Speeding (mostly excl cameras) VI - Mark (RLBS)
Thread closed, please see version VII for further discussion.

www.honestjohn.co.uk/forum/post/index.htm?t=12753&...f

Speeding (mostly excl cameras) V is now closed and this thread has been started.

For the continued discussions around the subject of speeding, usually excluding cameras which are in another thread.

Older versions will not be deleted, so there is no need to repost any old stuff.


Mark (RLBS)
Moderator at Work

mailto:mark_moderator@honestjohn.co.uk
Speeding (mostly excl cameras) VI - BrianW
I was on a course today with a representative from an organisation that is trying to cut down on car ownership by having "pool" cars that you can rent by the hour or day or whatever so you do not have the temptation of a car sitting on the drive and only use one when absolutely necessary.

I hope their records are good, otherwise I can see arguments a car flashed at 11.12 and whether A used it from 10.00 to 11.15 and B from 11.15 to 12.00, or whether the changeover was at 11.10.

Brian
Still learning (I hope)
Speeding (mostly excl cameras) VI - SteveH42
Any idea how they worked this? It seems an ideal candidate for some form of smart-card system. You'd get a card when registering with them, and each time you took one of their cars out, you'd put the card in to a reader in the car. The car wouldn't start without a card and it could log exactly how long you had the car before returning it.
Speeding (mostly excl cameras) VI - BrianW
Sorry, don't know the details.

Brian
Still learning (I hope)
True deterrent ! - volvoman
Those of you who feel excessive speeding is a serious offence will be heartened to hear that the full weight of the law has rightly been brought to bear on a certain Solicitor General who's apparently been fined £400 and banned from driving for a whole 7 days !

No doubt those of you who've been prosecuted for doing 99mph on a motorway will feel justice has truly been done here and applaud the message sent out by the courts !
True deterrent ! - BrianW
Let's hope that becomes the benchmark for speeding offences that do not involve dangerous driving!

Odd for a court case to impose a less onerous sentence than would be incurred by accepting a fixed penalty, though.

It would be nice if every recipient of a NIP went to court and quoted that case as the precident!
True deterrent ! - doug_523i
Isn't the fixed penalty £60 and three points?
True deterrent ! - BrianW
Did she get the point's, I wonder?
True deterrent ! - Toad, of Toad Hall.
Those of you who feel excessive speeding is a serious offence
will be heartened to hear that the full weight of the
law has rightly been brought to bear on a certain
Solicitor General who's apparently been fined £400 and banned from driving
for a whole 7 days !


Excellent. She must simply resign and *I*, for one shall respect her.
--
These are my own opinions, and not necessarily those of all Toads.
True deterrent ! - volvoman
Resign Toad ? No chance. Mind you she was so full of remorse that she couldn't even go to court and explain how guilty she felt.
True deterrent ! - Peter D
Banned. Well that will up the insurance and stop her from hiring a car with most car hire companies for up to 3 years. Ooooch !! People forget that. Regards Peter
True deterrent ! - smokie
I made some assumptions and input them to www.caughtspeeding.co.uk/motoring/speeding/
which said

You were caught driving at 99mph on a motorway. The maximum speed that you can drive your vehicle on this class of road is 70mph. You were doing 29mph over the limit. As a guideline, the penalty for exceeding a speed limit of 70mph by 29mph is a fine of £100 to £400 and an endorsement of 4 or 5 penalty points.
Jam today, jam tomorrow! - Homme van Blanc
I thought you might be interested in this article from todays Times. It was an add-on at the end of the article on speed cameras.

"A motorist has been arrested for using a laser ?jammer? to block speed cameras. The driver, who has not been named, was caught speeding in South Wales using a laser diffuser, not yet illegal, to prevent the speed of his car being read by cameras. He was arrested on suspicion of perverting the course of justice."
Jam today, jam tomorrow! - Homme van Blanc
What? Nobody interested!
Jam today, jam tomorrow! - BrianW
I'm more interested in something that sets off Gatscos when you drive past at less than the posted limit.
Jam today, jam tomorrow! - J Bonington Jagworth
"..caught speeding in South Wales using a laser diffuser.."

Not a very good advertisement for it, then.. :-)
Jam today, jam tomorrow! - smokie
As it says, he was arrested on suspicion of perverting the course of justice. Jammers prevent the laser gun getting a reading so I guess he won't be done for speeding.

Having just bought the Snooper Neo device at great expense, it'd better work!! Not that I do Excessive Speeds - but I thought as there are so many s************s it would do no harm to have a reminder when I am approaching one, even the local ones which I know about. It also incorporates radar detector (I understand the police use radar less these days) and a laser detector (which I understand is pretty useless as by the time you've responded to the "inbound threat" they have already taken the readings).
Jam today, jam tomorrow! - smokie
s************s

Just testing...swear-o-meter doesn't like s************s?

