Safe Speed Forums

The driver who faces a £60 speeding fine...for failing to measure the gaps between lampposts
by CHRIS BROOKE

Last updated at 20:18pm on 7th June 2007
A motorist has been given a £60 speeding ticket for failing to spot the distance between roadside lampposts.

Ian Thomas, 44, was caught on camera travelling at 40mph in a 30mph zone but he says there was no 30mph sign.

The previous signs he saw all showed a limit of 40mph.

However, under a little-known section of the motoring laws, a road is classified as having a 30mph limit if there are no other speed signs and the street lights are no more than 200 yards apart.

Mr Thomas, from Oldham, has now appealed and the case will be decided by magistrates.

He said: "It's crazy. How am I supposed to judge the distance between lampposts and drive safely on the road?

"It is totally misleading to motorists. I'm not disputing that I was doing 40mph, it just seems totally unfair."

Mr Thomas, who runs a window cleaning business, was driving his wife Susan, 37, daughter Millie, 20 months, and his mother-in-law home from a shopping trip in his Jaguar when he fell foul of a speed camera on the single- carriageway A629 near Rotherham town centre.

He said: "I saw the camera flash but at the time I could not understand why as I was doing exactly 40mph and had seen several signs further up the road saying there was a 40mph limit.

"I didn't think any more of it until I got a letter a few days later from South Yorkshire Police saying I was being fined £60.

"I was incensed. As far as I was concerned I hadn't done anything wrong. If there had been any 30mph signs I would have slowed down."

His only previous speeding case came from travelling at 33mph in a 30mph zone in North Wales in September last year.

He said: "I went on a speed awareness course following that and was taught how to keep my eyes on the road.

"It didn't include counting the distance between lampposts.

"What are drivers expected to do? If they are checking on lampposts they are not driving with due care and attention.

"How many motorists have just taken it on the chin and paid up for triggering a camera on this road?

"I can't afford to get any points on my licence.

"I run three vehicles with the business and the insurance would go through the roof.

"This needs bringing to the public's attention. "I doubt that many people have even heard of this obscure ruling."

Mr Thomas appeared this week at Rotherham Magistrates' Court but the case was adjourned after he denied speeding on a restricted road on November 4 last year.

Prosecutor Roger Tricklebank said the speeding prosecution was being brought by "virtue of a system of street lamps no more than 200 yards apart".

A Department of Transport spokesman confirmed the lamppost legislation exists in Section 82 of the Road Traffic Regulations Act 1984.

The actual words are "street lighting furnished by means of lamps placed not more than 200 yards apart".

He said: "Essentially where you pass from an area where there is a defined speed limit to a 30mph limit there should be a sign at the start of the restricted area.

"After that there tend not to be repeater signs but a motorist is able to judge whether it is 30 mph or not by looking at the distance between the lampposts.

"It is more of a visual thing and is born from driving experience."

Hugh Bladon, from the Association of British Drivers pressure group, said that using lampposts as an indicator of speed was unfair in today's era of widespread speed cameras.

"That's the law and ignorance of it is no excuse in the courts," he said.

"But my feeling is local authorities should make sure people know the speed limit.

"Limits change so much these days.

"If you put up a camera there should also be a sign to tell motorists the speed limit."

• The Highway Code states that "street lights usually mean there is a 30mph speed limit unless there are signs showing another limit".

There is no reference to a 200-yard distance between them.

It sounds as though there were no terminal signs?

In which case that would be a valid defence - it sounds as though he could do with a knowledgeable lawyer.

Umm, the streetlights rule is a very well established principle of speed limit signing. I don't know the location in question so can't comment on specifics. If there were no terminal signs, then the limit is unenforceable by virtue of that. But if there were, then the presence of street lighting denotes a 30 mph limit as it does on tens of thousands of miles of road across the country, and this is not a credible excuse.