You're a lot more tolerant of speed cameras than I am, then! Pulled by an actual policeman for riding/driving too fast, without due care etc, and I won't complain. Caught at 62 in a 50, late summer evening on an broad empty road in the middle of nowhere, while the unroadworthy, the uninsured, the untaxed, the drunk and the incompetent get away with it, and I felt a bit sore. Never mind, that's a whole new argument!
I can't imagine that it's easy to prosecute someone by linking one image with another, as you describe. The single image with reg plate and recorded speed is pretty conclusive (as long as the machine is correctly calibrated, of course), but how they get away with saying, in effect, here is a picture of a speeding bike with no identifying marks, and here is another picture of a bike's number plate, and we are asking you to believe that they are the same bike, is a bit of a mystery. I would have thought any decent brief could blow holes in that one. Maybe not - in my experience, the courts believe what they want to believe, and the word of the operator is good enough for them.
I wasn't sure about the 14 day thing - whether you had to receive it in 14 days, or whether they had to post it within 14 days. Thanks for clearing up the detail. Anyway, it looks as though natural justice has prevailed, and I can applaud that
