Safe Speed Forums

The campaign for genuine road safety
It is currently Mon Oct 22, 2018 01:02

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 19 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Tue Sep 18, 2007 13:28 
Offline
New User
New User

Joined: Tue Sep 18, 2007 13:15
Posts: 1
Location: Midlands
Hi there and hope that someone out there can provide some advice……

I was caught on a mobile camera in Nottinghamshire and have recently received an NIP. I’m currently awaiting further correspondance which will presumably be either a fixed penalty notice, or a summons.

I drove again along the same stretch of road yesterday for the first time since the incident and took a careful measurement of the distance between the start of the 30mph zone and the location of the Camera Van. I’d heard that the guidelines state that there should be a distance of at least 400metres, but the distance I measured was actually 320 metres.

Has anyone got any idea if I can use such information to successfully defend myself against any action against me?

Many Thanks. 8-)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 18, 2007 15:15 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 10:16
Posts: 7986
Location: Moved to London
As I understand it: all they need to give is proof of what speed limit applied to you and your speed within it. The speed limit applies right up to the signed posts - there is no buffer distance. The camera van can be located anywhere along the carriageway.

It seems you’re not disputing the speed reading or the signage, in which case I think you’re done I’m afraid!

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


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Sep 18, 2007 22:04 
Offline
Suspended
Suspended

Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 22:56
Posts: 88
As I understand it the speed limit starts at the sign-post,


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Sep 21, 2007 13:04 
Offline
Member
Member
User avatar

Joined: Sat Dec 04, 2004 13:41
Posts: 514
Location: Thames Valley
Tinbum - was it a rural :30: area, recently changed from :40: ?

Is there a system of street lighting along this road?

It may be that the limit is not enforceable. See this link from the ABD press releases - http://www.abd.org.uk/pr/385.htm

Even though this PR reports a test case dating back to 2003, councils are still misusing legislation. This PR turned out to be my salvation in my own speeding case, which I won in court in April 2007. I just thought I'd post this here, if only to piss safetyman off. :D


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Sep 22, 2007 10:12 
Offline
Suspended
Suspended

Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 22:56
Posts: 88
but what harm would it have done to follow the speed limit as posted??


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Sep 22, 2007 10:25 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 10:16
Posts: 7986
Location: Moved to London
safetyman wrote:
but what harm would it have done to follow the speed limit as posted??

Safetyman,

Roger has already locked a thread resulting from your repeated yet un-responding posts here, (please follow the link given in that thread).

Please refrain from repeatedly asking the same question without first addressing the previous subsequent responses.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Sep 22, 2007 11:15 
Offline
Member
Member
User avatar

Joined: Sat Dec 04, 2004 13:41
Posts: 514
Location: Thames Valley
safetyman wrote:
but what harm would it have done to follow the speed limit as posted??

Well safetyman, I will indulge you this once. The straight answer to your question is none at all. But let me ask a question - the road I was on had had a :40: limit for as long as I can remember (1974-1999). What harm would it have done to leave the speed limit as it was? It's not a dangerous road and I know of no accidents being caused by vehicles travelling at 31-40.

Let me ask you another question. That unguarded level crossing picture I posted for you in another thread - speed limit :nsl: on the approach to it, parked cars and houses on either side, likelihood of pedestrians, dogs/children etc. What harm would it have done to drive at the (60mph) speed limit through there?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Sep 22, 2007 17:04 
Offline
Suspended
Suspended

Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 22:56
Posts: 88
but what harm would it have done to follow the speed limit as posted??

Well safetyman, I will indulge you this once. The straight answer to your question is none at all. (exactly)

Now not exceeding the limit obviously (*to any-one not wishing to misunderstand and with half an ounce of brain) does NOT mean always travelling AT the limit.

IT means that in the drivers risk assesment the TOP speed of the assesment is the posted limit.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Sep 22, 2007 18:09 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 10:16
Posts: 7986
Location: Moved to London
safetyman wrote:
Now not exceeding the limit obviously (*to any-one not wishing to misunderstand and with half an ounce of brain) does NOT mean always travelling AT the limit.

IT means that in the drivers risk assesment the TOP speed of the assesment is the posted limit.

If the limit is set unreasonably low and drivers can still use their risk assessment and drive safely and considerately, what the harm in exceeding it?
What's the harm in doing 71 on a motorway?

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


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Sep 22, 2007 19:32 
Offline
Suspended
Suspended

Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 22:56
Posts: 88
"What's the harm in doing 71 on a motorway?"