S A F T E Y C A M E R A S
S A F T E Y C A M E R A S
S A F T E Y C A M E R A S
S A F T E Y C A M E R A S
S A F T E Y C A M E R A S
S A F T E Y C A M E R A S

Now I will go and wash my mouth out...
Jam today, jam tomorrow! - DavidHM
safteycameras probably works too...
Jam today, jam tomorrow! - Humpy
Something's wrong with that article. For a start the laser diffuser has nothing to do with cameras. It only jams laser speed traps. Secondly smokie, are you not talking about a laser detector. As far as I understand, by the time you've detected a laser you've been busted, they only need 0.25s to detect your speed. No diffusers I have heard of incorporate radar detectors or jammers.

My diffuser has saved me a couple of times but only against police on the side of the road using a laser gun on the motorway. Which is what I bought it for, it really woks well. I think it's a target le550 or something like that!
Solicitor General banned for speeding - John S
www.freeserve.com/news/national/story_news0.htm?li...r

Note the 'new campaign' on speeding and today's news that there are to be even more speed cameras, paid for from the 'revenue' from existing cameras. Don't I recall a while ago that 'cameras were only to used at accident black spots'? Ah, yes, of course, a week is a long time in politics.

Regards

John S
Solicitor General banned for speeding - Shigg
I'm still waiting for the camera that catches -

Car thiefs
Burglars
Muggers
Rapists
Murderers
Corrupt politicians
etc.

Steve.
Italy raises 3 lane m'way speed limit - SjB {P}
Excuse me if this has been posted before (I don't think so), and for starting a new thread (as it is not related to cameras).

The way to go?

www.motorcyclenews.com/news/detail?sectionID=50677...5
Italy raises 3 lane m'way speed limit - matt35 {P}
SjB

Having lived in Italy for two years and driven there for more than 25 years - I think if the new law can REDUCE the Autostrade speeds to 93mph, the transport minister will be promoted.
Regads,

Matt35.
Italy raises 3 lane m'way speed limit - SjB {P}
Ha ha :-))

Actually, Matt35, I thought something similar, but wanted to start the thread of at least reasonably seriously!
Italy raises 3 lane m'way speed limit - CM
Opposed to Burnstrom (Alwyn's favourite person) who says that more cameras are going to be installed as we have seen a reduction of 35% in deaths due to speed. How come Italy and the UK can have such diametrically opposed "sultions" to the same problem.
Good barrister or good luck? - Armitage Shanks{P}
I see that a prominent member of Tiny Blur's Government has been given a 7 day ban and a £400 fine, having been caught doing 99mph on a motorway. Do any backroomers think that they would have got off so lightly in these circumstances? Not the circumstance of being a Labour cabinet member, of course! Just being a motorist caught bang to rights driving at speed!
Good barrister or good luck? - Homme van Blanc
What surprised me about this was the fact that she'd climbed down off the gravy train long enough to drive herself!
Good barrister or good luck? - Ian (Cape Town)
Co-incidental that the speed is always 99, isn't it?
never 97, or 102, or 98, or 101...
Man, I wish I could drive so consistently...

Good barrister or good luck? - smokie
"Co-incidental that the speed is always 99, isn't it?
never 97, or 102, or 98, or 101..."

I once got done for 98.4!!

It's a fact that sometimes the police are "kind" to you in that they will adjust the reported speed in your favour. She may have been clocked at 102 or 103. You don't have to be a Solicitor-General but it probably helps!
Good barrister or good luck? - terryb
I thought there was only an automatic ban for 100mph plus.
Perhaps she was being made an example of????
Terry
Good barrister or good luck? - DavidHM
I'm not sure if she got points on her licence, or if the ban was in lieu of points, but she will still have to declare it on her insurance and pay for it that way. I don't think she's got off that lightly at all actually.
Good barrister or good luck? - Toad, of Toad Hall.
I'm not sure if she got points on her licence, or
if the ban was in lieu of points, but she will
still have to declare it on her insurance and pay for
it that way. I don't think she's got off that
lightly at all actually.


She's the solicitor general. She's broken a law!

Anyone in the legislature or the judiciary who breaks any law should be sacked immediately!!!

How can anyone argue otherwise?
--
These are my own opinions, and not necessarily those of all Toads.
Good barrister or good luck? - joe
OK Toad, I'll take up your challenge!

If the transgression in question is sufficiently serious to call into question the person's ability to do their job properly, then they resign. However, it is a bit of a jump to go on to say that any type of criminal offence whatsoever should automatically disqualify someone from this sort of office.

It encourages me that cabinet ministers drive themselves about from time to time, rather than using ministerial limos, first class trains, cabs etc. If they are going to drive themselves about, sooner or later they will get zapped by a speed camera unless they form part of the 1% of the population that never breaks a speed limit.

