http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jh ... ads226.xml
Campaigners furious at speed camera lottery
By David Millward, Transport Correspondent
Last Updated: 2:40am GMT 26/01/2007
Motorists face a speed camera lottery, with their chances of being prosecuted after being photographed varying according to where they are caught, it emerged yesterday.
The latest accounts from the 38 safety camera partnerships in England and Wales, which showed that £114 million was raised in fines, disclosed dramatic discrepancies in the approach to drivers who break the limit.
In some areas — such as Cheshire, Cumbria and Hertfordshire — a £60 fixed penalty notice carrying three endorsement points will be issued to every owner of a UK-registered car caught by the camera.
This is because the "notice of intended prosecution", which is triggered by the camera, and the fixed penalty notice are put in the same envelope, to save administration costs.
In other parts of the country partnerships issue the notice of intended prosecution then wait for the driver to respond. This is done in part to ensure that the owner of the car was actually driving at the time of an offence. But with some failing to respond to the paperwork, this has led to a significantly lower prosecution rate.
In Avon and Somerset, for example, this figure was as low as 46 per cent. But should the same motorist drive into Devon and Cornwall, the chances of receiving a fine and points soars to 86 per cent.
There were more than three million notices of intended prosecution issued in the year ending March 31 2006. They triggered 2.2 million fixed penalty notices and of these 1.9 million were paid.
The figures do not take into account foreign drivers or those on false or illegible number plates who could not be traced.
Motoring organisations joined road camera campaigners to condemn the discrepancies. Edmund King, the executive director of the RAC Foundation, said: "The best deterrent is one which is followed through. The problem is when this is not done and motorists think they can play Russian roulette with the cameras.
"They will believe that if they are not going to be pursued that they can get away with breaking the law."
Paul Smith, an unrelenting campaigner against the whole camera programme, said: "It should be implemented consistently county by county. One reason for the variation is that some partnerships have been wilfully failing to process the paperwork."
The decision by some forces to wait for the vehicle owner to identify who was driving the car could provide an incentive for dishonest motorists to ignore the notice of intended prosecution, while those who play by the rules would automatically be penalised.
Brake, a road safety body that supports the programme, said the inconsistencies were "outrageous". Jools Townsend, the charity's head of education, said: "It seems there are some parts of the country where you are more likely not to be prosecuted.
"Cameras play an important part in reducing deaths and serious injuries. But they can only do that job if motorists know there will be repercussions if they are caught."
Andrew Howard, the head of road safety at AA Public Affairs, said: "There should be consistency in pursuing motorists from outside the patch, those with dirty or false number plates.
"But you have to ask whether police patrols should be chasing non-payers or be out on the roads breathalysing people."
The discrepancies disclosed in the speed camera accounts were seized upon by Chris Grayling, the Tory transport spokesman.
He said: "The Government's strategy on speeding is all over the place. There seems to be one law in one part of the country and another elsewhere. No wonder motorists are frustrated."
Login
Register
FAQ
Search
Members
