caught speeding but no camera signs on the road

[therotweiller]

I have been caught speeding 35 mpg on a 30 road but there are no signs warning of a speed camera. I was a fair distance away when I saw the van but too late as he clocked me. Could I get off on the fact that there are no signs warning of a camera. Is there any other way besides taking the speed awareness of getting away with it.

[crem]

I don't believe there is a necessity to have advance camera signs to operate the the speed van so don't think that will negate the ticket if issued.

 

Have you actually received a ticket yet or are you just assuming you will get one? If you've got the ticket already then I think the speed awareness course will be your only option if they offer it.

[citizenkain]

if you were doing 35mph in a 30 mph zone,they dont neccessarily do you for speeding,they can give you a warning,know a few folk that got that,have you received something through the post?

[Aretnap]

There's no requirement for speed camera signs.

[Tony P]

There is a 'reverse' requirement that IF speed camera signs are to be shown they must only be within a certain distance of fixed cameras or frequently used mobile camera sites.

 

This is to stop signs being posted 'willy-nilly' as a possible blanket deterrent.

[therotweiller]

I have only got the letter asking was it ee driving at the moment. As soon as I send it off I know I,ll then get a ticket or speed awareness. Unless anybody else can advise anything.

[sgtbush]

you have had a NIP then, 35 in a 30 would normally come with a speed awareness course as an alternitive, but this is dependent on which area your in, as long as you havent been offered a course in the past 3 years i think it is

most areas would offer a course at your speed, just take it on the chin, pay for the course, its not the crime of the millenium is it!!,

[therotweiller]

I live in the TS6 area (Middlesbrough) and never had any speeding offences in over ten years. Would it make a difference if I sent a letter of apology begging and pleading or is there a percentage I would get away with.

[Aretnap]

Very little discretion is applied to camera detected offences - they work pretty much by the numbers. Up to 34mph = no action, 35-42 = speed awareness course (if you haven't already done one), 43-49 = fixed penalty (3 points and £60), 50+ = court appearance and possible ban. There's not much you can say, short of a proveable medical emergency, which will change that outcome.

 

(Obviously don't be tempted to invent a medical emergency if there wasn't one, as that sort of thing can land you in very serious trouble indeed.)

[therotweiller]

The only other thing I can say in my defense is that the speed needle kept dropping to zero every now and again. I took it to the garage and they told me that I need a new speedo. But since then I have sold the car as it had 65,500 miles on it and needed a lot of things like 2 new tyres, brake pads and shoes, exhaust etc and so that's why I didn't get it fixed.

[Aretnap]

Speeding is a strict liability offence so the fact that you didn't realise you were speeding is no defence, and driving without a working speedometer is an offence in its own right, so it's not even very good mitigation.

[crem]

Trying to claim you'd like them to let you off 1 offence (speeding) because you were committing another offence (Driving an unfit vehicle) at the time isn't going to be a good defence!!

 

As Aretnap says, speeding is black and white; either you were over the limit or you weren't, there is very little mitigation that would be accepted for this offence. Take the course, or take the points, I don't think either will be disasterous to your driving career (or insurance) on this occasion.

[Annie71]

It does vary from area to area. Years ago I got done and was told anything over 35 would have been 3 points no ifs or buts

[therotweiller]

Well Thanks everyone. Looks like points or awareness. I will let you know

[Aretnap]

It does vary from area to area. Years ago I got done and was told anything over 35 would have been 3 points no ifs or buts

Years ago there were no speed awareness courses, or if there were their availability was patchy and the criteria on which they were offered were inconsistent. Nowadays all areas except Scotland have them, and all of those except (off the top of my head) Wiltshire and Dorset are in the national scheme so have consistent criteria.

[Trurider]

There are strict rules about the use of speed camera's and siting is one of them - they can't hide. They must also have a straight line of sight. I stopped at one I saw which was sited just after a 90 degree bend. I told them off and reported them. No One was caught that day. Another one I stopped was on a road leading to an Army base, which was still Army land. This was a police trap and I pointed out to them they were not Military Police. Again No One got done that day either. Another time I was caught doing 50 in a 30 zone BUT I pointed out to the Council that they had reduced the speed limit for bridge works and that these works had been ongoing for 3 years and the law only gave them 6 months without the permission of the Home Secretary. Guess what... No permit. No fine.

 

Rules are rules, THEY have to obey them otherwise the ticket is worthless.

[Aretnap]

Can you point out the law which prevents them from hiding - or sets out any of those other strict rules?

 

Didn't think so.

[Trurider]

Yes, I can - the rules are VERY strict and set out in detail. Try looking them up. They are all set out in Statute Law.

