guess" for traffic lights, but they dont accept a guess for speed with the speed cameras, it has to be by a measured calculation and your speedometer.  |
|
|
|
Post by Administrator on Jul 21, 2017 22:50:00 GMT
Wow so Work just only today recieved a REMINDER For an N.I.P. for an offence on the A19 North Yorkshire from the 23rd June 2017! That is when i tested a North Yorkshire mobile van! at 80mph for accuracy, but we never got anything through!? and i tested another van out on the A19 since then and nothing from that! Now work THEMSELVES were going to get PROSECUTED! for NOt RESPONDING!! but they never got the original N.I.P. !! so my boss was complaining to them! today! we have not recieved the N.I.P. within 14 Days! its 28 days afterwards now! Apparently it was 76mph but i dont have speed or ref number yet, but they are claiming the van is only allowed to do 60mph on a dual carriageway, not 70mph... yet have been past numerous police vans over 70mph! Here somebody else has had the same problem with North Yorkshire police, only getting a reminder but never the original N.I.P. within the 14 days! forums.pepipoo.com/lofiversion/index.php/t66643.htmlAnyway.. i have the video of the testing, in this thread.. as you will know. I thought they would have seen it? Im certain my Speed Awareness course instructor taught us the speed is 70mph on a dual carriageway.. and ive studied the highway code a lot... it seems like there is a mix up with one of the pictures showing a van, but it says 60mph limit if articulated, or towing 2 units, then there is an extra section.... So ive bought a couple of old highway code books to see if im right or not... But, i think it might have to do with when they made it 40mph for lorrys, HGV on regular roads.. but then David Cameron lifted it back up again.. i think it might have been Tony Blair and Gordon Brown who lowered the limit for vans... to 50mph on single carriageways, but i thought it was 70mph on dual.. But it seems like it depends how you read the highway code and which version you have. Because its written a bit like the parking town centre signs when they can be misread and it should be written a certain way and is misleading... I will check the original legislation as the seatbelt law has no distance exactly, only the highway code... so might be similar for the National speed limit.. Anyway.. ive sent my letters already.. so i wonder what the video will be like?? Check out this from the North Yorkshire police facts sheet.. The police should provide evidence that an original N.I.P. was sent. you are forced to confirm you have recieved a letter, where is evidence one was sent? when its the other way around.. i expect the police would attempt to say they didnt recive letters like with Cheshire police and my statement i sent in. This is the biggest blag ever... they are claiming loosing your driving licence is not a serious matter.... its a summons to court, so its serious, its not a parking ticket or fine. They are attempting to "Get out of" giving the video over. I believe that it has been served when they post it.. but where is proof of postage? Notice to accused regarding advance information The laying of evidence to the defence, that i read, i dont think was in the The Criminal Procedure Rules 2005 .. i think it was somewhere else.... But anyway... Interesting... But seeing as my petition is exempted from being under legal commitment to The Criminal Procedure Rules 2005... i am not bound in any way by them. And as i am conducting my own private police work as well as ombudsman complaint for home office approval device matters.. i will be requiring the evidence from the Police as compulsary. |
|
|
|
Post by Administrator on Jul 22, 2017 2:29:00 GMT
My Official North Yorkshire police official speed camera testing document  |
|
|
|
Post by Administrator on Jul 24, 2017 20:30:29 GMT
Ok, so i went to surey the A19 some more on Sunday in relation to the North Yorkshire police mobile camera vans enforcement areas.. And found unlawfull road signage for the speed limit entering the road from both north & South ends. Might take a while to upload this... I also have a couple of videos giving evidence that the National speed limit in a van that is 3.5 tonne gross weight and under 3 tonne unlaiden is 70mph, no matter if its multi-purpose or buisness only, as that weight is not a heavy goods vehicle, and is the same operating weight as a camper van & mini bus. No matter what it is adapted, declared or used as, althought that counts... the Highway code book is only "Based on" the law. It is not the legislation itself. I will upload the evidence & discussions shortly.. I also have tested the LTI 100 out with somebody filming the vans speedometer.. and it seems more accurate than the fixed speed camera so its looking like the speedometer on the van is NOT 4mph in error.  So i will be challenging the CPS & North Yorkshire police on the Dual Carriageway National Speed Limit for vans. As well as the accuracy of their mobile speed camera officer & unit.   |