If we insisted on completely blameless politicians, what a colourless and insipid lot we'd end up with. People with any zest just simply wouldn't bother.

I suspect what gets your goat (I know it gets mine)is the sanctimonious attitude displayed by those in power (both this lot and the last lot). To give the solicitor general her due, at least she held her hands up and appears to have been treated no more leniently that you or I would have been. I was much more angry when Jack Straw's driver got let off after Straw made some spurious claim that he thought there just might be a "security risk" and ordered the driver to step on it. Utter nonsense. Equally, 2 Jags driving 200 yards to the party conference, this just displays contempt for all of us who have to use the roads.

Sorry Mark, little bit of politics there!
Good barrister or good luck? - Toad, of Toad Hall.
etc. If they are going to drive themselves about, sooner or
later they will get zapped by a speed camera unless they
form part of the 1% of the population that never breaks
a speed limit.


That's the thing Joe.

If it's a 'proper' crime it should lead to sacking because the official is clearly corrupt.

If it's a crime that can be commited by accident why is it a crime at all? In this case it should lead to a sacking because the official clearly supports a stupid law.

Then you've got Jack Straw who mixes with people in both categories.

If speeding was like a parking ticket (no stigma, no points and no courts) I'd take your point but the rozzer letter head and the magistrate's/clark of court's involvement means some takes this crime seriously and resignation should be inevitable.

BTW a few weeks ago I related the tale of a bloke who was done for Drink Driving off road then let off the ban by the magistrate. General consensus was that I'd made it up. Well blow me if there wasn't a similar case in my local paper. Bloke moved his car in his driveway to let a guest at his party out. Manoever was on and off drive. He was given 10 points and community service instead of a ban.

It does happen!!!

--
These are my own opinions, and not necessarily those of all Toads.
Good barrister or good luck? - joe
Is it a proper crime or not? I think the answer is actually "well, a bit!" Motoring offences (including fixed penalty offences) are technically crimes, but are treated differently from others in many ways.So its not a serious crime.

You go on to say that she should resign because she supports a stupid law. Not sure about that. Is it stupid that there is a law against driving at 99mph on a public road? Some will say yes, some will say no, but its not a resigning issue surely. If it was, it would not just be the Solicitor General that was resigning.
Good barrister or good luck? - Toad, of Toad Hall.
Is it a proper crime or not? I think the answer
is actually "well, a bit!" Motoring offences (including fixed penalty offences)
are technically crimes, but are treated differently from others in many
ways.So its not a serious crime.


- It is dealt with by the courts though. When I send of my enforced 'confession to speeding form' it goes to the magistrate. Therefore I would argue it's like other crimes. If it's not serious it could just involve a fine or community service. Say, one months net income. Nobody would get banned, nobody would lose thier careers, nobody would feel like a crook, the police would literally overnight become the heroes they were before the crack down on speeding days. (Big difference between being fined in a civil case and being given anti-job points with low lifes in a court.) ALso the extreme speeders who end up in goal could be released to make space for some of the burglars that we currently let off.
You go on to say that she should resign because she
supports a stupid law. Not sure about that. Is it stupid
that there is a law against driving at 99mph on a
public road? Some will say yes, some will say no,


...and I would still argue that either way she should resign!
but
its not a resigning issue surely. If it was, it would
not just be the Solicitor General that was resigning.


If I had my way it would be a lot more. Straw (Inciting driver to speed and coming from a family of crooks) & Prescott (Punch) to start with.
--
These are my own opinions, and not necessarily those of all Toads.
Good barrister or good luck? - Maz
ALso the extreme speeders who end up in
goal could be released to make space for some of the
burglars that we currently let off.


Is this another crack at David Seaman, or to give them a chance of saving the penalty? :-0
Good barrister or good luck? - HF
Is this another crack at David Seaman, or to give them
a chance of saving the penalty? :-0


ROFL!!!
HF
Good barrister or good luck? - BrianW
"Is it a proper crime or not? "

IMHO, If it is dangerous driving then it is is a crime and should be treated as such.

If it is not dangerous then there is no case for prosecution.
Good barrister or good luck? - Armitage Shanks{P}
"If we insisted on completely blameless politicians, what a colourless and insipid lot we'd end up with. People with any zest just simply wouldn't bother."

But that it is just what we HAVE got! Apart from a few notable exceptions ie people who attend regularly, make sensible speeches and actually DO something as MPs, a lot of the rest are a waste of time and space in a self serving club who don't seem to be in the house much (unless it is to vote themsleves an inflation busting pay-rise or pension increase).
Good barrister or good luck? - Phil I
I am pretty sure that the traffic man who stopped Harriet in her mad dash to Bristol (more likely around 110 to attract his attention) when he saw the documents and recognised the name being a wise person made sure the paperwork was for 99. Brownie points with the Chief C. Got H.H. off the hook. All good stuff.
Good barrister or good luck? - Humpy
I got stopped for 116mph a few years ago. 3 week ban, no points and a £90 fine (means tested, and I was a student!). I don't think you can get points and a ban.
Good barrister or good luck? - smokie
For 108 I got £200 fine and 2 week ban, no points, £20 costs. I also paid for a solicitor (further £200) who before the case worked out that I should get fine, ban AND points.

