Safe Speed Forums

I am sure that i read a post on here that said that it was unlawful for a speed limit to be reduced by more than 30mph in one "step". Can anyone give a pointer, either to the post or to the legislation itself?

Last night i left the M6 at junction 7 (Great Barr, southbound, but it probably also applies northbound) to find that the speed limit dropped from 70mph (motorway) to 30mph at the top of the slip-road!!!!

If you happen to miss these signs (easily done, as it is a very "fiddly" interchange) you could end up driving down the A34 towards Birmingham on a dual carriageway past a central reservation GATSO (that used to be a 40mph limit) and get pinged! That, of course, is assuming that you don't spot the "holding" traffic lights to allow buses from Walsall to move to the next 50-yard section of bus lane, and all the other intrusive car-controlling measures (including extending the 30 limit well along the Queslett Road).

I guess that they will say "it is a technicality", but there are good reasons why speed limits should be properly signed and enforced - if only because a 70-30 drop no longer needs any signage (assuming streetlights) - regardless of the condition of the road.

mb

No, although it seems to crop up from time to time, this is a myth. There are numerous examples of 70-limit dual carriageways dropping immediately to 30, or of side roads off them with 30 limits. Also at most motorway junctions in urban areas, you hit a 30 limit as soon as you leave the motorway.

Here's an example of a direct drop from 60 to 20 on a single carriageway road:

_________________
"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

PeterE,

I am sure that there was a post in here (or PePiPoo) where a driver took the case to court and his speeding conviction was thrown out due to a 70-30 in one go reduction being signposted.

You posted an "interesting" picture! That 20mph limit cannot be lawful, can it? The left hand sign does not have a rectangular backing plate, and it also has a black border, so it cannot comply with regulations.

Also, i thought that 20mph limits had to be "self enforcing", whereby the layout and design of the road itself would automatically cause drivers to abide the the limit (there are no repeaters as far as i can see). I can't see any chicanes, humps or other such paraphernalia on that straight stretch of road!

mb

AFAIK, the 20mph sign incorporated into the village name is legal and it is only a 20mph ZONE that needs to be self enforcing. a 20mph limit does not.

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

Yes, agreed on both counts.

However this particular 20 mph limit is questionable as it is signed as a LIMIT, not a ZONE, and has some humps within it, but no repeaters.

Mind you, it was done by Halton UA, one of the smallest UAs in the country and also one of the least competent in traffic signing. Within a mile of this there are signs showing the wrong number for an A-road

_________________
"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

I'm not convinced of the legality of the sign on the left there. It's not a backing board because it has a black border, and I thought it was only the backing board which could be that shape... And the bottom part of it... I suspect it's not lawful. But I can't be bothered to check at the moment.

_________________
Andrew.

It is allowed that a backing board may be shaped as in the picture when it incorporates the place name. However, I believe that the border does invalidate it.

I believe the photo the ABD show on there is actually invalid because there are three signs on the board, and only two (the correct two) are allowed for that shaped backing board.

_________________
Andrew.

Don't you think that these rules are ludicrously complex to the point that nobody understands them.

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