Very little and of course even if the gatso's were on motorways they would not be set to flash at 71mph, the drivers that do 71MPh have posible drifted over and we all can do this however carefull, the danger comes from the morons who rather than drifting over by 1 or 2 MPH drive regularly at speeds of 10, 20 30MPH over the limit expecting others to just get out the way for them.

THERE is a vast difference between the two styles, many of the recent posts have been from people going 10mph + over the limit Most claim not to have seeee the speed limit sign, SPEED + POOR OBSERVATION = WHAT?? :? :?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Sep 22, 2007 20:01 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 10:16
Posts: 7986
Location: Moved to London
safetyman wrote:
"What's the harm in doing 71 on a motorway?"

Very little

So we agree that there could well be very little harm in not abiding by the posted limit. So where do you draw the line, given that almost half admit to exceeding the speed limits on the motorways (source: gloucestershire.gov.uk).

safetyman wrote:
the danger comes from the morons who rather than drifting over by 1 or 2 MPH drive regularly at speeds of 10, 20 30MPH over the limit

Would you substantiate that claim?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Sep 22, 2007 21:09 
Offline
Suspended
Suspended

Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 22:56
Posts: 88
NO Smeggy high speeds are very safe, and cause no difficulties at all, what planet are you really from, do you drive?? Do you ever try to drive within the limits/law??


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Sep 22, 2007 21:12 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 19:50
Posts: 3369
Location: Lost in the Wilderness
safetyman wrote:
NO Smeggy high speeds are very safe, and cause no difficulties at all, what planet are you really from, do you drive?? Do you ever try to drive within the limits/law??


:yawn:

_________________
Useless laws weaken necessary laws.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Sep 22, 2007 21:27 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 10:16
Posts: 7986
Location: Moved to London
safetyman wrote:
NO Smeggy high speeds are very safe, and cause no difficulties at all,

Why do you continue to blatantly misrepresent everything that people say? It really doesn't cast you in a good light.
I’ve recently explained how even high motorway speeds can be a problem on other threads.

safetyman wrote:
Do you ever try to drive within the limits/law??

Actually yes I do, where it is reasonably expected by other road users that drivers should not be going faster than the limit, such as within built-up urban areas where hazards are dense, hidden and unexpected, especially where there are road users (the young) who can't judge the situations where higher speeds of vehicles are involved; my stance on this has always been consistent.
I'm afraid this doesn't apply to motorways and many dual carriageways.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Sep 22, 2007 21:52 
Offline
Suspended
Suspended

Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 22:56
Posts: 88
"I’ve recently explained how even high motorway speeds can be a problem on other threads."


"I'm afraid this doesn't apply to motorways and many dual carriageways."

Be consistant the first line seems at odds with the last rather!!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Sep 22, 2007 22:05 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 10:16
Posts: 7986
Location: Moved to London
safetyman wrote:
"I’ve recently explained how even high motorway speeds can be a problem on other threads."


"I'm afraid this doesn't apply to motorways and many dual carriageways."

Be consistant the first line seems at odds with the last rather!!

Only to you perhaps; it would make more sense if you didn't selectively quote.

My point is simple (aided with the bold above): high motorway speeds need not be dangerous - yes it can be but not necessarily so due to the substantially reduced hazards, and young pedestrians.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Sep 23, 2007 01:45 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member

Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 14:06
Posts: 3654
Location: Oxfordshire
Safetyman, don't dodge the question:

If 70 is the limit, but you yourself admit that 71 is not unsafe, where do you draw the line: At what excess of the posted speed limit does one cease to be safe?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Sep 23, 2007 10:25 
Offline
Suspended
Suspended

Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 22:56
Posts: 88
What's the harm in doing 71 on a motorway?"

Very little and of course even if the gatso's were on motorways they would not be set to flash at 71mph, the drivers that do 71MPh have posible drifted over and we all can do this however carefull, the danger comes from the morons who rather than drifting over by 1 or 2 MPH drive regularly at speeds of 10, 20 30MPH over the limit expecting others to just get out the way for them.

THERE is a vast difference between the two styles, many of the recent posts have been from people going 10mph + over the limit Most claim not to have seeee the speed limit sign, SPEED + POOR OBSERVATION = WHAT?? :lol: :lol:

As the prime-minister so often says, I refer you to my earlier reply


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Sep 23, 2007 12:09 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 10:16
Posts: 7986
Location: Moved to London
The PM is adept at spin and diversionary debate.

I might refer you to Robin's reply as, again, you didn't answer the question.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 19 posts ] 

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


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:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
[ Time : 0.212s | 13 Queries | GZIP : Off ]