I think it was helpful having him represent me.
Speeding Ticket 'Fines' Rise to £500 - daryld
Why all the fuss?

Everyday I see lunatic drivers speeding along A roads, 'undertaking' impatiently, 'dive bombing' other drivers when exiting a carriageway. My wife and two kids were travelling along the A428 and were almost involved in a head on collision (so bad that she had to stop the car as she was so badly shaken) due to some speeding lunatic overtaking on a blind bend.

One of the few advantages of having lived in the USA is that the police have a zero tolerance to speeding drivers (at least in upsate New York they did). Overall, the driving style there was slower and less aggressive than here, and safer, although I'm not sure what the accident rate was compared to the UK.

So I welcome more fines for speeders; if I get clobbered one day for a minor speeding item then I will be happy in the knowledge that the other idiot, and many others like him/her, who nearly killed my wife and kids would have probably been caught even more.
Speeding Ticket 'Fines' Rise to £500 - Phil I
Fines have no effect on the sort of drivers you mention. Imprisonment is the only way you can stop these people and you cannot lock them up for ever.
Speeding Ticket 'Fines' Rise to £500 - smokie
Imprisonment for speeding??? Dangerous driving yes, driving without due care maybe, but not for speeding if it's done in a safe manner and with due respect for other road users.
Speeding Ticket 'Fines' Rise to £500 - Marcus
daryld,
"Overall, the driving style there was slower and less aggressive than here, and safer, although I'm not sure what the accident rate was compared to the UK."

There have been a number of threads in the Backroom comparing USA & UK driving styles. The concensus is exactly as you say they drive slower and less aggressively.

However, despite the above, there are numerous sets of statistics to show that it is considerably more dangerous to drive in the USA. That includes deaths/accidents per 'x' miles driven and any other permutation of the statistics.

Nobody is sure why that is so.

Marcus
£560 fine for speeding - wemyss
Below is from HJs news. Do you actually inform your insurance company that you have a conviction from a speed camera trap and
they load your premium next time.
I wasn't aware of this but will certainly be on the ball in future. It appears that not only the cameras revenue collectors for the state but also for the private sector.

The massive proliferation of speed cameras planned thoroughout the UK mean that not only will almost every driver in the country be forced to pay a £60 fine, they will go on paying for a further five years.
The reason is that insurers which used to turn a blind eye to a single SP30, now hit policyholders with premium rises of up to £100 for each 'conviction'. Since these must be declared for five years, the total cost of one tiny trangression can be as much as £560.
£560 fine for speeding - TrevorP
Interesting.

How many NIP's do they issue now? About 1m per year?

And how many licence holders do we have? 25m?
And how may NEW licence holders per year?

So, ignoring some drivers who get multiples, and the drivers who can't be traced, an interesting use of the term
"almost every driver in the country".

As to this Insurance question, I asked my Broker.
He is NOT aware of any insurance company taking such a view
(with the proviso, of course, of "at this time")

Nice bit of factual reporting.
£560 fine for speeding - BrianW
The figure for 2001 was about 1 million.
The figures for 2002 haven't been released yet but is probably double that,
The target for 2003 is 3 million.
HTH
£560 fine for speeding - Toad, of Toad Hall.
3 million loaded for five years.

15 million people who've been through the courts.

1/4 of the population!

Given that the courts should be the last resort for the worst offenders (shoplifters & drug users won't even see a court for offence number one which will warrent only a caution) we are becoming a dangerously lawless society.

15 million people who are *worse* than druggies or shop lifters.

Maybe deportation is the answer.
--
These are my own opinions, and not necessarily those of all Toads.
£560 fine for speeding - Mark (RLBS)
You do realise that if nobody did any speeding for, say, 6 months then the whole system would cave in on itself and most of the cameras would disappear as being uneconomic ?
£560 fine for speeding - BrianW
And if you applied it to other overtaxed commodities, if nobody smoked or drank for six months excise duties would come down.

And if nobody used their car for a month, fuel duties would do likewise !
£560 fine for speeding - TrevorP
Interesting logic.

"15 million people who've been through the courts."

So you multiple GUESS of 3m by this other insurance bit to get

Myth A x Myth B = Fact C.

Surely that stands at
"3m drivers affected for 5 years (allegedly)"

How does that equate with "almost every driver in the country"?
£560 fine for speeding - Mark (RLBS)
>>3 million loaded for five years.
>>15 million people who've been through the courts.
>>1/4 of the population!

