Safe Speed Forums

Spent a morning in court recently, the morning list was 56 motoring offences- 54 of which were for speeding on Tower Bridge (most of them seemed to have been going from South to North).
Here's the problem: being a good driver, you focus on the multiple traffic lights, myriad road signs,and idiots, and you don't notice the reduced-size "20" sign lurking amongst the panoply of street furniture- you're nicked.
So many of the defendants said "we didn't see the sign", that the bench actually started to quiz the prosecution on said sign. The response? "It's a heritage site, and a big (i.e. normal-sized) speed limit sign would be detrimental to the area". So that will be 54 cases of 3 points (4 points if you were doing over 40), £60 fine (£100 if it was over 40), and £35 police costs. About 80% of the cases happened in the early hours of the morning when there was no-one about, so the prosecution played the "potentially causing structural damage" card. The majority of those prosecuted had, until then, a clean licence.

Here's an old pic (May 05) of Lower Thames St (from ABD):



Notice how the SPECS camera will capture the VRMs of vehicles before the 20 limit sign, clearly enabling a vehicle at the speed limits to be measured above 20mph between the cams.

_________________
Views expressed are personal opinions and are not necessarily shared by the Safe Speed campaign

Assuming the zone is more than 10 - 15 seconds long and that the limit from which you are emerging is no higher than 30, the percentage error as a result of this transgression is within rounding errors I think. Nevertheless, it is in the wrong direction.

I think you are right, but set-ups like this could mean the difference between points or a court appearance and a ban; this will also have a significant impact when graduated penalties are introduced!

_________________
Views expressed are personal opinions and are not necessarily shared by the Safe Speed campaign

I agree - it's wholly unacceptable to have the first set of cameras outside the signed limit.

It would IMV be reasonable to campaign for no enforcement to take place less than 400 yards from the point where a limit drops.

_________________
"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

The issue of "where exactly was the camera/laser in relation to the zone" is a hot one. Remember the recent cases on the M4 where drivers were wrongly nicked as they left a 50mph zone and accelerated back up to 70?
Also, the driver who was fined for entering the London congestion charge zone even though he skirted the edge of it-turned out the mobile camera which did him was itself 500 yards outside the zone.
Point to remember with LTI 20.20s- they should only be used to confirm an officer's ALREADY-FORMED opinion that you were speeding. Where you come round a bend and straight into it, how could the officer have a pre-formed opinion, he couldn't see you. Also, the further away the laser was (and stories of 800 yards plus are common), the lesser his chances of being able to assess your speed. And, lastly, it could be strongly argued that civilian laser operators are not "expert" in traffic matters, so they are not allowed to form an opinion on your speed (therefore any subsequent use of a laser was illegal).

I'm tempted to attach a numberplate to the back of my bicycle and pedal through the specs zone in excess of 20mph a few times.

_________________
Only when ideology, prejudice and dogma are set aside does the truth emerge - Kepler

Unfortunately SPECS is forward-facing, so you'd miss out on all the fun

_________________
"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

OK, I'll attach it to the front then.

_________________
Only when ideology, prejudice and dogma are set aside does the truth emerge - Kepler

Hello everyone. I'm new to this forum and may not have the full picture.

However following the Trevor McDonald programme last month are those signs not authorised as they are on a reflective background. I'm aware that this doesn't matter for 30 zones but applies for all other speed limits.

Most of us saw that too angry. I think you're right about the signs not being approved.

_________________
Science won over religion when they started installing lightning rods on churches.

The incorrect signs shown on the Tonight programme were on a circular reflective background - the circular background is not prescribed and therefore does not exist in law. The Tower Bridge ones are on a rectangular background and are ok.

_________________
Less Kodak, more Kojak.
In times of deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

But big yellow cameras on sodding great blue gantries are not. What a crock.

If human lives really were at stake, I'm sure some huge speed limit signs and having the speed limit painted on the road would be an acceptable sacrifice.

This is a revenue gathering exercise and a horrific one at that - in fact it's possibly the worst one I've ever seen.

Wasn't this the site where several fines were refunded due to the speed cameras actually snapping people OUTSIDE the 20mph zone?
http://www.thisislondon.com/news/london ... 20Standard


I feel sorry for all those that have been scammed. It's just a shame that they don't exercise some "people power" and all refuse to pay up.

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

The zone where either the SPECS or the signs were in the wrong place was Lower Thames Street (these are the "yellow vultures" perched on the blue gantries)

The cameras around Tower Bridge are not SPECS, they are GATSos, which are IMO just as much of an eyesore.

The Tower Bridge cameras ARE Specs.
Now, did anyone else see the recent press article about the child psychologist/psychiatrist who got called at home by the Bib and asked to attend a minor taken into custody?
When she'd finished at the nick, she went home across Tower Bridge and got flashed at 29 mph, and she's being prosecuted.
Her pleas of "I didn't see the signs" and "the Bridge was deserted" have fallen on deaf ears, and the prosecution have played the old "likely to cause structural damage" chestnut. Yet another easy 3 points, £60 fine and £35 costs.
B*stards.

I have to go (or post it) to court at the end of Feb casue that damn bridge!
Being caught at 31 mph....same old story: signs are definetely too small and if you have busses or big lorries in front...no fat chance to see them any way!
GRRRRR, it really makes me angry to think about all the hassle that this is causing me + money.

It is a big scam and combined to the C charge I am wondering why people are not going down the streets of London in protest!

2 years ago I had somebody crashing into my car which was parked on the bay in front of my house. I was in the garden and I didn't hear a thing but my neighboar took down the reg plate.
Went to the police station and it took me nearly an hour to fill in all those forms...

3 weeks later I have received a standard letter from the met police saying that they had more important things to take care of and appreciating my understanding told me to p**s off!

Now, for a freaking 31mph I get treated like a criminal in a very officious way!

Never caught speeding in 10 years...I'll do it by post but they are BA***RDS!

The law says that speed limit signs MUST be a minimum of 300mm (12ins) diameter. Worth going back to the Bridge and measuring them; if they're less than that, you could plead not guilty on the basis that the speed limit was not legal. Heritage site or not, I bet they'd need something pretty special to allow them to put up smaller-than-legal signs- wonder if they got it, or just put the small signs up anyway. Also, there should be a sign on BOTH sides of the road, i.e. visible whether you look left or right- check that there is.
All it needs is one person to plead not guilty, put up a reasoned and well-constructed defence, and I reckon the floodgates would open. Don't assume magistrates are as unsympathetic as you may at first think, but if you plead guilty they've GOT to do you, regardless of your reasons/excuses.

Are there any special requirements for a 20 zone before it can be enforced?

Have a look at the ABD website- whole load of info.

Interesting - so a 20mph "Zone" must have self-enforcing street furniture (speed bumps, tables, etc) before it is valid?