Safe Speed Forums

Yes, where for example an uninsured driver is being picked up then that can result in an investigation. Speedwatch has bee involved in prosecution where dangerous driving has been witnessed and evidence recorded. Speedwatch letters do not result in prosecution, but may result in a visit by a police officer to talk about why there is an issue with speeding. Guidelines allow 10% + 2 mph before a driver is recorded. In a 30 that is 35mph. allowing for speedo error, speedos must by law be optimistic. It is unlikely drivers will not be reported until they have exceeded 37mph on their speedo (allowing for speedo accuracy). Stories of drivers being reported for doing 32, 33, or even 34mph are not true. In a 40 it would be 10% + 2mph = 46mph being the speed they would be reported, this would likely equate to 48-50mph on their speedo.
FYI - our group has several bikers with advanced driving qualifications, and several car drivers with the same, we also have two RoSPA diploma holders (car). We have ongoing training. Equipment does not have to be type approved, but we do check it is accurate to less than 1mph error.

I'm happy to enter into a discussion on speedwatch and answer questions honesty and frankly. Youo ay need to guide me as I'm new here.



Admin Edited - Thread split from here ...

I'm happy to discuss Speedwatch from an insiders point of view. For the record I hold a full MC licence and am a RoSPA Diploma holder (car). I have driven HGVs and enjoy fast cars and progressive driving. I’m mentioning this because I don’t want to bogged down that speedwatchers hate drivers or have hidden agendas. Neither does anyone in our group want a lowering of speed limits, many limits are too low anyway – for example the M6 toll. Then, there are places where alert drivers need to and will slow down. Most drivers we record are not alert, we record very few powerful vehicles, the sort of drivers recorded are in my opinion those who have little interest in driving. The sort of driver who fails to make any progress when it is safe, and does not recognise a change of environment when entering a village setting, continuing at what was previously a slow speed, into now a fast speed for the changed situation. Driving requires social interaction, awareness and observation on the driver’s part. After all, they had to do it for their driving test how ever basic it is. A roads in towns tend to have furniture to slow vehicles down, for example, roundabouts, traffic light controlled junctions and pedestrian crossings to separate pedestrians from vehicles. Villages do not have these so the driver must take responsibility. I like my fellow speedwatchers are opposed to speed humps etc, in fact, it is the selfish speeding lobby, who force councils to install physical speed calming measures onto the rest of us! I doubt anyone in this forum are of the “selfish speeding lobby” who are drivers, if they can be called that, who have no interest in driving.

Hello,

I was discussing Speedwatch, whose purpose is to educate, not prosecute. There is as you note nothing to prevent two witnesses provide evidence for prosecution (for speeding). Whether the courts except the evidence, or it even goes to court, is another matter. Even a police officers requires a witness, which can include a speed measuring device.

In my experience, it is very difficult to guess speed, an accurate means is required. Modern vehicles create considerable tyre noise (low wide profiles) which does greatly mislead. Most reports of speeding I receive are Sunday afternoons, when people are in their gardens. Speedwatch does allow surveys to take place to identify what the problem is. Often it is someone who purchased a house below market price (in that area), but where traffic noise is the issue. Thus, a low cost survey can be used to determine as to whether an issue exists. Another purpose for Speedwatch is counting traffic. It is not all about the motorist be naughty. There might be other reasons for speedwatch sessions such as determining traffic flow in light of a planning application for a new estate. Our displays cost about £3000 each, they are accurate, but they are not intended to prosecute but to inform the driver - hence we would not use police equipment which is intended to prosecute and the police would not use our displays, which are intended to educate.

Using a speedwatch session to prosecute might in law be possible, but due to how we operate it might be thrown out and rightly so. For example, we are allowed to operate far close to a speed limit change than the police. This would be unacceptable for prosecution, but we may be in that location because children cross the road in a rural setting to reach the school bus. Devices have a habit with type approval of escalating in price, approval does not mean quality or accuracy.