Firstly you are assuming that the 3 million will happen.
Secondly you are assuming that nobody ever gets two or more speeding offences.
Thirdly, the insurers will not load your policy for 5 years, at worst it would be three, and much more likely to be one.
Fourthly I could get a job with a speding conviction, I would be unlikely to get one with a drug or theft conviction, whatever the punishment (and a caution is frequently official and recorded)
£560 fine for speeding - Toad, of Toad Hall.
Mark: a) Yes, I think it would be a great idea for all to stop speeding and bring the system down. (Road tax would have to go up of course) Electronic limiters would be a great step forward in this. b) My figures are based on assumptions yes. The original figures that ushered in camera's we're actually distorted. AFAIA a caution isn't reported to a potential employer. The rehabilitation of offenders act allow us to lie about points after a certain number of years. Can't remember how many.

Trevor: I didn't say almost every driver. But a straw poll of active drivers around me suggests that anyone living in Oxford of the south east can expect points.

So yeah. I agree with 100 per cent of both your posts. You must both be reckless loons.

--
These are my own opinions, and not necessarily those of all Toads.
£560 fine for speeding - Tomo
I have tried to comment on this before.

Either this is opportunist profiteering by the insurers, or they have been put under pressure by the anti-motoring authorities.

Tomo.
£560 fine for speeding - DavidHM
I got flashed shortly after I got my car, my first. Concerned about what this would do to my insurance, I got two quotes from the Direct Line website. One was about £80, or 10%, higher, with a 35 mph speeding conviction and 3 points. (That's based on 1 year no claims, a driving licence held for 7 years, and no other convictions or claims).
£560 fine for speeding - Mark (RLBS)
>>Either this is opportunist profiteering by the insurers, or they have been put under pressure by the anti-motoring authorities.

Or they feel that speeding drivers represent a higher risk and therefore should pick up a larger burden of premium than someone without a speeding conviction.

Or are you saying that someone who has no speeding conviction should pay the same premium as somebody with one, therefore effectively subsidising the insurance premium of someone who cannot be bothered to remain within the law ?

And bear in mind we're dealing wiht an awful lot of "up to"s

I think 560 quid was quoted above. But it could equally be a fraction of that. You are not necc. fined 60, your insurer does not necc. load your premium at all. 560 is scaremongering.

M.

p.s. no pound sign, sorry.
£560 fine for speeding - Toad, of Toad Hall.
Or are you saying that someone who has no speeding conviction
should pay the same premium as somebody with one, therefore effectively
subsidising the insurance premium of someone who cannot be bothered to
remain within the law ?


Depends on whether he crashes more. I often stray a fraction over 70 I don't crash.

Others run people over, but only within the speed limit.

If I was an insurer I'd be more worried about the guy who's gonna have a kid claim millions for care following a broken neck than someone who hit 75 but didn't claim.

Maybe I just don't know much about commerce.

Fortunately all the other insurers stopped loading for points when cameras turned up - a few years back 9 points still left me on a minimum premium.
--
These are my own opinions, and not necessarily those of all Toads.
£560 fine for speeding - Mark (RLBS)
Loading on a specific person is done considering his actual claims history.

However, overall rating is done using the statistical likelihood of him having an accident and the ramifications of that accident, irrespective of whether or not he has an accident.

And whether or not you crash at over 70, whether or not you claim, statistically you are more likely to have an accident and more likely to claim - I guess the rest of the drivers just aren't as good or luck as you.

It may not even be directly related to your speed. It *may* be that statistically people who speed also are more likely to disobey rule x which does cause accidents - I'm guessing, but it gets that complex.
£560 fine for speeding - Toad, of Toad Hall.
Loading on a specific person is done considering his actual claims
history.
However, overall rating is done using the statistical likelihood of him
having an accident and the ramifications of that accident, irrespective of
whether or not he has an accident.


And they obviously feel 9 points on a guy approaching 30 with no claims ever who keeps his worthless car on his driveway is not any extra risk at all. Which I agree with. Luckily I don't have to tell them I was so dizzy after an epic squash match on tuesday that I couldn't see the petrol pump figures when I stopped!!!
And whether or not you crash at over 70, whether or
not you claim, statistically you are more likely to have an
accident and more likely to claim - I guess the rest
of the drivers just aren't as good or luck as you.


Can't be better, must be lucky. Can I have discount for being lucky then? How do you measure luck?
It may not even be directly related to your speed. It
*may* be that statistically people who speed also are more likely
to disobey rule x which does cause accidents - I'm guessing,
but it gets that complex.


Tailgating. If they ever ask me that I've had it.

I'd have thought mileage was by far the biggest factor for points. I'm clean because I do under 17k a year. Father + Brother do 200k between them. Even with company provided radar detectors they've picked up some...
--
These are my own opinions, and not necessarily those of all Toads.
£560 fine for speeding - Mark (RLBS)
And they obviously feel 9 points on a guy approaching 30
with no claims ever who keeps his worthless car on his
driveway is not any extra risk at all.


