When a Notice of Intended Prosecution for speeding arrives in the post, the case against you can feel insurmountable. In an age of digital cameras and laser technology, drivers often assume that the evidence is flawless and that there is no choice but to accept the penalty. This can be a significant misstep. Every piece of evidence the prosecution relies upon, whether it is a photo from a camera, a reading from a laser gun, or even the opinion of a police officer, is subject to strict legal and procedural rules.

An allegation is not the same as a conviction. The prosecution has the burden of proving its case beyond a reasonable doubt, and their evidence is not always as robust as it appears. At Motoring Defence, our expert speeding offence solicitors know that the key to a successful defence often lies in a forensic examination of the evidence itself. This guide will break down the main types of evidence used in speeding cases and explore the ways they can be effectively challenged.

Part 1: Challenging the Paperwork – The Notice of Intended Prosecution (NIP)

Before the prosecution can even get to the evidence of the alleged offence, they must first clear a critical procedural hurdle: the Notice of Intended Prosecution (NIP). This is the formal letter that informs the registered keeper of a vehicle that a prosecution is being considered.

The Legal Challenge:

The law surrounding the NIP is strict. For it to be valid, it must be served on the registered keeper of the vehicle within 14 days of the date of the offence. If it arrives on day 15, the prosecution cannot proceed. Furthermore, the NIP must be correctly filled out, with accurate details of the nature, date, time, and location of the alleged offence. While minor typographical errors may not invalidate it, significant mistakes can render the notice defective. A successful challenge to the validity of the NIP is a complete defence and can stop a case in its tracks, which is why it's the first thing skilled speeding offence solicitors will investigate.

Part 2: Challenging the Machine – Speed Detection Technology

The majority of speeding cases today rely on evidence from technology. However, these devices are not infallible. They must be approved by the Home Office, properly maintained, and operated correctly by trained personnel.

The Legal Challenge:

An expert solicitor knows how to question the reliability of these machines.

• Fixed GATSO Cameras:These cameras use radar to detect speed and take two photos to create a secondary check based on distance travelled over time (evidenced by the white lines painted on the road). A defence can involve requesting the device's calibration certificate to ensure it was tested and working accurately. If the secondary check lines on the road are faded or obscured, this can also form the basis of a strong challenge.
• Mobile Laser Guns (e.g., LTI 20/20):These are operated by police at the roadside. Their accuracy can be affected by a number of factors. A defence strategy can involve questioning the officer's training records, the weather conditions at the time (rain or fog can affect the laser beam), and whether the device was held steady on a tripod or if it was handheld, which can cause a "slip effect" where the laser beam moves along the side of the vehicle, producing an artificially high reading.

Challenging the evidence from a machine requires a technical understanding of how it works and the procedures that govern its use—something only specialist speeding offence solicitors possess.

Part 3: Challenging the Human Element – The Police Officer's Opinion

In some cases, particularly on motorways, the primary evidence may come from a police officer's own observation, often backed up by a "follow check" where they tail a vehicle for a set distance to gauge its speed using their own calibrated speedometer.

The Legal Challenge:

Unlike a machine, a human's opinion is subjective and can be challenged effectively in court. A skilled advocate will cross-examine the officer on the specifics of their observation:

• For how long did they follow the vehicle? A check over two miles is more reliable than one over a few hundred yards.
• Was their police vehicle's speedometer recently and correctly calibrated? Evidence of this must be provided.
• What were the traffic conditions? In heavy traffic, it can be difficult to maintain a constant distance from a target vehicle.
• Was their view ever obstructed?

By questioning the reliability of the officer's opinion and the accuracy of their methods, a solicitor can create the "reasonable doubt" needed to secure an acquittal.

The evidence against you may seem conclusive, but it is always worth a closer look. The team of expert speeding offence solicitors at Motoring Defence specialises in this forensic approach. We don't just take the prosecution's case at face value; we test it, we probe it, and we challenge it at every turn to protect your licence. If you have received a speeding allegation, contact us before you respond, and let us examine the evidence for you.