Safe Speed Forums

Speeding motorists across Norfolk were today warned they were unlikely to be able to cash in on a new court ruling which saw a man get a ticket wiped - because the road he was on was not properly lit.

While speed cameras along the A148 between Fakenham and Holt and the A146 to Lowestoft are on unlit roads drivers were told they would be unlikely to be able to follow in the footsteps of a driver in Lincoln who won a landmark legal case.

Magistrates ruled that driver Phil Walker could not be slapped with a fine and points after he was snapped speeding because the road he was travelling along was not street lit.

It was decided that because the camera was not clearly visible the 30mph limit was not legally enforceable.

Potentially the landmark case could apply to drivers in Norfolk who have been caught by fixed cameras in Bale, Little Snoring, Loddon and Heacham where roads are not street lit.

But according to legal experts in Norwich, it is unlikely that the new ruling will open the floodgates for banned drivers to claim their money back or sue for loss of earnings, compensation, and the extra cost of public transport.

According to a spokesperson for the Norfolk Casualty Reduction Partnership which controls speed cameras in the county, the decision should not affect speeders in Norfolk.

"The case in Lincoln was on a 30mph road and I believe there was an issue with the speed limit not being clear to the motorist. The same law doesn't apply on the roads in Norfolk which are not lit because they have higher speed limits.

"Officers have checked very carefully the positioning of fixed speed cameras before they are installed and they would not make a mistake like this.

"We are working hard to make sure that people drive below the speed limits to reduce the amount of accidents on our roads. It is quite simple that if people slow down, collisions are reduced."

Traffic law specialist Tim Carey of Traffic Lawyers, The Close, Norwich, said that if a president was set by the magistrates, there were higher powers which could stop a flood of claims.

He said: "I suspect that what will happen is that, if a lot of people start making claims against their fines, the magistrates in question will get a severe telling off and higher courts would be able to put a stop to it."

But Paul Smith, founder of Safe Speed - an anti-camera campaign group, said that drivers should challenge any speeding ticket.

He said: "The system is fraught with holes so every driver who has been fined should challenge it every time on all roads.

"Safe driving isn't about speed. It's about driving responsibly and the authorities should invest more money in improving the skills and attitudes of drivers.

"Speed cameras must be visible because if they are not, and a driver suddenly sees it - that's where the danger is. People can panic and have accidents because of the cameras."

_________________
Speed camera policy Kills

Of course not, scamera partnerships have never made any mistakes

also how is a Scamera worker a officer now ??

It's my understanding that you cannot enforce any limit other than NSL on an unlit road where the speed limit signs are not lit. Wasn't there a manchester supercop who said he could have argued this one, but decided to pay up in the interests of public support

http://www.abd.org.uk/speed_limit_signs.htm
Only site i could find