I thought you started by complaining that the insurance companies would make someone with 9 points pay a lot more ? And I thought you thought that was unfair. But now you seem to be saying that someone with 9 points should be charged ? I am confused - as I suspect are you.

>>Luckily I don't have to tell them I was so
dizzy after an epic squash match on tuesday that I couldn't
see the petrol pump figures when I stopped!!!


Somewhat irresponsible of you, I'd say. However, I would now hazard a guess that there seems to be a correlation between someone who drives a little over 70mph and someone who is also prepared to drive whilst unfit to do so due to dizziness.

Therefore, I would think, in your case at least, loading your preimum would be quite justifiable.
Can't be better, must be lucky. Can I have discount for
being lucky then?


Of course you can. To a large extent that is what your NCD is.

>>How do you measure luck?

Claims not happening.
I'd have thought mileage was by far the biggest factor for
points. I'm clean because I do under 17k a year. Father
+ Brother do 200k between them.


I do 1000 business miles a week as a minimum. Not picked up any points while working yet. However, I could easily be either an exception or exceptionally fortunate.
£560 fine for speeding - Toad, of Toad Hall.
I thought you started by complaining that the insurance companies would
make someone with 9 points pay a lot more ?


- More fool you for staying in the debate, then!!! ;-)
And
I thought you thought that was unfair. But now you seem
to be saying that someone with 9 points should be charged
? I am confused - as I suspect are you.


-

>> Somewhat irresponsible of you, I\'d say. However, I would now hazard
a guess that there seems to be a correlation between someone
who drives a little over 70mph and someone who is also
prepared to drive whilst unfit to do so due to dizziness.


Yeah but if it\'s ok to drive after a few spliffs driving exhausted or dizzy must be ok.

In the *real* world drivng at 71 is harmless and driving, as I did tuesday is inexcusable and should bring an immediate ban.
Therefore, I would think, in your case at least, loading your
preimum would be quite justifiable.


Morally a ban for driving when your eyes don\'t focus would be lenient. [snip] don\'t be silly Toad Fortunately we live in a culture where only speed matters.
Of course you can. To a large extent that is what
your NCD is.
Claims not happening.


Whichever way you look at it that is scarily like the truth.
I do 1000 business miles a week as a minimum. Not
picked up any points while working yet. However, I could easily
be either an exception or exceptionally fortunate.


Maybe the leather policeman\'s flat hat and handlebar moustache puts them off?

--
These are my own opinions, and not necessarily those of all Toads.
£560 fine for speeding - Mark (RLBS)

>In the *real* world drivng at 71 is harmless and driving, as I
>did tuesday is inexcusable and should bring an immediate ban.

In the real world there is a correlation between tending towards one and the other.
Of course you can. To a large extent that is what your NCD is.

>>Claims not happening.
>
>Whichever way you look at it that is scarily like the truth.

It is the truth. I wasn't joking.
£560 fine for speeding - Toad, of Toad Hall.
>In the *real* world drivng at 71 is harmless and driving,
as I
>did tuesday is inexcusable and should bring an immediate ban.
In the real world there is a correlation between tending towards
one and the other.


Utterly disagree. In my limited experience permanantly disabled people, people who are stroke victims, people who are elderly do not tend to speed more than average.

In fact I find that people who are a bit confused and perhaps should not be driving tend to drive slower.
--
These are my own opinions, and not necessarily those of all Toads.
£560 fine for speeding - BrianW
"I often stray a fraction over 70 I don't crash."

How do you get away with it?
Don't you know that if someone puts up a tin sign saying "70" you will die if you do 71?

£560 fine for speeding - Toad, of Toad Hall.
"I often stray a fraction over 70 I don't crash."
How do you get away with it?
Don't you know that if someone puts up a tin sign
saying "70" you will die if you do 71?


Yeah, I like to live dangerously.

I've put a self imposed 1mph limit on my driveway.

For kicks I like to drive on at 2mph.

Life's cheap to punks like me!!! ;-)

Those tin signs are the whole problem.

Speed kills. THerefore if you abolish all speed limits speeding is impossible and nobody can die. QED.
--
These are my own opinions, and not necessarily those of all Toads.
Speed limit repeater signs. - J500ANT
On a main road near me there is a 40mph limit, and there are signs at the start of it, which seem to be the standard size, fairy snuff.

BUT the repeater signs are tiny, they are "narrower" than the lamp posts they are attached to! Ive not gone and measured one, but i'd guess at 10cm across max.

Anyone know the minimum size these things are legally allowed to be?

(Of course this stretch of road is one that the s************ Partnership are targetting, surprise surprise!)

