Safe Speed Forums

Or so said the leaflet that accompanied the NIP that landed on my mat last year. I agreed, but my wife was tired, on her own, had driven a four hour journey (with breaks), was stressed and had just missed her junction on an unfamiliar section of motorway and so was doing 50mph through roadworks (40 mph limit). First offence after nearly 20 years of driving.
Paid up £60 - told insurance company - forgot about it.
Then another one turns up.
It's me this time. I know what it's about, I'd been expecting it. I remembered seeing the van as I went past, "But that's OK", I had thought, "because it's national speed limit here". Except as I went past the next set of NSL "repeater" signs, I saw 30 mph speed limit signs in my rear view mirror. What? How did that happen? Where were the signs I missed. I backtracked about 1/2 mile, there they were. One sign partially obscured by a bush, the other twisted right round, so that it displayed a NSL sign on it.
So the NIP had dropped through the door as sure as eggs is eggs. 37 mph in a 30 mph limit. "That can't be right", I thought, "I'm not accepting that..."
So I checked the internet for the law on this. Sure, there it is, plain as day, traffic signs regulations and general directions, 2002, must have a sign on each side of the road. Send off 'Not guilty" plea.
More digging. Road traffic regulation act, 1984. Signs must be installed and maintained by local authorities or secretary of state. So far so good.

Then the killer blow. Street lamps. Less than 200 yards apart. But surely, if the signs aren't right, then they can't convict you still, can they? I mean, after all, if there are street lamps less than 200 yards apart with repeater signs on them, and the repeater signs suddenly disappear, the speed limit doesn't automatically revert to 30 mph, does it?
Surely not? And if the local authority has broken the law (part of the speed camera partnership), then that same authority can't have a hand in convicting you for an offence committed only because they broke the law in the first place. Can they?

Yesterday, the answer came. Yes it does. Yes they can. £150 fine + costs + 3 points. Second person in the family to lose a near 20 year unblemished record within a year.
The reason the magistrates gave? I should have just known it was a 30 mph speed limit because of street lamps and houses that I had passed before the location of the camera.

Well, I would have known it was a 30, if there were repeater signs (Not allowed by law), or a flashing sign displaying the limit in case of going too fast, or even if the entry signs were adequate in the first place.

So, nothing to fear if you obey the speed limit? Not true. So an appeal to them.
I do at least try to stick to the limit, but could you please, please, please tell me what the speed limits are? Because by not doing so, you have converted someone who strongly believed that speed cameras were about promoting road safety to someone who now knows that they are revenue generators. And as a result of the trial, I know how they get their money out of the supposedly "cash neutral" system. But that's for another day.

I'm sorry to hear you have fallen victim to an obvious revenue gathering trap. I assure you that the Scamera operators are well aware of the ambiguity of the speed limit on that road, and that's why they chose to patrol there.

They don't give a stuff whether you stick to the speed limits or not. In fact, they'd rather you didn't. They want your money and they want you off the road. If enough people are banned, there will be less cars, hence less accidents and it will appear that speed cameras are working as a safety device, justifying more cameras - the scam self-perpetuates.

Not sure whether it applies in your case, but this might be worth a read:
http://www.abd.org.uk/30_action.htm

The most surprising and horrific thing is the Magistrate's comment about houses. There is NO mention in Law of the presence of houses beside a road having any bearing on speed limits. The Magistrates have given potentially dangerous instruction here - can you imagine the chaos if people were to suddenly start hitting the brakes every time they spot a building by the side of an NSL road?

_________________
“For every complex problem, there is a solution that is simple, neat, and wrong.” - H. L. Mencken

Unless you happen to be one of the road accident victims that result from the failed road safety policy.
or

#Your plate has been cloned
#The Speed limit signs are in the wrong place
#The speed camera laser picks up a reflection
#Any one of a dozen other procedural violations the SCPS get up to in order to get a conviction.

_________________
Speed camera policy Kills

Thanks for your comments. To be fair I may have misquoted the magistrate slightly, I believe the actual comments were something like "There were signs ... that it was a built-up area" I took the signs comment to mean signs other than speed limit or other road traffic signs, so I understood this as meaning housing. I made it absolutely clear in my evidence, and it was not disputed that there were no other speed limit signs, so I can only assume that is what he meant (unless he wasn't listening at that point).

Teepee, perhaps the only good thing about this story is that it's finaly prompted me to send some money off for a Safe Speed membership!

You have my sympathy. I am completly sick of artificially reduced and unclear speed limits being exploited just to drive people off the road.

I wish I could think of something more constructive to say at this point, apart from aaarrghghghg!!

Actually you do have something to fear if you stick to the speed limit.
Rigidly sticking to the speed limit means you are more likely to be pulled for suspected drug or drink driving.
You can't win either way. Stick to the speed limit you also have a line of frustrated motorists behind you. But break the speed limit at any time and according to the SCPs you are a dangerous criminal!!
Heads they win tails you lose!!!!

Mark

_________________
Mark

There speaks the voice of experience. But with a currently clean licence (though you never know what's in the post these days ) my biggest worry about rigid adherence to the speed limit is the extra attention I have to pay to the speedo at the expense of what's going on around me. I had it with the M1 SPECS recently, and unfortunately didn't have cruise control in that car. I'm quite sure I was watching the road less than usual as a result.

