Safe Speed Forums

The campaign for genuine road safety
It is currently Sat Dec 16, 2017 02:25

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 6 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: From ABD site
PostPosted: Mon May 30, 2016 19:09 
Offline
User

Joined: Sun Sep 03, 2006 04:10
Posts: 3244
By Admin

http://www.abd.org.uk/post/important-in ... imit-signs
14th of April, 2016 at 12:10
ABD wrote:
Speed limit signs will no longer be a legal requirement but you will still be prosecuted for exceeding the limit

Changes implemented in TSRGD 2016

The principles of signing were set in law, to be precise Statute Law, Regulations and Directions of the Secretary of State for Transport.

Statute made it a duty for the Secretary of State to set out the base level of traffic signing for speed limits that the law required a local authority to erect.

The minimum number of signs, primarily 2 signs at the start and end of every limit and signs to remind drivers on lengthy road systems were set out in the Secretary of States Directions contained with the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions.

This has been the benchmark of the Highway Code, driver training and law since the 1960's.

In the event, as the government anticipated, councils failed to place the signs as directed, the same Act of Parliament prohibited a court from convicting drivers of speeding.

Since the advent of camera enforcement, the Police/ CPS lambast the motorist for using technical defences for avoiding a conviction, when the law was written to protect the driver from lazy, crass or deliberately defective signing by local authorities.

The pressure to convict has resulted in demands by authorities to remove the need for repeater signing, that in itself is known to have caused confusion but has not prevented camera or police enforcement.

On Friday 22nd April new Regulations come into force.

The Directions within TSRGD have been altered beyond belief, the Must and Shall requirements for the placing of terminal signs have been revoked and there is merely a WHEN. The when being if an authority chooses to do so.

There is no longer any requirement to place any repeater signing anywhere as well.

Whilst the government draws authorities' attention to its signing guidance, that is all it is and it was published to advise authorities what they formerly (and formally) had to do.

And of course, that guidance is just that, it is not law.

Under statute law, the demand placed upon the Secretary of State to direct what is the minimum standard of signing required to give adequate guidance still exists.

His direction in the regulations requires NONE.

Therefore, under new law, to give adequate guidance to a driver, the definition of what is adequate set in Statute being that signing demanded by the Secretary of State authorities have to place NOTHING at all on any road. Unless they want to go to the expense of doing so of course.

For the avoidance of any doubt as to how perfidious the new TSRGD changes are, here's a for instance:

The traffic department of X local authority achieves a democratically reached decision (i.e., voted on and approved) that the signage on a given stretch of single-carriageway rural (say 50MPH) road no longer requires signage. It is no longer maintained, allowed to be obscured or removed.

The local authority then creates a Temporary 20mph Order imposing a limit on this unsigned stretch and the Scamera Partnership commences enforcement of that lower limit.

This results in a massive number of NIPs, fines, disqualifications and Awareness Course attendance fees etc as everyone using it is at least 200% above the (unsigned temporary 20mph) speed limit.

Under the new guidelines; while highly unscrupulous and totally unethical, the enforcement of this unsigned 20mph limit would be perfectly lawful and in compliance with the new law.

All prosecutions brought up under the Temporary Order must therefore still stand up in in court - unless the court chooses to interpret the word "adequate" in the guidance.

In Humberside for example, there are many roads with alternating 60 and 40 mph limits. As of April 22nd, Humberside would be at liberty to remove all 40mph signage and continue the legal (!) enforcement of the 40mph limit on those unsigned 40 limit stretches. How can this be supportive of good road safety - as opposed to anything other than blatant revenue generation.

In addition, this county enforces at 1 mph above a set limit even when speedometers are incapable of being within 10% accuracy in their displays.

Hence the reason the enforcement 'threshold' is said to be the speed limit, + 10% + 2 mph.

And of course, if the Humberside Partnerships are enforcing below the policy guidelines and taking people to court/ courses for exceeding limits with no way of knowing, what will they do when there are no signs, too?

Finally, with the stopping of legal aid, increasing defendant costs from £45 per hearing to £600 - plus the ramped up fining based upon percentages above a limit - what hope has any driver now?

_________________
The world runs on oil, period. No other substance can compete when it comes to energy density, flexibility, ease of handling, ease of transportation. If oil didn’t exist we would have to invent it.”

56 years after it was decided it was needed, the Bedford Bypass is nearing completion. The last single carriageway length of it.We have the most photogenic mayor though, always being photographed doing nothing


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: From ABD site
PostPosted: Sun Jul 03, 2016 11:42 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 02:17
Posts: 7347
Location: Highlands
I see that rsgb states here : http://www.roadsafetygb.org.uk/news/5013.html

rsgb wrote:

Road sign changes come into effect
Monday 18th April 2016
20 readers have commented on this story

The removal of the requirement to place repeat speed limit signs is one of a raft of changes in new legislation which came into force across Britain last week.

The Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2016 took effect on 22 April and replace those set in 2002. The new legislation follows a consultation on the issue which received 140 responses from 55 local authorities across Great Britain.

Under the new legislation, local authorities can now make their own decisions on how many speed limit signs are needed so that drivers know what limits apply.

