A BOURNEMOUTH driver successfully challenged two speed camera fines because of the poor quality of the images.

James Woolford, from Milton Road, is now urging other motorists to check the evidence against them in speed camera cases.

The 30-year-old land buyer received three notices of intended prosecution (NIPs) from the notorious speed camera on Holes Bay Road, Poole.

Unsure if he was responsible for all the alleged offences, James was advised to take the matter through the courts.

When the images captured by the camera were produced at Weymouth magistrates, they were so inconclusive the prosecution dropped two of the three charges.

“They were so blurred you couldn’t even see the numberplate, let alone read it,” he said.

“You certainly couldn’t see who the driver was.”

James was happy to admit the other offence as the numberplate could just be made out in the photo.

But he said people should contest the fines, rather than be pushed down the route of admitting guilt based on potentially flimsy evidence.

“The whole thrust of the speed camera system is to make people take the points and the conviction,” he said.

“I felt I was the one who had to prove my innocence when the law says you have to be proven guilty.”

Ian Belchamber, from campaign website Dorset Speed, said James’s case could open the floodgates for similar claims.

“Hundreds, possibly thousands, of drivers may have received NIPs who should not have and some may have lost their licences as a result,” he said.

The Crown Prosecution Service said the two disputed cases should not have been dropped.

Instead, enhanced photographs should have been requested in which “the registration number would have been clear”.

A CPS spokesman said: “The Central Ticket Office, Traffic Prosecutions Unit and the CPS work closely to ensure people are only prosecuted when there is strong evidence to support the case.

“In this case, as a result of a misunderstanding, two summonses have been dismissed which could have resulted in a conviction.”