That was clear from the outset. As someone who is familiar with the law you are well aware you need to be very precise to avoid misconception and error.
Speedwatch is intended to be an education program ;that is quite right;the questions that has been debated from page 1 is "CAN the evidence from 2 witnesses who are or who perhaps are not members of the speedwatch scheme be used in court"? The answer is still "yes it can"!
Whatever the intent of each local scheme or even the national guidance, that does not prevent the lawful use of the evidence of 2 witnesses.
Note the use of non-approved equipment, was that not brought into doubt by the sceptical not too far back? If it is a choice between a £3,500 approved device and not carrying out CSW activity or use a £200 instrument and carrying it out what would you choose? And again the question would arise about using the readings as evidence; yes it can be but just not certified under section 20 of the RTOA 1988 as explained earlier. Certificate to evidence record =Type Approval required, witness to evidence record =no Type Approval required.
This becomes an area of interesting debate in Scotland because they are requiring 2 witnesses of the speed reading making the number of witnesses effectively 3 in total. Why then do they need an instrument because with 2 police officers the instrument is merely providing the speed reading for penalty after conviction rather than evidence of speeding. Even so, it is not unusual for defendants to be acquitted on alleged doubts in accuracy even though that evidence is not required. Quite bizarre.[/quote]

hello speedwatcher welcome to the forums, i hope you do not have a hard time.

i have taken quite an interest of the mechanisms and dynamics of speed enforcement systems, in particular those in actively attended mode, would you be so kind to answer some questions.

1, what device do you use to record speed?
2. what training did you recieve in the said device?, who loaned you the device the police or council
3. what recoring mechanism is in place?
4. how quick are follow up procedures undertaken?
5. is there a speeding problem in your village?, and have your local camera people been involved

No, I will not have hard time

i have taken quite an interest of the mechanisms and dynamics of speed enforcement systems, in particular those in actively attended mode, would you be so kind to answer some questions.

Speedwatch is not an "enforcement system", it is advisory in order to educate.
I think you mean detect, we use a freestanding radar display made by Radarlux.

Training is ongoing and initially undertaken by a police office, police oversee ongoing training and experienced speedwatchers undertake basic training with the final session being undertaken by a police officer who will then pass the new member. New members then assist to gain more experience.

Details are recorded onto a sheet, details are, reg no., colour, make, model. If these do not agree during hte PCN check, the report is abandoned.

This is done by the police, it depends on their time.

We work in severval villages & small towns, yes there are speeding problems and yes, the police follow up if drivers ignore us! We have about 40 members,.

many thanks for that, is this you http://speed-watch.org/

are vehicle details recorded at the national ACPO guidance of 10% +2, ie 35mph or all vehicles over 30mph

many thanks for that, is this you http://speed-watch.org/

Why do you think this is me?

are vehicle details recorded at the national ACPO guidance of 10% +2, ie 35mph or all vehicles over 30mph[/quote]

Yes, I have aready confirmed this is so.

a quick google search came up with Cambridgeshire, the device looks very similar to a SID or VAS, that can be lampost mounted, i understand these devices has a data recording port, does your radar device have such a data recorder that can be used to cross reference with your hard copy

The device is programable in a number of ways, including recording speeds. I understand it records at one mile per hour under the ACPOs giudeline, i.e. it would indicate a driver doing 34 in a 30 and upwards, and in a 40 it would light up at 45. We do not record until 35 or 46 is reached. If the driver slows and the display switches off we do not record, the message has worked. We have never compared a written copy with the data. It would not agree as mentioned, those trying to comply we do not record. We are not out to make enemies. One of the interesting consequences where we are active is drivers give a greater distance between vehciles and hand held mobile phone useage drops. We see this after may be three or four sessions, this is why I support Speedwatch.

