Safe Speed Forums

It has come to my attention that there are at least three sites in my county where the 40 mph speed limit has been extended out without repainting the white lines on the duel carriageway to match the new speed limit. These sites have gatsos and mobile cameras on them and a lot of prosicutions. the signs say 40, the road markings say 50-70mph. A 1km site may have 3 40mph signs and 111 white lines to confuse a driver. One case the driver left a 30 mph zone, merged with traffic onto a duel carrige way and decided it was NSL hit the cruise control and got clocked fot 70 in a 40. He is facing a ban.

I want people to go out localy and look at the road markings between lane 1&2. If the limit is 40 the white lines should be 1m long with a 5m gap. If they are 2m long with a 7m gap they are wrong and represent a limit of 50-70mph.

Before you all get run over... 1m is 1/4 of a car length or 1 kerb stone.
2m is half a car length and 2 kerb stones

A use full guide is here on the ABD site
and the government diagram is here.Diagram 1005 & 1005.1 (Permitted variations:NONE)
This could make thousands of convictions unsafe at 100+ sites.
It could even make all 30-40mph roadworks convictions unsafe.

To impose a new speed limit they need to make a traffic order, change the signing and I argue repaint the white lines to comply with the statutory instruments below.

Please can you safely go out and take photos of the lines and a speed limit sign, give me accurate locations preferably with a map reference (see the info panel on multimap) and the name of the local highway authority or county.

You can cheat and look up on http://maps.google.com/ just put "place name uk" or a "poste code uk" If the area is hi res you can see every white line

looking at this this 40mph gatso,[, the gaps between the white lines are the length of a truck, rather that a car. the lane seperation white lines are half the lenth of a car.

When a camera site is set up the SCP are supposed to check that all signs and markings are correct. Also if you want drivers to slow down it might help if the road LOOKS LIKE A 30-40 MPH ROAD

Bits of relevent legislation:










The relevant legislation is s.85(4) RTRA 1984.

_________________
Speed limit sign radio interview. TV Snap Unhappy
“It has never been the rule in this country – I hope it never will be - that suspected criminal offences must automatically be the subject of prosecution” He added that there should be a prosecution: “wherever it appears that the offence or the circumstances of its commission is or are of such a character that a prosecution in respect thereof is required in the public interest”
This approach has been endorsed by Attorney General ever since 1951. CPS Code

Oh how I would laugh if Julian Hewitt had to do a press release on this.

So where are the questionnable sites (or would you rather not say publicly?

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

I would rather not say
This is a complex area of law and it depends wether you accept that road markings are signs. I had to wade through three 150 page bits of legislation and amendments to find what I found. Also existing road markings do not have to be repainted just because the legislation came in. However , in my mind if the speed limit is altered the road should be brought up to current standard. Especialy if that road is deemed to be an accident hot spot.

The next step would be a FOI request on the council about the date the limit was changed and all works to that site regarding the signs and road markings to facilitate the new limit. and the reason for the change in limit.

_________________
Speed limit sign radio interview. TV Snap Unhappy
“It has never been the rule in this country – I hope it never will be - that suspected criminal offences must automatically be the subject of prosecution” He added that there should be a prosecution: “wherever it appears that the offence or the circumstances of its commission is or are of such a character that a prosecution in respect thereof is required in the public interest”
This approach has been endorsed by Attorney General ever since 1951. CPS Code

Here is an example site where one carriage way is painted up as 50-70mph and the other as 30-40 click here I always thout the southbound lanes ran slower than the northbound lanes, now I know why!

This site (the road under the flyover has a 30 limit but is painted as 50-70) (it has now been erased by a bus lane but was a haunt of southampton coppers for years.I allways wanted to do 50 but the signs said 30, now I know why!)


This road has a 50 limitbut is painted as a 30-40 limit

_________________
Speed limit sign radio interview. TV Snap Unhappy
“It has never been the rule in this country – I hope it never will be - that suspected criminal offences must automatically be the subject of prosecution” He added that there should be a prosecution: “wherever it appears that the offence or the circumstances of its commission is or are of such a character that a prosecution in respect thereof is required in the public interest”
This approach has been endorsed by Attorney General ever since 1951. CPS Code

Surely that's a Truvelo?

