Safe Speed Forums

Exclusive: M25 cameras failing to catch speeders
By James Baggott, Dec 10, 2012

M25Steve Parsons/PA Wire
An exclusive AOL Cars investigation has found the overhead speed cameras on the M25 have not caught ANY drivers in the last 12 months.

A three-month probe, which involved no less than 20 Freedom of Information requests, has resulted in AOL Cars forcing four police forces to admit their cameras either don't work or have failed to catch any drivers in the last year.

The Met Police, which is in charge of policing the London Orbital motorway in Surrey and the Thames Valley took more than 40 days to respond to our FoI requests – and originally refused to respond for fear of the repercussions.

However, after arguing with the Met that these cameras are paid for by motorists, are supposed to be located at "accident black spots" and that other forces had already revealed the information, the force finally admitted that NO drivers have been caught be overhead gantry cameras on the M25 in the last 12 months in its area.

Hertfordshire police told us it was the same for the stretch it polices, while the Essex force were even more forthcoming – they admitted that there are NO live cameras on its stretch of the M25 at all.

Kent police also told us that despite the Highways Agency installing overhead speed cameras between junctions one and three, they had yet to be commissioned and as such had not caught any drivers. "There are no other gantry cameras within the Kent boundary," added the response to our FoI request.

Our probe's original aim was to uncover which overhead speed camera on the M25 had caught the most motorists. We asked each authority this question as well as which was the worst performing in terms of generating revenue for the Treasury. We also asked what the highest speed recorded by one of these cameras was.

However, it soon became clear from the responses that followed – and the evasive actions some forces took to our requests – that very few of the cameras were actually active.
Edmund King, president of The AA (pictured below), was shocked when we presented him with our exclusive report.

He said: "Generally, apart from controlled motorway schemes or average distance cameras through road works, cameras are not targeted on motorways as they are our safest roads.
"Speeding on the M25 does not tend to be as prevalent as on other motorways mainly due to heavy usage and congestion.
"If drivers believe that there is no chance of being caught speeding on the M25 then there will be a temptation for some to speed up when conditions allow it. We know that some of the cameras have worked in the past so we will be keen to hear why they are not currently working.
"Perhaps the police should investigate which are the most dangerous sections of the motorway and target their enforcement resources on those areas?"

The question as to why, despite numerous speed camera warning signs and lines painted on the motorway to gauge speeds, the traps remain unused.
One contact, who did not wish to be named, told AOL Cars that police forces already struggle to process the offences recorded by cameras in built-up areas and that the deluge of paperwork the M25 cameras would generate would simply swamp the system.
Some may also question the ethics of revealing that few – if any – of the cameras on the M25 are live and say it may result in more motorists breaking the law. However, it's worth noting that there are many thousands of miles of motorway in Britain where there are no cameras at all and there's always the chance of mobile camera vans operating on the M25, not to mention police patrols.

While the overhead gantries on some sections of the M25 may not be active now, there's nothing to stop police forces changing their minds either...

M25: not a single motorist caught by speed cameras in a year
By David Millward, Transport Editor - 10:00PM GMT 12 Dec 2012

Drivers speeding on the M25 have not been issued with a single ticket from its overhead cameras over the past year.
Technical and legal difficulties have prevented the Highways Agency from switching on the network of 36 new digital cameras intended to enforce variable speed limits on the London orbital motorway.

The failure was discovered by the AOL website, which had hoped to identify the biggest money raiser on the 117-mile long road, only to find that the cameras had caught no speeders at all.

Safety groups condemned “incompetence” by the agency, which owns the cameras although enforcement is handled by police forces along the route.
With around 500,000 drivers using the M25 every day, it is one of Europe’s busiest motorways. Cameras have been used to catch speeding drivers on it since 1995, and the network has grown during the intervening years.

They are supplemented by police patrols, which continue to enforce the limit, even if the overhead cameras do not.

The first of the digital cameras were installed in 2009, but a Highways Agency spokesman admitted that it had still not received statutory authority to use them on the Surrey, Hertfordshire and Essex stretches.

They need separate authorisation from the previous generation of cameras.

On other parts of the M25, where authority has been given, the difficulties were described as purely “technical” relating to the upgrade of the older generation of “wet film” cameras to the new digital devices. The cameras in Surrey, Hertfordshire and Essex have not even been tested yet.
The agency was working with police “as a matter of urgency” to address the situation, the spokesman said.
The problem did not apply to temporary average-speed cameras used to monitor stretches of roadworks.
The spokesman was unable to say how much the overhead cameras had cost or when it would be able to use them.
But he added: “The mandatory speed limits shown by the red rings are still enforceable and the onus remains on drivers to obey all mandatory speed limits.”