Tony :)
Speed limit repeater signs. - Deryck Tintagel
The following link gives a lot of information about speed limits, etc. Apparently, the sign should be 300 to 1500mm in diameter!

www.abd.org.uk/speed_limit_signs.htm#diagram670
Speed limit repeater signs. - Dwight Van Driver
Look at:

www.tinyurl.com/b9kj

dvd
Speed limit repeater signs. - volvoman
Silly question maybe, but if you know it's a 40 limit (presumably because you've seen a larger sign to that effect at the start of the 40mph section) why does it matter what size the repeater signs are ? It's not as though you haven't seen them is it.
At the next point the speed limit changes there should be a large sign to that effect. Until you see that sign giving notice of the change, 40 mph is the limit whether there are repeaters along the way or not.

As to why the repeaters seem to be smaller, that's certainly my experience in this part of the world - perhaps it's just down to cost !

I often wonder why there are repeater signs in some areas and not others, seemingly irrespective of the location, type of road etc.
Speed limit repeater signs. - Blue {P}
Careful there Volvoman, if you followed that exactly then that means our street has a 40 mph limit as there are no signs to say that you are entering a 30 limit.

Of course anyone who manages to get up to 40 mph in our street should be shot...

Blue
Speed limit repeater signs. - TrevP
Volvoman is of course correct - with the addition of

"all built-up areas with street lighting are 30 mph unless signed otherwise"
Speed limit repeater signs. - Andrew-T
Trev - which is precisely the reason why a 40 zone should have repeater signs, especially if the streets are lit - so that you know you may do 40 anstead of assuming you may not.
Speed limit repeater signs. - SteveH42
Silly question maybe, but if you know it's a 40 limit
(presumably because you've seen a larger sign to that effect at
the start of the 40mph section) why does it matter what
size the repeater signs are ? It's not as though
you haven't seen them is it.


I know of quite a few speed limit signs that are positioned where it is easy to to miss them if you don't know the area. Some of these are roads that would normally be NSL. The repeaters save you speeding if you do accidentally miss the sign for whatever reason.
Speed limit repeater signs. - Mark (RLBS)
This will get moved to the "speeding (mostly excl cameras)VI" Thread later.
Speed limit repeater signs. - J500ANT
I bow to all of your greater knowledge.

Yes I do know its a 40mph limit, but even so, if the signs are below regulation size then thats not right. Further along the road where it turns into a 50mph zone the repeater signs are "proper" size!

I will go out later and take some pix and measurements, and go from there.

Tony :)

PS Mark, will i still be able to find this later?
Speed limit repeater signs. - Mark (RLBS)
PS Mark, will i still be able to find this later?


Yes. Just look for the thread called "speeding (mostly excl cameras)VI"
Speed limit repeater signs. - pugdriver
Is there a requirement for the signs to be maintained in good order?

I'm asking this because in South Cambridge there is (was?) a road with a 40 mph limit, and the repeaters were in some cases weathered to such an extent that the '40' could not be read. I noticed this some years ago, and they are probably just the same now.

Similarly, in Maidenhead there is (was?) a sign with lighting inside, but the screen was broken, thus defacing the '40' legend. It was like that every time I saw it. (Again some time ago)

Now, my argument would be that if a sign is not legible, how can the instruction thereon be enforcable?

As a motorist I am obliged to keep my car's number plate legible, so does this cut both ways?

Over to the legal team.......


Speed limit repeater signs. - Altea Ego
AS you enter a restricted section, there is a stonking great BIG speed limit sign, or where the speed changes there is a stonking great big sign. Mostly TWO in fact. THIS indicates a restricted section not the repeaters which are there just to remind you. NO EXCUSE about colour, dirt, size, etc. Try the old excuse of I didnt see the sign cos its too small or dirty will get you a ticket for Driving without due care because you missed all the others! As for lampposts, its 30 unless otherwise posted.
Speed limit repeater signs. - Obsolete
I know at least one area where a NSL seamlessly transits to a 40 without the obligatory 40 speed limit sign. The only reason I know this is because of a small repeated hidden away just before the 40 becomes a 30. I think someone fluffed up. I also know areas where the start of a speed limit sign is hidden by overgrown vegetation. It took quite a while for me to find it.
Speed limit repeater signs. - tone
The regulations exists saying repeaters should be x size and y far apart and in good order, which it seems some people seem to think should apply to be applicable and others dont.

What do the 'dont's' feel about 'designer' number plates. The registration is still visible just because the fonts smaller and in italic doesn't make in completely non readable.
Speed limit repeater signs. - Flat in Fifth
Way I look at it is this.

If the rule applies that it is not up to me to choose which law to obey and which to ignore, then the same rule applies to the authorities. (Possibly with the exception of the Crown, but then I don't necessarily agree that the latter situation is at all desirable)

If the signage is not in accordance with Statutory Instrument 2002 No. 3113 The Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2002 then the limit is potentially unenforceable.

Convictions have been overturned because of this very reason thus setting precedent in my view.