|
|
|
Post by Administrator on Jul 29, 2017 0:17:35 GMT
Turns out that i am retarded, as not only am i correct about the van being 70mph on a Dual carriageway, not 60mph.. but its also 60mph on a regular road single carriageway, not 50mph... So, i have been mislead by the Police, Government and Speed Awareness courses and i believe they are trying to brain wash the public, spread misinformation, and also use radio and television to change the driving of the UK to how "They" want it so they can extort massive volumes of money and issue riddiculous punnishments on people. Also ive found more legislation and i need to rsearch the original reason & Purpose for the 1977 speed limits and National speed limit as it was mostly for temporary roads works.... the national speed limit was "unrestricted" road... There is still a grey area... i think there is a strong likelyhood they cannot have 50mph dual carriageways. And Traffic regulation orders vs statutory instruments purposes are questionable. I think there is more scope for defrauding & misleading the public now as well as causing distress and most certainly racketeering... As we have and are all being duped into this Smart motorway system at our own cost by radio station propaganda, after being lied to as well. Here the van i drive is NOT subject to 50mph single carriageway or 60mph Dual carriageway restrictions. Original national speed limit table   Im going to have to write to the CPS and add more evidence, complaints and give notice to them of further charges i intend to bring against them. In Private prosecution. Im pretty certain that the original legislation refered to a "Restricted road" as one that was in a built up area, and had street lighting and a 30 miles per hour speed limit, and when you left the 30mph area you were back onto an unrestricted road again. Because if you look at the symbols originally designed & their meaning.. and old old national speed limit signs when you leave a village.. you will see it was "end of the restriction".. Obviously in 1977 when they brought in the National speed limits, there really is no such thing as a "Completely" unrestricted road.. unless you go "off road" to a field of race track. So is a racetrack and a field an "unrestricted road" or "off-road" ? can you even speed on a racetrack or in a field? Or was it meant to mean unrestricted once you left the village, before 1977? because what sign tells you you have " left national speed limit? " if you are leaving an National speed limit road, if its restricted? If only going "off road" is leaving a restricted road.. then is it passing the broken lines of an entrance? as you are not supposed to drive over the white edge line. Thus the whole Pneumatic tyres law is questionable regarding speed limits as to what is or is not a restricted road and if its the same as it meant before? or the terms have changed? yet we still use the majority of the old legislation supposedly with its original intention & meanings intact. |
|
|
|
Post by Administrator on Aug 9, 2017 15:48:06 GMT
Hmmm... i am looking for the West Yorkshire Police N.I.P. scan i did for 0133050492384720 from 13th July 2017 but i cannot find it. im certain i sent it back to them, signed. I have 2 duplicate versions of 0133050487736520 from 02 July 2017, each with a different PIN number and title.. one to me the other to the petition. Im certain i had scanned 3 different documents.. I have a letter from the West Yorkshire police ticket office just arrived today.. so i guess i will have to read it and see what it says.. But there were 2 different log-ins for 0133050487736520 and one had the calibration certificate the other didnt. I have sent full notices and documents to both the CPS and police for both West Yorkshire incidents, the A19 North Yorkshire one and the Finnegan seatbelt fine complaint as well. |
|
|
|
Post by Administrator on Aug 15, 2017 23:14:49 GMT
Please note i covered up the sheet of of paper i was holding as it had my details on it. i have uploaded this video seperately again for the police, set to private settings. North Yorkshire Police Questioning over National Speed Limit Enforcement 14th August 2017 A19 Crathorne. Plus evidence from Royal mail. I challenge North Yorkshire Police YJ15 HDO on back lane bridge Crathorne over A19 at 12.25 14th August 2017. Over the 60/70mph speed limit for the van i drive, with evidence and discussion. I believe the officer has been issuing Prosecutions unlawfully and i officially citizens arrest him. He actually argues his point over commercial vehicles, then concurs its not in fact a matter of being a goods vehicle, just the weight of vehicle.. thus i am correct. This supports my interview with Lancashire police officer from the other week. youtu.be/HSpMbBJj8uAI also