Government Guidelines For Placement of Speed Cameras

 

Where can the police, councils and camera partnerships place speed cameras? The government have a set of guidelines that authorities must adhere to when considering the location for a new camera.

 

There is a slightly different criteria for fixed, mobile, and digital sites. Further rules govern visibility and signing - see the column on the left of this page for details.

 

Criteria for fixed site cameras (e.g. GATSO)

 

Criteria Details

1. Site length Between 400 & 1500 meters

2. Number of fatal & serious collisions At least 4 per Km in last 3 calendar years (not per annum)

3. Number of personal injury collisions 8 per Km in last 3 years

4. Causation factors Collisions where causation factors are not speed related must not be included

5. 85th percentile speed at or approaching collision hot spot 85th percentile speed at or above ACPO guidance (10% plus 2mph) for free flowing traffic (excluding rush hour). Partnerships must have a strategy to move thresholds to the ACPO guidance level by April 2005

6. Percentage over the speed limit At least 20% of drivers are exceeding the speed limit, excluding congestion period

7. Site conditions suitable for type of enforcement Loading and unloading the camera can take place safely

8. Distribution of collisions Collisions are clustered close together around a single stretch of road or junction

9. No other engineering solution is appropriate There has been a site survey by a road safety engineer and there are no other obvious practical measure to improve road safety along this stretch of road.

10. Camera visibility Enforcement cameras are well signed and highly visible in line with DfT guidelines

Criteria for digital enforcement sites:

 

Criteria Details

1. Site length Between 3000 and 10,000 metres

2. Number of fatal & serious collisions At least 5 per Km in last three calendar years along a minimum 3 Km stretch of road (not per annum). At least 4 in previous three calendar years in each subsequent Km (not per annum).

3. Number of personal injury collisions At least 10 PIA per km in last three calendar years (min 3km). At least 8 PIA in previous 3 calendar years in each subsequent km.

4. Causation factors Collisions where causation factors are not speed related must not be included

5. 85th percentile speed at or approaching collision hot spot 85th percentile speed at or above ACPO guidance (10% plus 2mph) for free flowing traffic (excluding rush hour). Partnerships must have a strategy to move thresholds to the ACPO guidance level by April 2005

6. Percentage over the speed limit At least 20% of drivers are exceeding the speed limit, excluding congestion period

7. Site conditions suitable for type of enforcement Location for mobile enforcement is easily accessible, there is space for enforcement to take place in a visible and safe manner

8. Distribution of collisions Accidents are more likely to be evenly distributed along a route

9. No other engineering solution is appropriate There has been a site survey by a road safety engineer and there are no other obvious practical measure to improve road safety along this stretch of road.

10. Camera visibility Enforcement cameras are well signed and highly visible in line with DfT guidelines

Criteria for mobile enforcement sites:

 

Criteria Details

1. Site length Between 400 and 3000 metres (can be linked into a longer route strategy if more than three stretches satisfy the criteria)

2. Number of fatal & serious collisions At least 2 per Km in last three calendar years (not per annum)

3. Number of personal injury collisions At least 4 per Km in last three calendar years

4. Causation factors Collisions where causation factors are not speed related must not be included

5. 85th percentile speed at or approaching collision hot spot 85th percentile speed at or above ACPO guidance (10% plus 2mph) for free flowing traffic (excluding rush hour). Partnerships must have a strategy to move thresholds to the ACPO guidance level by April 2005

6. Percentage over the speed limit At least 20% of drivers are exceeding the speed limit, excluding congestion period

7. Site conditions suitable for type of enforcement Loading and unloading the camera can take place safely

8. Distribution of collisions High density of accidents distributed evenly along a stretch of road

9. No other engineering solution is appropriate There has been a site survey by a road safety engineer and there are no other obvious practical measure to improve road safety along this stretch of road.

10. Camera visibility Enforcement cameras are well signed and highly visible in line with DfT guidelines

For a technical argument of why criteria 5 (the 85th percentile) achieves the opposite of the desired effect see this page at Safespeed.org.

 

The Department of Transport have published a speed camera evaluation document which contains (from page 31) the full guidelines on the placement of cameras.

 

However, since these are only guidelines and not laws the Department for Transport has said the rules "do not preclude cameras being placed at sites that do not meet the guidelines if they contribute to the overall strategy aimed at reducing road accident casualties." The DfT document referenced above states "Some discretion is allowed to enforce at sites where there is genuine public concern about speeding and also at roadworks."