_________________
Make everything as simple as possible, but not simpler - Einstein

You may want to check with the Council as to whether or not the traffic order for the desrestriction is valid. They may have made a common mistake in assuming that they can just switch back to restrictive status because of the lamposts, there are many other mitigating factors involved. I understnad that they cannot just do this because of the lamposts, many local authorities have been caught out by this and continue to do so.

perphaps Paul or others may be able to elaborate on this but if you look on the ABD website, they have a whole piece on traffic signage etc.

Magistrates are not experts in traffic law and are unlikely to understand the significance of the signage.

I suggest you get over to www.pepipoo.com to discuss your options for an appeal.

Surely, in order to judge a person fairly, the magistrate has to have extensive knowledge of the traffic regulations or, an advisor who has that knowledge.

If what you say is true then justice cannot be delivered by these people

_________________
I'm not always right, but my score is higher than the government's

Think that's what the clerk of the court is for....

Sorry to hear you got nabbed - did you take photos of those signs by the way? If so - perhaps you should show the photos to the newspaper and see if they bite over this.

Sure they have to be clear and in pairs - and maintained. Having said that - got photos of obscured ones here. Letter has gone to council about it - but based on track recored all will happen!

_________________
If you want to get to heaven - you have to raise a little hell!

Smilies are contagious
They are just like the flu
We use our smilies on YOU today
Now Good Causes are smiling too!

KEEP SMILING
It makes folk wonder just what you REALLY got up to last night!

Smily to penny.. penny to pound
safespeed prospers-smiles all round! !
But the real message? SMILE.. GO ON ! DO IT! and the world will smile with you!
Enjoy life! You only have the one bite at it.

A typical magistrates' court has a 'bench' of three magistrates (these folk are 'from the community' and are not legally qualified). They are advised by the 'Clerk of the Court' who is legally qualified.

An alternative structure is to have (what used to be called) a stipendiary magistrate (or 'stipe') sitting alone. Stipes are legally qualified. Stipes are now called 'District Judges'.

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety

Thanks SafeSpeed, I was aware of the setup vis-a-vis the Clerk of the Court. My point was to the effect that, unless the 'Clerk of the Court' was well versed in traffic regulations then my original statement hold true.

While on this subject, isn't this set up a little strange when you examine it closely? As you say, the magistrates are lay persons and rely on the guidance of the COTC. So, in essence, it is this worthy who makes the judgements is it not. I guess the magistrates are just there to provide some semblance of a proper judicial procedure!

_________________
I'm not always right, but my score is higher than the government's

Yes, but they don't always seem to advise the Magistrate as well as they should (Going by cases covered on Pepipoo). This seems to be such a case.

Have you considered appealing to the next level of court, Teepee? Get over to Pepipoo and see what the prospects of success would be. From what you've said I say high - but I am not a lawyer. Ask opinion there.

I would have thought you had strong grounds for a defence here, although you do need to be very determined to keep going in the face of all the threats and bluster from the authorities.

Indeed I recall an example in my area (A538, Halebarns) where someone had a speeding conviction overturned because of deficient 30 mph signs.

Obviously there has to be a sense of proportion, and it wouldn't be reasonable to expect to get off a speeding charge in central Manchester because a 30 mph sign was missing in Cheadle, but if you were caught within a mile or so of the obscured signs, especially if the road isn't heavily built-up, then I would say you have a very strong case.

As others have said, get over to Pepipoo.

_________________
"Show me someone who says that they have never exceeded a speed limit, and I'll show you a liar, or a menace." (Austin Williams - Director, Transport Research Group)

Any views expressed in this post are personal opinions and may not represent the views of Safe Speed

It is even a case of "the wrong type of lamp post" foot path lamp posts that are put up by the parish council don't actually make a 30 limit valid..... they have to be county council proper highway lamposts ...
and there has to be a valid speed limit in place

yeah right.

time after time im driving through the camera zone at 28 mph and i get very very very slowly overtaken by the nutter doing 33 mph.

really safe huh?

Here yer go:


"Some local authorities have made a different error when lowering the speed limit to 30mph on a road with street lights. Instead of using the section of the Act that enables restricted road status to be restored, they have introduced a 30mph speed limit by using the section of the 1984 RT Act that is normally reserved for imposing a different speed limit, e.g. 40mph or 50mph. This error does not itself make a 30mph speed limit illegal, but the local authorities concerned have usually failed to realise that TSRGD specified different requirements for signing a speed limit in those circumstances".

Hi Teepee.

Exactly the same thing happened to me in Carrbridge south of Inverness quite a few years ago. never been there before - stopped off to visit the local shop. Headed out the village towards 'ness. the road turns round a left hand bend and heads across heathland - dead straight.T

There's one-or two houses if I recall correctly but they are well back from the road and very widely spaced.

I had driven up from Nottingham through the day and it was about 9PM on a clear Sunday evening. I mistook the stretch for NSL and got caught by 2 policemen hiding in the bushes.

Yes, there were lamp posts on the stretch - it was a 30 limit but looked like a 60 (how many 60 limits have lamp posts and missing repeater signs?).

I had a clean license and was quite surprised by this, but was courteous to the police explaining that I had mistaken the road for NSL and it was a genuine mistake but I still got a ticket and a hefty fine (£120).

I late found out of several locals and a mate who had got done a few years ago for the same thing on the same stretch that it was a regular haunt the police to put a trap on.

Surely if road safety was an issue here then a few extra signs/road markings wouldn't be amiss, but I'm maybe the Procurator Fiscal's offices needed redecorating or something. Maybe he lived in one of the houses.

Boss payed the fine and I learnt a lesson about how devious application of the law can be used to screw the public!