Safe Speed Forums

Speeding driver plans legal move

The camera clocked 130 speeding motorists
A motorist caught by a speed camera that turned out to be operating illegally plans to sue.
The camera was on a stretch of the A65 Leeds to Skipton road, but an oversight meant there was no legal speed limit in force, despite 40 mph signs on show.

About 130 motorists are being offered refunds on fines.

But Ian Roberts said he was fined and banned under the totting-up system, lost his job as a driver and had to sell his home as he was now unemployed.

He said he was now planning a legal action for compensation for the distress caused by the blunder, although he admits he was speeding when he was clocked.

The Road Safety Partnership said the loophole was now being closed.

Although the camera and speed signs were put up, there was no legal enforcement notice.

A spokesman for the organisation said Mr Roberts should not have been speeding in the first place. He had admitted the charge at the time.

Loophole and Technicality are simply terms used by those who have not done their jobs properly to imply some kind of foul-play. The law is the law.

"Should not have been speeding", "admitted the charge". How can he be speeding if there was no speed limit in force, regardless of whether he knew that. How can he admit a charge that does not exist.

I am livid for this poor guy, and I hope to hell he gets fully recompensed for the ill-effects he has suffered from the lax, underhand and downright greedy actions of the scameraship.

More anti car reporting by the BBC!

There was no speed limit, there fore it should be "innocent drivers plan legal move"
councils cannot place signs on a road with out a traffic order, so it should read "Illegal speed signs found on the highway" and "sloppy police fail to check traffic orders before spending £30k on a speed camera & prosecuting motorists" It was not speeding motorists or a loophole. The elected councilors of north Yorkshire did not impose a speed limit on that road.

Anton