Safe Speed Forums

Insurance industry PR:

ARE TOO MANY CAMERAS TRIVIALISING SPEEDING OFFENCES?
ASKS LEADING INTERMEDIARY

Award winning insurance intermediary, The A&A Group Ltd, has warned that the large number of speeding cameras on our roads may be trivialising the offence to such an extent that points on a driving licence are almost coming to be accepted as the norm.

"Points for speeding seem to be losing their impact because of the sheer number of motorists with speeding convictions, which in turn is a direct result of the increasing number of speed cameras in unnecessary locations", says A&A Group Chairman Tony Allen.

Tony believes this is a retrograde move that sends out the wrong signals to drivers about the dangers of speeding and could result in more accidents and greater road casualty figures in the longer term.

"Drivers often regard speed cameras with distain and some adjust their driving style accordingly," he says. "How many times do you see drivers brake sharply to pass through a camera and then accelerate again"?

"This is not good driving practice and it actually increases the chances that following cars will not respond to the change of speed in enough time to avoid an accident. Far from promoting road safety, there is an argument that in some locations speed cameras can even cause accidents.

"With so many opportunities to get caught speeding and often for just being a few mph over the limit, it sometimes becomes difficult to blame motorists for adopting an indifferent attitude to the offence, even though it is wrong and potentially dangerous.

"But what they are forgetting are the additional implications of speeding points on their insurance costs, which can add up along with the points and can make a large financial difference.

"The penalties for points levied by insurers may be less severe than they were, but they still make a difference and I would urge convicted motorists to try to limit the financial damage by finding an insurer that makes a distinction between numbers of points and the actual offence they were given for.

"The A&A Group, for example, realises the difference in seriousness of doing 55mph in a residential area and 85mph on a motorway and we take this into account when assessing premiums for convicted drivers, even though on paper both offences may carry the same three-point penalty.

"By looking closely at what points are for, we are often able to provide convicted drivers with cheaper policies.

"Whilst this does not solve the problem of speed cameras trivialising what can be a serious offence, it does at least go some way to mitigating their consequences by not unfairly punishing motorists that get caught committing a relatively minor indiscretion," he adds.

In the meantime, perhaps it is time all parties involved in the ongoing speeding debate re-evaluated what they are trying to achieve and worked harder to find a practical and safer solution.

ENDS

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety

so A&A will offer a good quote to drivers with points, maybe direct debit with 15% APR taking the quote back up

are there to many cameras / mobile sites - yes lets drop motorways and long dual carraigeways, and concentrate on residential areas

_________________
now retired

duh!

Insurance companies are not charities - they try to make as much money as possible, and generally are just as happy as the government to squeeze motorists until the pips squeak.

Actuaries are in the position of being able to analyze vast quantities of data, such as SP30 offences and points, and statistically make a judgement of risk, using facts and a scientific methodology, instead of politically correct mantras.

Out of all the interested parties in road safety, the ultimate victim is the insurance company who has to grudgingly open its wallet due to its policyholders accidents. Damage to property is one thing - its the Personal Injury claims that can amount to millions in payouts.

Clearly they now realise that points awarded due to speeding are not a risk factor whatsoever. Market forces mean they eventually have to adjust their models accordingly. Soon they will probably have to do the same with S172 convictions.

I'm sure they would have done this years ago, but being large corporations with nearly as much inertia as the governments public sector, are more than happy to keep fleecing the motorist when it suits them. It only takes one to rock the barrel and they will all have to follow.

As for 15% APR - you are free to obtain credit from any other source you choose. Thats whats so great about a free market. Personally I always pay it out in one whack each year, just like I do with the road tax.

(my first post - be easy )

Wanna explain your sanctimonius sig?

Wanna tell me what going faster than the sign has to do with being a safe driver?

Wanna tell me who put YOU in charge of safe driving strategy?

Just who do you people think you are?

_________________
"Safety" Scamera Partnerships;
Profitting from death and misery since 1993.

Believe nothing- Question everything.

Wanna explain your sanctimonius sig?

i though it is pretty easy to understand, if you don't break the limit you will not get zapped.