Jim Fitzpatrick, Labour’s road safety spokesman, said: “This revelation is unbelievable.
“The M25 is already used as a racetrack by a number of reckless drivers. If there is one place where we need working cameras it is on that stretch of motorway.”

Edmund King, the president of the AA, also expressed surprise.
“You do see drivers slow down when they pass under the gantries. We know there were some concerns when the signs were changing whether the cameras were keeping up,” he said.
Robert Gifford, executive director of the Parliamentary Advisory Council for Transport Safety, added: “This sounds like a perfect combination of cock-ups.”

Claire Armstrong, of the anti-camera group, Safespeed, seized on the agency’s embarrassment.
“If they believe the cameras are doing any good why aren’t they using them?” she asked. “If they do not believe that they are doing any good they should remove them and stop the paranoia they create by their presence.”

As I said on BBC Radio Kent this morning they shoudl be removed altogether as they bring nothing to Proper Road Safety.

Was it 50 mph average speed zones on motorways allow people to progress down the carriageway quicker than if there is no enforcement of the limit at 70?

Only under a limited range of conditions when traffic is approaching saturation point. It wouldn't lead to faster progress on, say, the A74(M).

Even if they didn't it's known that they help with traffic flow, stops people chopping and changing. Removing them would be a massive mistake.
Was it 50 mph average speed zones on motorways allow people to progress down the carriageway quicker than if there is no enforcement of the limit at 70?

Legal and technical setbacks have prevented the Highways Agency from turning the speed cameras on, a failure discovered by AOL. In an effort to uncover the largest source of funds raised along the 117-mile road, the website discovered no speeders had been caught at all.

The M25 is one of the busiest stretches of road in Europe - roughly 500,000 drivers use the road every day. Speed cameras have been in place since 1995, while additional police patrols enforce speed limits along the road as well.

The new generation of cameras were installed along the highway in 2009, but major stretches of the road - namely in Surrey, Hertfordshire and Essex - have not received statutory authority to turn the cameras on. On other stretches of the popular motorway, the cameras have not been properly tested as a result of technical issues.

2.1 The Case for Evolving the Managed Motorways Design
11 Evaluation of the M42 pilot 3,4 demonstrated that managed motorways are able to deliver clear benefits in terms of: improved journey time reliability through reduced congestion; at lower cost and with less environmental impact than conventional widening programmes; and without negatively impacting the safety performance. The subsequent programme to roll-out managed motorways with dynamic hard shoulders designed to IAN 111/09 (referred to throughout this document as MM-DHS) has delivered similar benefits to conventional road widening programmes, but at significantly lower cost. Experience from these schemes suggests that there is scope to further reduce both the capital and operating costs, whilst continuing to meet the congestion and safety objectives.

22 The safe operation of all managed motorway schemes is dependent on delivering a controlled, compliant environment; which in turn encourages appropriate driver behaviour. The design features outlined in section 2.2 above are intended to ensure clear, appropriate and unambiguous information is provided to drivers, for example regarding speed limits or lane availability. Information must be delivered to the driver in such a way that it does not cause overload or leave the driver in doubt as to what behaviour is required of them. Simulator work has been used to provide a level of assurance that the design will perform as expected, prior to actual on-road implementation.

6. In an emergency, drivers can exit the network at the next available downstream junction, or stop in a refuge area. The hard shoulder adjacent to an exit slip may also be considered to provide a safe location to stop, however they will not usually be fitted with an ERT;

3. Operating Regimes
32 The scenarios outlined below do already exist on the network. For example, there are sections of motorways without a dedicated hard shoulder, and this environment is typical on the APTR network. Maintenance work is conducted on these sections, and incidents do occur and are managed. Therefore in many cases, the existing policy and procedures used in these situations will either already be sufficient, or will only require slight modification or extension.

43 One key difference between a conventional and managed motorway is that any speed limit(s) displayed within a managed motorway scheme will be mandatory, whereas on a conventional motorway they are advisory. The speed limit will be enforced using strategically positioned HADECS cameras able to detect and record speeding offences and initiate the prosecution process. It is therefore critical that the displayed speed limit is appropriate to prevailing traffic conditions to protect the credibility of the system and enforcement regime.
Generic Requirements
1. The congestion management system will determine the speed limit(s) necessary to keep traffic flowing smoothly;

46 In designing for and evidencing that compliance can be achieved, Designers should consider the application of the 4 E’s (Engineering, Education, Encouragement and Enforcement) and how, when considered together, these will achieve a compliant and operable environment that meets the scheme objectives.