Safe Speed Forums

Hi all,

I've just been nipped by Bedfordshire plod for doing 38 in a 30 limit.

The NIP came as something of a surprise as I have been regularly driving through the village in question (Turvey, Beds) as long as the scameras have been there and always drive religiously below the limit.

The Gatso that got me is situated on the A428 near Jacks Lane at the Bedford end of the village. The camera faces into the village. I was travelling toward Bedford on the opposite side of the road to the camera. I did see a flash as I approached it but assumed from reading about Gatsos that it was spurious.

It is possible I was doing more than 30 as I accelerated briefly to avoid a white car that pulled out directly in front of me when I was some 50 yards from the camera. The car was too close to brake for without causing an accident. However, I doubt that I got up to 38mph as I was doing 25mph when the car pulled out.

Would this be considered 'mitigating' circumstances?

I have not completed part 2 of the NIP. I sent it back admitting I was the driver, entered my driver number and requested photographic proof of the alleged offence. Will that get me in more trouble?

Any help much appreciated to keep my 30 year driving license clean!

I'm sorry, but I don't understand the circumstances here. A car pulled out directly in front of you and you didn't brake? What did you do, accellerate onto the opposite side of the road and trip the opposing side camera?

In any event, there is practically no mitigation possible.

I suggest you try Pepipoo for more detailed assistance.

_________________
Malcolm W.
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not represent the views of Safespeed.

Thanks for the reply, I apologise for not making myself clearer.

I did pull out to pass the car that pulled out in front of me but not so far as to leave my side of the road. I didn't brake as the vehicle that pulled out did so within ten feet of my car. Had I done so I would almost certainly have hit it. In the milliseconds it took to make a decision I considered it safer to accelerate past its bonnet.
Maybe I was wrong? Had I hit it I would not have been Gatsoed. But then again I would have had an expensive repair bill. At even 5mph, modern cars do not crash well...

My other query was that I was under the impression that Gatsos (and this is DEFINITELY a gatso) photograph the REAR of a vehicle travelling away from the camera on the same side of the road. This Gatso flashed as I was travelling toward it on the OPPOSITE site of the road.

I hope that clarifies things a bit?

FWIW, there is a second Gatso at the entrance to this village. It did not flash as I was not speeding when I passed it. I maintained an indicated 25mph throughout the village until the above mentioned manoevure took me over the limit. That's what I meant about possible 'mitigating circumstances.' The Gatso that got me is intended to catch vehicles speeding INTO the village from Bedford. I was traveeling TOWARD Bedford from Northampton.

So it seems that Gatsos CAN work in BOTH directions and cover BOTH sides of a single-carriageway road. Or am I hopelessly wrong???

It's always been recognised that a Gatso can cover both lanes of a single-carriageway road (or both lanes of a dual carriageway).

However I was certainly always under the impression that Gatsos could only catch vehicles from the rear.

Might there have been a sneaky Talivan hiding somewhere?

It would be interesting to get hold of the photos to see what they show.

_________________
"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

As was I.

It's doubtful, but not impossible.

Which is what I requested when I returned the NIP today. I will keep you posted.

I would feel less aggrieved if I habitually sped through villages in excess of the speed limit. But I have been driving through this village twice a week for ten years. This time I exceeded the limit by a small margin to avoid a potential accident. So much for cameras making everyone's life safer...

Picking up on the safety element here, surely the safest move would have been to have pulled out and braked, thereby not risking him, eg, going straight across your bows, and of course also not speeding (though that is secondary).

Roger Changing the road position providing safe to do so and just easing off would have been safe enough as he says he did not enter the other side of the road and thus need to reduce "exposure to on-coming" for too long in this situation. Had there been a collision and he could prove the other car pulled into your path - then the insurers may well have held the other driver liable


Of course, he could have used COAST and assessed th potential likelihood of some muppet pulling out there.

Was it a Truvelo?

_________________
Take with a chuckle or a grain of salt
Drive without COAST and it's all your own fault!

A SMILE is a curve that sets everything straight (P Diller).

A Smiley Per post
FINES USfor our COAST!

Approach love and cooking with reckless abandon - but driving with a smile and a COAST calm mind.

Thanks IG.

I can only vaguely remember cars pulling out in front of me. It happens infrequently, and, thanks to COAST, in all cases in my memory, I was *already* over the brake or braking. This brings me to another point. I contend it is safer in a given situation where, say, 30 is the safest speed before commitment to go past a solitary hazard or anchor up for it, to be travelling faster, braking down gently to 30 at that point rather than cruising at 30 for some distance to it. Several reasons for this: First and foremost, you're ALREADY on the brake so if the need arises you've saaved vital tenths of a second in the transfer of the beetle crusher and taking up the slack of the hydraulics. Secondly, you are asserting yourself with the faster approach and are less likely to have someone try it on (this does not apply to those who don't see you, but renders a misjudgement less likely). Thirdly, you'rer actually en pris for a shorter time. Fourthly, if you get better visibility shortly before this pinch point, you're in a position soonerr to be able to power through.

All of the above has to be tempered by the regulated speed limit of course, whatever that mey be, for license-preservation. This is why I am so very definitely OUT of favour of these long stretches of 30 limit for solitary hazards. Whatever hwappened to the word SLOW in the road? That works a treat.

Yes, the devices can work in either or both directions. I don't know if they are legally allowed to work in front-facing mode though.


It stopped working when they started to put three SLOWs on the approach to every village.

_________________
Andrew.

I don't mean the post-mounted ones, I mean those actually painted in the road.

Yep, ditto. Maybe it's a Dorset thing. A lot of villages around here have 1, 2, and 3 yellow lines and the word SLOW before each of them on the way in. It is quite ugly and un-necessary.

_________________
Andrew.