Wanna tell me what going faster than the sign has to do with being a safe driver?

nothing the offence is driving at excess speed,

Wanna tell me who put YOU in charge of safe driving strategy?

my chief constable has authorised me to carry out my job, so i suppose he is in charge

Just who do you people think you are?

i could ask the same question, but the are many people who post in here that have valid points so as not to offend them no comment

_________________
now retired

We know that your Chief Constable has authorised etc etc. It's a pity that he, like many others, has absolutely no idea as to what really constitutes danger on the road, and allows you to do what you do whilst the real causes of death and destruction have almost no resources allocated to them.

As for who we are, we are the normally law-abiding citizens who are easy targets, and paying your wages (unless we're in the 30% of drivers who haven't registered our vehicles and are therefore untouchable, in which case- what are you going to do about it !!!!)

As for the "don't speed and you won't get zapped" underline, given the huge amount of recent media coverage relating to the innaccuracy of LTI 20.20s and even GATSos, you may want to remove it.

biker

i don't intend to get into a slanging match with a poster who has been in here 2 weeks, been there done it, no doubt you are better qualified than a chief constable,

reading your comments anyone would think that it is my fault they are speeding

dont speed and you won't get zapped - i'd call that common sense, every day 100's ofvehicles pass me if they are not speeding why would theyget booked.

LTI 20/20 you ever seen one, you ever seen one being operated, then i'd suggestsay nothing until you know what you are talking about

_________________
now retired

Agreed, no slanging match.
You know nothing about me, which negates the rest of your posting.

but you know nothing about me, take a bit of time and read some back posts (excluding say the first couple) i took these personal but soon got over it

_________________
now retired

Please don't take this as a re-start of a slanging match !
My point was, I MAY have extensive knowledge of road safety, LTI 20/20s and all the rest of it, I MAY be an advanced driver /rider etc etc, but you seem to equate my driving skill/knowledge/ability with the fact that I've only been posting here for two weeks.

And here's what your postings say about you:

You believe that cameras are wonderful
You believe that not exceeding the speed limit is a good thing
You believe that anyone exceeding the speed limit deserves to be done
You have total faith in the accuracy of the equipment you use

And I think that says a lot.

Anyway, I think this one is now done to death, so it's goodnight from me.

I would call it a lie.

1100 drivers zapped who were travelling below the limit!.

Driver persecuted for 51mph when he was doing 13.5mph!

Driver clocked at 480mph!

The AA agrees with us.

Please, remove your sig as it is both offensive and false.

Another set of wrongful prosecutions by mobile camera vans.

Do you still stand by your statement?

Cam Op

Even with my 'not quite rabid anti-camera stance' , I felt that your sig was asking for trouble!

i have sent paul a pm explaining why i attached the signature, i will act on his response

_________________
now retired

one at a time i think
since i started posting here, i have had posters firing bullets at me for a couple of weeks then disappear never to be heard of again (unless they register under a different name)

You believe that cameras are wonderful

not in the slightest, strategic placing of cameras / camera signs variable message boards alert drivers to potential hazards (or even the misfortune of others), i have around 30 sites that i am required to enforce at, of them 6/8 total waste of time (not meaning speeding offences but the limit is wrong for that road)

You believe that not exceeding the speed limit is a good thing

when i passed my driving test many moons ago, i was assessed on my driving skills / highway code knowledge etc, remember i do not set the limit, i might not like the limit, the limit annoys me but nevertheless at this moment in time the limit is the limit

this is where i agree with most posters in here that the speed limits of our roads needs a bloody good overhaul

You believe that anyone exceeding the speed limit deserves to be done

i believe that any one exceeding the speed limit in a current 30 mph, who is also exceeding our prosecution level in an area that is clearly marked as a safety camera operating area, where a highly marked transit is parked visible to both directions of traffic (many actualy passing the van)
is fair game (i disagree with enforcement at motorawy and dual carr. sites

You have total faith in the accuracy of the equipment you use

lets say i have around 90% faith in the equipment i use, certain factors have risen doubts (but i sense some underlying motive, i'm up to teletrafic in the next few weeks where i'll find out more), i can only use the equipment provided back when i was in the fire brigade enter a burning house with a BA on, (its type approved, you've checked it , someone else has checked it) will a hose go you have faith in it, another scenario at an rta driver gone into cardiac arrest paramedic arrives with a de fib you would like to think that the paramedic hasfaith inthe equipment provided to him

sorry for the long post

_________________
now retired

Sooooooooo.