Hmm the lines going across the road go over the gap which is meant to be between the centre lines, I wonder if that is of any signifficance...?

_________________
Andrew.

For a start, the different markings are simply there to deal with the shortening effect that occurs at higher speeds. The do not indicate the speed limit - as such I don't see any judge worth his salt throwing out a speeding convication on such grounds. And it certainly isn't an excuse.

And thats before the "road markings" vs "coloured surfacing" shenanigans......

anton - a road marking IS a sign, it's a sign painted/affixed to a road instead of a metal backing. Richard Bentley will be the person to ask about this - nobody knows more about signage law than him.



The argument is whether or not these are required to be a certain length for a speed limit to be valid, if they are then the judge has no choice but to throw it out.

Gareth

It is required that the markings, if used, should be of certain mark / space lengths for a given speed limit.

There are no road marking requirements whatsoever for the speed limit to be valid.

That is of course assuming it is a "road marking", and not merely "coloured surfacing".

OOH- 50 to 30 - make retrospective, pay back all that money - if this is true, i predict a rise in insolvent SCPs, or revised limits.

_________________
lets bring sanity back to speed limits.
Drivers are like donkeys -they respond best to a carrot, not a stick .Road safety experts are like Asses - best kept covered up ,or sat on

A few points:

- the SCPs expect us to obey the speed limits; we expect them to enforce within the law. On both sides, if there are transgressions then we expect to get a ticket while they should expect to drop the prosecutions.

- The motorist needs every assistance to ascertain what the limit is at any given point. The fact that line patterns indicate this is a useful guide and should be correctly implemented.

- The question about whether lines are "road markings" or "coloured surfaces" is stupid. Are crosshatched areas with solid edges OK to drive on after all, they are only coloured surfaces.

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

SCPs are not respsonsible for road markings.



They don't.



Not really - its purpose is so that the marking retains similar characteristics at higher speed by compensating for the shortening effect that occurs at high speed.



Agreed, nevertheless the actions of one party are not an excuse for the actions of another.



Maybe so, such is legalese.



No, because they are a road marking as prescribed in the TSRGD, whereas diag 1005.1 isn't for roads with a speed limit greater than 40mph.

ndp,
S C PARTNERSHIPS include the local authority and the local authority are responsible for the road markings which are legally signs as much as plates on poles.

Motorists are legally entitled to clear guidance as to a speed limit.

The length changes exactly for the reason that there is a higher limit.

All the actions are by members of the PARTNERSHIP see above

Legal road markings are shown in TSRGD 2002. The traffic signs manual chapters 1-9 may contain other markings not prescribed but allowed placement on the carriageway.

Roadlines give a legal instruction i.e. solid white line =do not cross, transverse broken double line =give way.

AIUI this particular point has not been tested in court, so there is no precedent, I nearly got to argue this point (amongst 2 others) in The Mags but the case was dismissed at pre trial review (insufficient evidence).

I personally think my case was dropped to avoid a refund situation, I'm still trying to make this happen, (I think Paul is aware).
This may seem unfair as you obviously would consider me guilty and I 'Got off' 'scottfree', but hey the law isn't always fair, hence websites such as this (and others) trying to change unfair laws.
8000 innocent drivers fined £60, at least one totting up 6 month ban, FAIR????

fatboytim

anton fancy meeting you here

Yes



Yes



But not to indicate the speed limit to drivers, rather to compensate for the apparant shortening effect that occurs at higher speeds.



Yes



No.

Prescribed signs and markings are defined by the TSRGD 2002. These may usually be placed on the public highway, though occasionally site-specific authorisation is required from the Secretary of State (eg for diag 601.1, and by association,

Any other sign or marking may be implemented with the authorisation of the Secretary of State.

Coloured surfacing requires neither prescription nor authorisation.

Coloured surfacing is undefined in law.



Though only Chapter 5 is really relevant.



No.

All road markings (but not coloured surfacing) require either prescription or authorisation, and sometimes both.



Only if subject to direction 7, or subject to a regulation defining the legal requirement.

Diags. 1005 and 1005.1 are subject to neither.