 

So it seems that local authorities can place cameras wherever they please. The penalties for breaking government guidelines are unknown and it's doubtful that any action can lawfully be taken against authorities who choose to ignore

 

I have long ago moved beyond the 'prove it' generation.

 

If you don't know then - don't comment.

[Aretnap]

That has nothing to do with statute law. Moreover it's years out of date, and was fairly meaningless when it was current. Once upon a time speed camera partnerships were funded by the netting off arrangement, where they kept money from the fixed penalties they generated. To benefit from the arrangement they were supposed to follow certain guidelines about placement and visibility of cameras. Even then failure to follow the guidelines never meant that drivers could not be prosecuted, it just meant that the partnership was (in theory) not eligible for certain types of funding. But in any event the netting off scheme was scrapped in 2007, and the guidelines went with it. They were replaced with some less specific guidelines from the DfT which note clearly (page 8) "This camera signing, visibility and conspicuity guidance has no bearing on the enforcement of offences. Non-compliance with this guidance does not provide any mitigation of, or defence for, an alleged offence under current UK law". Of course it wouldn't - it's just some departmental guidelines, not the law.

 

Unfortunately, the internet being what it is, the old guidlines are still presented as current on various websites which haven't been updated for six years. Though in fairness at least the website you cut and pasted that from did say "So it seems that local authorities can place cameras wherever they please. The penalties for breaking government guidelines are unknown and it's doubtful that any action can lawfully be taken against authorities who choose to ignore". You seem to have failed to notice that bit.

[Trurider]

First of all this website exists for people to ask real questions and get real answers - it is not a place for personal and unfounded opinions.

 

Second - English Law does not change from day to day - we have laws that are hundreds of years old and still totally relevant.

 

Third - English Law is based on Precedent (prior decisions) and one of those is that the authorities have to obey the rules and any breach of those rules invalidates their actions (fines).

 

Unless you hold legal qualifications, I do. Please don't espouse your opinions.

[Annie71]

Guidelines by their very definition are not law. Even OFT guidelines are just that although serious and repeated non compliance may lead to loss of your CCL

[Aretnap]

First of all this website exists for people to ask real questions and get real answers - it is not a place for personal and unfounded opinions.

Exactly, which is why I'm challenging your unfounded opinions.

 

Second - English Law does not change from day to day

Of course it doesn't. That's why it's legal to use a mobile phone while driving, and why you have to have that man walking in front of your car with a red flag. Mind you, has anyone told Parliament? I wonder what those MPs think they're actually doing with their time? (Insert obvious joke here)

 

- we have laws that are hundreds of years old and still totally relevant.

Indeed, centuries old law is highly relevant here. As I recall the Magna Carta in particular had a lot of things to say about the placement of speed cameras.

 

Third - English Law is based on Precedent (prior decisions) and one of those is that the authorities have to obey the rules and any breach of those rules invalidates their actions (fines).

What a bizarre statement. So if a policeman swears a bit and commits a public order offence while arresting a murderer, the murderer walks free does he?

 

Maybe you're thinking of the American doctrine of the fruit of the poisonous tree, where evidence which was obtained by illegal means can be excluded from trial. English law has no such rule; the general position is that evidence can be admitted even if it was obtained illegally, except in extreme cases or where the manner in which it was obtained would make the evidence itself unreliable (linky). And anyway it's not illegal to hide behind a tree and see if you can spot any speeding cars, so the question doesn't even arise here.

 

Unless you hold legal qualifications, I do.

I have no idea what qualifications you claim to have, and frankly I couldn't care less as I'd have no way of checking whether you actually had them. And anyway I know plenty of lawyers who are clueless about motoring law. I would care if you could back up your opinion with reference to some actual law, rather than cutting and pasting stuff from largely defunct anti-speed camera websites. Or perhaps you could name some cases where drivers were acquitted because the police were hiding? There must be plenty, after all.

[Boltmaker]

Look speeding is speeding end of story. I the road is limited to 30mph and you are driving at 35mph you are guilty end of, a faulty speedo makes no difference to the speeding offence and as has been said earlier is another offence in itself. You are the one at fault, stand up and accept the fact and take the awareness course if that is what you are offered and stop wingeing.

[crem]

Look speeding is speeding end of story. I the road is limited to 30mph and you are driving at 35mph you are guilty end of, a faulty speedo makes no difference to the speeding offence and as has been said earlier is another offence in itself. You are the one at fault, stand up and accept the fact and take the awareness course if that is what you are offered and stop wingeing.

 

Is this comment aimed at anyone in particular Boltmaker, coz the OP who asked the question was "the rotweiller", and I can't see any evidence of the wingeing by them that you refer to?