questioned three different Royal mail car vans later in the day 14th August and all three have vehicles limitd to 70mph which all 3 drivers state can drive at 70mph on a dual carriageway and DO. they are commercial vehicles adapted to carry goods below 7.5 tonnes weight. If it is correct thus that it goes on weight and not commercial good status then a 3.5T van, unlaiden construction under 3T is the same catergory as these royal mail vans, under 3T and adapted to carry goods but not subjected to lower speed restriction. I layed the North Yorkshire officer with my petition notice of protection, and all supporting evidence for him to withdraw prosecution against me and informed him i intend to prosecute Him and North Yorkshire police and that i have done nothing wrong and can conduct my own police and petition work and investigations. Also, note that the "Amendment of the Motor Vehicles (Wearing of seatbelts) Regulations 1993 - 10. - (2) has been inserted that "Light goods vehicle" means a motor vehicle which - (c) has a maximum laden weight not exceeding 3.5 tonnes. |
|
|
|
Post by Administrator on Aug 16, 2017 3:11:53 GMT
The National Speed Limit, restrictions legislation, vehicles under 3.5t gross weight
MPVs Multip Purpose Vehicles and Light Goods Vehicles VS Vehicles over and between 3 5T & 7 5T
|
|
|
|
Post by Administrator on Aug 18, 2017 21:58:00 GMT
80mph accuracy test Humberside police YX59 CPV M180 Scunthorpe 10.22am & 10.58am 18th August 2017 driving vehicle YH14 ZPM
I was driving on route to Scunthorpe today at approx 10:22am Eastbound, just before the M181 exit. I was driving on the inside lane nice and steady very little traffic, after calling at the services for a coffee. I was surprised to see Humberside police vehicle YX59 CPV parked on the Police observation platform performing enforcement. I immediately looked down at my speedometer which was at a near perfect 80mph, if not very slightly under at 79mph or 79.5mph. I am was driving the white rental van from the Vw van centre at Cleckheaton REG:YH14 ZPM which is the same type and model van that i drive. But does not have a speed limiter fitted to YH14 ZPM. My recent accurate tests have shown with great accuracy that the speedometers in these vans are exactly 2.6mph Lower speed than that shown by the speedometer. So with this information, my speed at a displayed 80mph would be 77.4mph which is below the Crown Prosecution service published speed to trigger an N.I.P. being issued on a 70mph motorway in this vehicle. As soon as i saw the Huberside police vehicle I invoked my right to conduct work for my own police investigations under my own direction and for my petition campaign evidence and this was a perfect opportunity to obtain more evidence, thus i began recording to document the events and comment.
I did my delivery in Scunthorpe and approx 15 to 20 mins later i drove in the opposite direction Westbound on the M180 past the Humberside police vehicle YX59 CPV on the other side of the motorway and just after i passed it i managed to get the vehicle up to 80mph exactly and not over for a short time until i was out of immediate middle range of the device, that i am famiiar with use of myself. I not an uploading the video and submitting it to Humberside police and to my own body of police work and petition work. I do not know what the recorded speed of the police device is yet, or if they intend to issue an N.I.P. yet. I am Currently contesting an N.I.P. and in process of obtaining a police video from North Yorkshire police from the A19 where i am contesting that the speed limit for the vehicle i drive is 70mph on a dual carriageway, not 60mph as the police claim, because the vehicle i drive is a multi-purpose vehicle under the unlaiden weight on 3tonnes and is insured for use as a multi purpose vehicle for pleasure and domestic vehicle as transport and leisure as well as a delivery vehicle.
I have been testing and document police enforcement cameras for my website petition evidence and police work as i intend it to be used for a legal case, thus my reason is legitimate.
|
|
|
|
Post by Administrator on Aug 18, 2017 22:07:49 GMT
Completely fraudulent congestion
40mph variable motorway limit
M62 Juncts 28 to 25 Westbound 15:59pm Friday 18th August
The circumstances and road traffic cannot comply with any true order for use in "Congestion" and has in fact "Created" it.
This is evidence that all previous traffic signal traffic has also been "Controlled" to delay traffic rather than have it run smoothy.
The speed limit increased after a reduction before i even got to the junction that was purported to be congested!
And some of the Speed signs over the lanes have not been lit up to show the speed limit in that lane. The signs are not visible from certain angles and distances and do not record clearly on video for evidence
|
|
|
|
Post by Administrator on Aug 19, 2017 6:31:35 GMT
|
|