The device looks very similar to a SID or VAS, that can be lampost mounted, i understand these devices has a data recording port, does your radar device have such a data recorder that can be used to cross reference with your hard copy[/quote]

you mentioned earlier that the highest speed you have observed , at what sort of distance were these speeds obtained, was there any further proceedings taken


i was under the impression that these radar devices would only have a short range maybe 20 metres max, they are not mounted as high as enforecment Gatso's



replying to message if you use the quote facility at the top of the reply page, then paste in what you want to respond to it is easier to understand

Letters were issued, but as stated, our purpose is not to prosecute. The displays can read at some distance, considerably more than 20 mtrs.


i was under the impression that these radar devices would only have a short range maybe 20 metres max, they are not mounted as high as enforecment Gatso's

so Greenshed is wrong, if there were 2 CSW personal backed up by data, there is not enough evidence to prosecute, although 65mph / 30 and 98 / 40 is a tad excessive, assuming that the limits are set correctly, do you think the drivers were educated to their actions, or did they know they could not be touched, BIB and even a SCP would go for a driving without due care or even dangerous driving charge

i beg to differ VAS abd SID are very short range indicators, assuming you have a similar set up to Cambridgeshire, unless you are very very selective where you set up you would get interference within the doppler range

I don't think the doppler efect need be a concern at over at these short ranges. A fast vehicle does not display until at about 40-50 mtrs. Also the mini sonic boom of a vehicle doing 90 is quite confirmative something ain't right. We have carried out checks when the police are present with lazer guns and the readings are the same, not even 1 mph discrepency.



i beg to differ VAS abd SID are very short range indicators, assuming you have a similar set up to Cambridgeshire, unless you are very very selective where you set up you would get interference within the doppler range

no glass frontage in shops or parked vehicles or bus shelters, sonic boom , i think we have all experienced that

interesting whats the time delay lag on the radar, we all know the laser is either 0.3 or 0.4 sec, so how can you confirm with the police that the vehicles are targeted at the same time, meaning ready steady go, fire driver spots you and slows yet the laser is quicker

I also propose that we start another thread and discuss your organisation if you are willing ?

I'm happy to do that but would prefer questions are limited to allow me time to reply, not more than six or so a day.

No, we're in the country - bus stops are muddy lay-bys, no shelters, no shops, fast food is road kill - Tescos is ten minutes away, parked vehicles and we go home, it slows the rascals down Frankly, where you have shops, parked cars etc., then speeding is more likely to be perceived through noise and density.

no glass frontage in shops or parked vehicles or bus shelters?

I and others have said this here before. People conflate busy but flowing roads with speeding traffic.

An A-road near me was said to have a "speeding problem" after the limit was lowered from 60/50 to 50/40. My view is that this perception was down to the increased traffic density caused by the lower limit. I would imagine it is a lot harder to cross the road since the limit was lowered.

Ditto my home village on the A30 sees occasional agitation for something to be done about the "high speeds" through the middle of the village; I have never seen anyone going over 35-40 in the village centre, and in the usual traffic density 30 is an aspiration only.

How have you worked that out?
This is indicative of the wishful and distorted thinking of members here where even the flimsiest indication of agreement is seized upon without apparent thought.
Not issuing prosecution proceedings is not the same as being able to or it having "legal force". Speedwatcher and his compatriots have set out to not issue prosecution proceedings and the police have provided backing on that premise, that is not the same as there being no avenue for doing so if it was so decided.
Observing drivers at 98mph in a 40mph speed limit and sending a letter after 3 observations of excess speed makes little sense IMHO. That should have gone to further action as it would be a summons even if it was on the motorway; what extra evidence would be necessary for a prosecution to proceed? Before you go too far in working out what extra evidence you need, there is none if you had 2 witnesses, especially if you had a reading from a radar device approved or not approved.

That would be the exact situation; I agree.

There is little point in enforcing a speed limit where the speed is never or is seldom exceeded. This would be the situation in the majority of areas outside of schools yet we still see calls for speed enforcement there.

BBC News today:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-11755222

The road in the video looks pretty straight with good sight lines and no school entrances. It's unclear what the problem is apart from the technical breach of the limit.

_________________
Malcolm W.
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not represent the views of Safespeed.