I asked:" Wanna tell me what going faster than the sign has to do with being a safe driver? "

Camera operator said: "nothing the offence is driving at excess speed"

So why are you calling them "safety" cameras?

Oh and thanks for confirming what we already knew, namely that going faster than the sign has "nothing" (your words) to do with safe driving...cheers for that.

Another one then: It would appear that your name ie; "safety cameras" is a misnomer, a diversion even from your real aims which is simply to criminalise lots of drivers for a non safety related reason.
True?
If not, why the "safety" cameras name? Youve already confirmed that safe driving has got "nothing" to do with going faster than the sign so id suggest that all youre doing is "upholding" the law for the sake of it and not for any other benefit....in other words, a BAD law, but a neverthless lucrative one for you lot.

You appear to disagree with the speed limits:

Camera operator said: "this is where i agree with most posters in here that the speed limits of our roads needs a bloody good overhaul "

How can that be??? Youre sitting in the back of a van proclaiming "safety cameras" on the side, targetting drivers travelling over a "limit" (most likely falsely lowered for the purposes of driver criminalisation) and yet disagreeing with what /whyyoure doing it...? Are you confused? I know I am!

A slight conflict of interest, a crisis of conscience surely must exist within you?
If you believed that the speed limits were wrong then why target drivers?
Why take that job? Why not suggest that the limits are wrong?
Why not go have a long hard chat with your "authority" figure and suggest that he's got it all ass backwards?
Why not have some balls and tell him where to shove it???
Certainly i think youve put yourself in a difficult position by saying one thing then doing entirely something else.

As for that sig, it was always going to be a target for someone being as it was, both pious and sanctimonius.

_________________
"Safety" Scamera Partnerships;
Profitting from death and misery since 1993.

Believe nothing- Question everything.

I suppose 'Camera Operator' is in the position most of us are in. We need to earn a living and this one will see him through to retirement and beyond, I would think.

No chance of redundancy here !!

_________________
Good manners maketh a good motorist

That may be so, but it seems a bit much to be saying "we're doing it for safety" then admitting theyre doing it to uphold the law....a bad law oh, and not forgetting the oodles of lovely cash this operation raises.

My other question to Camera Operator would be: If driving faster than the sign has nothing to do with safe driving, then just what is the problem?

Not withstanding that, its quite obvious to anyone that these "people" are not wanted on our roads, theyre about as welcome as a F*rt in a spacesuit, add to that the fact that drivers wernt consulted before implementation (for obvious reasons) and you end up with people like me who hold the attitudes that theyve helped to foster and re-enforce.

_________________
"Safety" Scamera Partnerships;
Profitting from death and misery since 1993.

Believe nothing- Question everything.

i honestly give up

i will repeat again

as the law stands anyone caught exceeding the posted speed (and the bit more) limit is issued with an nip, that individual may think they have the right to break the law because he / she think themselves as a safe driver, the offence commited is exceeding the speed limit, i have yet to see a 30mph sign with if you think you are a safe driver please ignore the limit

delatf / paulf whoever you are

IMO no the law is not 100% right but nevertheless it is the law and until theres an overhaul nothing will change, my secondmentto my SCp from ANPR ends in March so i do not know if i will stay on as yet

i have read somewhere on the web that an italian F1 driver has beencaught and banned for doing twice the limit in Rome, no doubt he is a safe driver on a F1 circuit but does thatmake him above the law, no , yes maybe its Italy men in white shirts black ties!!

_________________
now retired

Camera Operator effectively said: " The law is the law is the law is......."ad infintum.

Laws are made for the guidance of wise men and the obedience of fools.

Now, can you address the other points i raised please?

Ps, PaulF and me (DeltaF) are unconnected, we are not the same poster/s.

PPs, dont "give up" ............we havent, and weve heard all the scammers excuses.

_________________
"Safety" Scamera Partnerships;
Profitting from death and misery since 1993.

Believe nothing- Question everything.