This move has been met with a negative reaction from the Alliance of British Drivers (ABD), which says this can “only result in multiple signing standards, the creation of real danger, genuine confusion and the criminalisation of swathes of the motoring public”.

The Government says the new regulations give councils the powers to ‘tear down pointless road signs’, on the back of figures which show that between 1993 and 2013 the number of road signs in England increased by 83% to 4.57m.

The new regulations also allow councils to install new eye-level cycle traffic lights to make busy junctions easier and safer for cyclists, following ‘successful trials’ of the concept.

Other changes include:

A requirement for new road signs to carry imperial and metric measurements for height, width and length limits.
The removal of the need for a Traffic Regulation Order for unrestricted parking bays.
Signs must be retroreflective if street lighting is switched off during part of the hours of darkness.
Directions that apply to the mounting and backing of permanent signs will also apply to portable and temporary variable message signs.
The inclusion of the tunnel restriction code sign in the new Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions.

Patrick McLoughlin, transport secretary, said: “Road signs should only be installed on our roads when they are essential. Our common-sense reforms will help get rid of pointless signs that are an eyesore and distract drivers.

“These new rules will also save £30m in taxpayers’ cash by 2020, leaving drivers with just the signs they need to travel safely.”

Despite welcoming the move to reduce the number of unnecessary signs, the RAC has expressed concern over the removal of speed limit repeater signs.
Simon Williams, RAC spokesman, said: “Signage is at its most effective when it’s well designed and used in just the right location – and that location is rarely one that is surrounded by a plethora of other signs. A move to de–clutter our roadsides therefore makes a lot of practical, as well as economic sense, and will be welcomed by the 63% of motorists we spoke to that said our roads are too full of unnecessary signage.

“While responsibility for local signage should rest with councils, we do not believe the option of axing small speed limit repeater signs makes much sense. All road users benefit from regular reminders of the speed limit, especially on roads where the limit is not immediately obvious."
- See more at: http://www.roadsafetygb.org.uk/news/501 ... sJ2XA.dpuf

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


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: From ABD site
PostPosted: Sun Jul 03, 2016 11:48 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 02:17
Posts: 7347
Location: Highlands
The manual pdf :
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/. ... ter-03.pdf

http://researchbriefings.files.parliame ... N01921.pdf

Traffic Signs :
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/s ... ter-03.pdf

This is extremely troubling. This is a side-step to the proper legal requirements, for the sake of additional prosecution of drivers, than properly holding the Councils to their road safety responsibilities of upholding their legal obligations towards the UK Government! :(
In other words an appalling cop-out so further profits can be gained by the 'Speed enforcement industry'.

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


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: From ABD site
PostPosted: Sun Jul 03, 2016 11:55 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 02:17
Posts: 7347
Location: Highlands
Speed limits are on page 107 onwards of this Government document :
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/s ... ter-03.pdf

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


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: From ABD site
PostPosted: Wed Jul 06, 2016 19:11 
Offline
User

Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 13:03
Posts: 685
Seems the ABD are fantasising again.

1st, Humberside and other police areas do not enforce the speed limit at 1mph above the speed limit. Quite why that was claimed is beyond me and I wouldn't like to speculate why it was included in the report but it does signify, very clearly, the quality of the rest of the article.

TSRGD has been altered to give more flexibility in the posting of signs and limits. This means that the authorities are able to sign in a way that gives drivers adequate guidance. Inadequate guidance will result in 2 outcomes I confidently predict, 1. Police will not enforce speed limits that they consider inadequately signed. 2. If a court considers that a limit is inadequately signed it will acquit the driver.

It is up to the authorities to use adequate signage.

The example given by ABD of a speed limit with no signs, is quite bizarre and suffice to say, the police will not enforce such a limit. The suggestion is bonkers, no surprise that such a report ended up on that website, it suits it.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: From ABD site
PostPosted: Sat Jul 23, 2016 23:08 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member

Joined: Fri Sep 24, 2004 23:26
Posts: 9230
Location: Treacletown ( just north of M6 J3),A MILE OR TWO PAST BEDROCK
GreenShed wrote:
Inadequate guidance will result in 2 outcomes I confidently predict, 1. Police will not enforce speed limits that they consider inadequately signed. 2. If a court considers that a limit is inadequately signed it will acquit the driver.



Given that we REGULARLY see reports of Police /speed enforcement being guilty of not THOROUGHLY scrutinising speed camera photographs ,i predict

1) - Drivers being forced to prove that the area is not adequately signed in court in the face of so called Expert witnesses.
2) Facing the penalties a court will impose if expert witnesses ( and there's quite a few about ) claim( not prove ,by trolling web sites) decide that there's more money to be made from claiming this than proving the truth .

So in light of this ,HOW many more will just roll over and pay the FPN , and as such keep the retired Police and RETIRED Commissioned officers association in work and income.
Problem is that in most forms of life, persons attempting to blacken the reports of an organisation have to declare their affiliations. Perhaps, in the case of GS ,he might be asked to say where his loyalties ( and income ) come from.

_________________
lets bring sanity back to speed limits.
Drivers are like donkeys -they respond best to a carrot, not a stick .Road safety experts are like Asses - best kept covered up ,or sat on


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 6 posts ] 

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 3 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:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
[ Time : 0.642s | 14 Queries | GZIP : Off ]