Thankyou for your patience.
It took a while to find this as Iknew there was case law on it.
It isn't particularly good news I'mafraid and I find these pointless speed cameras annoying too.
Thebad news is that in relation to speeding offences this has been considered in acase called Clarke and the Crown Prosecution Service. That was in 2013 andalthough it is apparently an open source citation I can't find it onlineanywhere. I have tried to attach it to this answer so that may help.
In any event, a summary of Clarke isthat the officer had not followed manufacturers guidance nor the ACPOinstruction in relation to calibration and the defence argued that the devicecould not be relied upon. The High Court held that the manufacturer ad ACPOguidance reflected best practise but were not mandatory procedures.
That is not to say that the absence ofcalibration cannot be relied upon but of itself it does not invalidate thefindings unless there is some other reason to believe that the device is notoperating correctly.
That said, one thing you could do isthis. The police do not generally have much awareness of this case. Before 2010roughly it is fair to say that they used to drop cases if the device was notcalibrated. You could always write to them pointing out that the device is notcalibrated properly and therefore may be considered unreliable. You may belucky and they may just take no further action.
I'm very sorry because I know thatthat is bad news and it is a shame when points like this are lost to thedefence because people appeal them in circumstances where they could never havewon.
Can I clarify anything for you?