Were they breaking the law?

ndp,
We can argue the divider line, issue for ever, but, the decision will at some point be made in court, however, I doubt the CPS would proceed to trial if they were aware that this would be the defence, as the consequences of aquittal to the authorities is far greater than a guilty from the Mags, and losing an Appeal to the Crown to the defendant.
I actually believe the issue would only be decided by 'ambushing' the prosecution with it.
If I did not break the law niether did they, my case was dismissed with costs of over £2000 going to taxation,
since my case signing and lining works have taken place at the site, enforcement was suspended at the site for the last 4 weeks (commenced again this week), the deficiencies in the signs were confirmed by the Highways Agency and a leading indepenant expert in signs and lines.
THEY WERE NOT BREAKING THE LAW ---
8000 innocent drivers fined--
IS THAT JUSTICE?

fatboytim

Well whether or not the authorities decide to persue a prosecution is neither here nor there - but the markings do not indicate the speed limit, and as such its a valid excuse. They don't convey any legal requirement whatsoever.

Additionally, it does not follow from the fact the prosecution dropped your case due to "insufficient evidence" or whatever that the other drivers are innocent. You haven't been found "Not Guilty" - you have merely had the charges against you dropped.

Of course, signing deficiency can (quite rightly) be used as a defence. But only where the required to convey a legal requirement are sub-standard. This doesn't apply in the instance of diag 1005 or diag 1005.1.

I believe the divider line law will be tested in court very soon
No, it wasn't me.

If that case gets dropped there are a number of people who were found guilty in a court (rather than who paid a FPN) who could appeal in a higher court.

By hook or by crook we will get this in to a court this year! I have 4 current cases at 3 sites currently at various stages and 3 cases who could appeal. some are stronger cases than others. An ideal case is someone caught for 47 in a 40 who had passed. Just two signs and there was no other defence. I have found 6 sites in 4 different highway authorities

We also need more solicitors prepared to take leagal aid cases. It is being granted by the CPS as these cases are complex it does not go on income. But the few names are becoming very overloaded. which is cool

It would be nice to see a case in the Manchester police cheater zone.

I was listening to trading standards on the radio and came up with a nice name for this senario.

"Counterfeit speed limit"

_________________
Speed limit sign radio interview. TV Snap Unhappy
“It has never been the rule in this country – I hope it never will be - that suspected criminal offences must automatically be the subject of prosecution” He added that there should be a prosecution: “wherever it appears that the offence or the circumstances of its commission is or are of such a character that a prosecution in respect thereof is required in the public interest”
This approach has been endorsed by Attorney General ever since 1951. CPS Code

ndp
I am NOT GUILTY due to the FACT I have NOT been CONVICTED of ANY OFFENCE. The prosecution offered NO EVIDENCE and the case was DISMISSED by the Magistrate.
My defence was a terminal sign on the right of the carriageway only (a fatal flaw to a speed limit), all drivers were NOT GUILTY.
http://img221.imageshack.us/img221/7493/169a8jr.jpg
http://img294.imageshack.us/img294/2117 ... 70a4vf.jpg

Note the dividers are 1004.1

There is also a side road that joins the site that has no streetlighting, no repeater signs (default NSL?) and no signs at the junction.
http://img265.imageshack.us/img265/8839/phto01150ke.jpg
http://img157.imageshack.us/img157/9928/phto00770zj.jpg

8000 innocent drivers.

If you were so sure of your position you would be supporting Antons idea for the Courts to decide the issue.

Fatboytim

Your first link is dead - the second crops out where one would expect to find the other terminal sign.

And if this situation is as you allege, then in this instance the convictions should be overturned as the signs required to convey a legal requirement are not to standard.

It is of no relevance to diag 1005/1005.1/1004/1004.1 markings, which do not convey any legal requirement.



And?

And if the speed limit is 40, then the marking is correct. But again, the photo doesn't reveal the vital information.



Those photos provide insufficient context to really state anything.



But not because of the dividing line.



I would be nice to have that much confidence in the courts. Decisions like this makes such confidence difficult to find.[/url]

To my mind that does give confidence in the courts that they are actually prepared to consider the circumstances of a case rather than vindictively banging someone up for years for a one-off error of judgment.

But of course under the new "causing death by careless driving" law they will be able to do just like that, which of course will deter people from making minor errors of judgment, won't it?

_________________
"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

And the worn tyres and defective brakes?