Safe Speed Forums

The campaign for genuine road safety
It is currently Sun Sep 15, 2019 15:00

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 2 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Fri Oct 07, 2011 15:19 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 02:17
Posts: 7355
Location: Highlands
This is Surrey Today (Leatherhead Advertiser)here
This is Surrey Today wrote:
Fewer speeding drivers caught in Leatherhead

Friday, October 07, 2011
Profile image for Leatherhead Advertiser

A SPEED camera is catching fewer motorists every year – but countless drivers still break the limit, the Advertiser can reveal.
Figures obtained using the Freedom of Information Act show the camera on the A24 at Mickleham issued fines to almost 3,000 speeding drivers in 2006, compared to just 459 last year.

Surrey County Council said the fact that fewer motorists are being caught speeding is "encouraging", but the Advertiser took its own speed recorder to the road and found the 50mph limit being broken almost twice every minute.
Using a portable speed recorder, we found 116 drivers in one hour were breaking the limit by 5mph or more – just 200 yards on from the camera.

Mole Valley MP Sir Paul Beresford said: "It does worry me that there are people doing it, but we are aware that people come round those bends and slow down and then speed up again.
"We have always had trouble with speeding on the A24. The limit has been set at 50mph for a reason and to go any faster is silly.
"The fact remains that the numbers of bad accidents on these bends has dropped dramatically over the last few years."

Karen Edwards, of London Road, Westhumble, said: "I'm not overly concerned whether there is a speed camera or not.
"People speed up and slow down all the time so a camera won't make any difference. What does need to be sorted out is the idiotic motorcyclists who use that stretch of road like it is a race track."

Of the 116 motorists caught speeding by the Advertiser, 57 were driving more than 10mph over the limit and one was driving at 81mph.

Adrian Creek, of the Surrey Safety Camera Partnership, said: "Part of the reason we sometimes have mobile enforcement just around the corner is to stop this.
"Drivers who speed up after the fixed camera on Mickleham bends always face the risk of being caught by one of our mobile units.
"A quick snapshot might show people are continuing to speed, but overall trends over a number of years through our speed surveys show that average speeds have fallen quite sharply since the camera was first installed.
"This is backed up by the fall in casualties and the number of tickets issued."

Speaking about the reduction in the number of fines issued, Surrey County Council road safety team manager Duncan Knox said: "The encouraging thing for us is that this data shows that the cameras are clearly doing the job they are put there to do – acting as a deterrent to speeding drivers."
As I recall there are many varying speeds on the A24 with many types of environments too. I'd question some of the speed limits if many are especially over the limit in a certain stretch ... But what of education and guidance to do the right thing, and what of Councils needlessly setting speed limits lower to the average mean than the 85th % ile?
... Or are people missing hazard areas and if so why ?

_________________
Safe Speed for Intelligent Road Safety through proper research, experience & guidance.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Oct 07, 2011 16:24 
Offline
User
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2011 11:07
Posts: 248
I travel this stretch of road a few times a week. I have previously referred to police and sacamera vans waiting on the corner and this was one if those situations that I think are dangerous.

A blanket speed limit is inappropriate for this stretch of road as is blanket enforcement of it, in my opinion. It doesn't surprise me that people break the limit along there. I think you have hit the nail on the head, Claire. It is not the speed that is a problem but people's inappropriate use of it or failure to appreciate the effects of conditions. The only accident I have witnessed along there was past the corner and the bend the police wait on where a car had failed to take the next bend and ended up in a field. This was in the wet. I think that speaks volumes. However I do not think that those breaking the limits are automatically dangerous. I won't say how fast I go round there but if you know the hazards then 50 on a dry, clear day is artifically low. Yet again the authorities seem to believe none of us can drive or judge a road for ourselves. I have nearly been caught out by the police there before but always managed to slow in time. The advantage is I know they wait there so always prepare to slow if necessary. If not, I continue on my way just as safely and sensibly as I was before.

I wish the Advertiser had not conducted their own checks. I would have been happy for the authorities to believe the camera had a real impact, eventually leading to it being decommissioned as it became less and less finaicially viable to have one there. This will presumably force the local police to step up their efforts to harrass ordinary, safe motorists. :headbash:


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 2 posts ] 

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 15 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
[ Time : 0.315s | 15 Queries | GZIP : Off ]