No doubt Ratty is consulting with wise old Badger as we speak. ;-)
Speed limit repeater signs. - Dwight Van Driver
FiF

Ten out ten as per usual.....

Back to the Riverbank Hammock and contemplation...

DVD
Speed limit repeater signs. - doug_523i
There is a short stretch near me that has been downgraded from 40mph to 30mph for approx 75yards, but the 40 repeater sign is still there. As a matter of curiosity, I wonder what the enforceable limit is, bearing in mind it's a dual carriageway, with no houses accessible from it, leading to a motorway.
Speed limit repeater signs. - Sheepy-by-the-Sea
A slight aside - motorway road works speed limits.

Where roadworks have an enforceable limit, usually 50mph, the signs are obvious on entry.

On exit, I have found some roadworks terminate with just an 'end of roadworks' sign, while others have the 'national speed limit applies' sign as well.

I have also seen at least one set where there is an end of roadworks sign and then half a mile further on a 'national speed limit' sign.

So is the NSL sign mandatory or not? Which sign takes precedence? We should be told!
Speed limit repeater signs. - Dwight Van Driver
Sheppy bt the Sea.

This has been covered before and there is a long string of threads about same.

Speed limits for Roadworks are brought in by an Order.
Order states that it has to be signed.
Start of works with 50 sign.
End of works only needs end of roadworks sign to terminate speed limit for those works.

DVD
Speed limit repeater signs. - Flat in Fifth
Funnily enough DVD on my merry way up to Bonnie Scotland a few weeks ago in the run up to Easter most road works had been abandoned. Nevertheless a nasty moment occurred.

Road works with reduced limit, end of road works sign, so NSL restored.

Not so much further, lots of cones along the grass verges, ie off the carriageway and hard shoulder, all the road works signs and repeaters had been removed leaving just empty frames in place.

So there FiF is thinking, better get a wiggle on going to be after 11pm when I get to Granite City, so kept at the indicated 72 (calibrated 70) when came upon a load of specs cameras with NSL signs just after. Every beggar was thinking DOH and hitting the anchors, quite frankly.. not keen!

Thanks to your excellent advice from the riverbank knew what the limit was and just kept going. Ta muchly.

PS: any more vino recommendations?

Speed limit repeater signs. - Sheepy-by-the-Sea
Thanks for your reply - I'm fairly new to HJ but should have searched...

Speed limit repeater signs. - SteveH42
The road from Stockport to Macclesfield, or the stretch between Poynton and Bollington at least recently had one limit on the main signs, another on the repeaters and a third painted on the road. I believe it was said that as a result *no* limit could be enforced. Most of it has been reduced from NSL to 40, but it doesn't really make that much difference as you always got stuck behind someone pottering along at 35 before so it's not that much slower.
Speed limit repeater signs. - Amin_{p}
Steve. I was fined for speeding the road you mention for doing 40 in a section which was apparantly 30. It was the first time I had been caught speeding and I genuinely thought the limit was 40 at that section (somwhere between hazel grove and pounton). That road is very confusing as the limit is constantly changing every half a mile. I have subsequently recieved three points and a fine. But if what you say is true with regards to the signing on that road, can I do anything about my points? When I was caught I simply accepted it as my mistake, but may be it wasn't. May be there was also a sign with 40 on it, and that is the one I saw. As I said previous to that I have never exceeded the limit and always even drive 5 miles below it for same measure. what do you think? any chance to get rid of the points? or am I stuffed?
Speed limit repeater signs. - SteveH42
I think you must have just missed the sign. The only change in limits between HG and Poynton is the bit after Fiveways where the NSL has been reduced to a 40. Where did you get caught? It's 30 all the way from Hazel Grove (well, Manchester actually!) to about Brookside, then this was NSL until it reached the dual carriageway section just before Poynton where it dropped to 40 (this is all 40 now) and at the end of the dual carriageway it becomes 30.
Speed limit repeater signs. - J500ANT
Right, below are links to pix showing the size of the \"offending\" speed repeater signs. By my measurement they are 15cm across, or the size of a Mars Bar (regular not King Size!) Sorry for the quality of the pix, these things are too high off the ground for short \'uns like I!

I havent found anything that states the minimum size for these things, but I will try!

Tony

www.j500ant.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/40sign.JPG
www.j500ant.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/40signruler.JPG
www.j500ant.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/40signmars.JPG

Speed limit repeater signs. - J500ANT
www.roads.dft.gov.uk/roadnetwork/ditm/tal/signs/01...4

As the repeater signs that i have photographed are not 300mm across as stipulated by the above DfT leaflet, could anyone suggest the best course of action? I have not been caught by any speed enforcement, but i know that many others have!

Tony
Speed limit repeater signs. - Amin_{p}
Steve, I can?t remember exactly where it was, but it was defiantly after HG (from Manchester). I travel regularly from Manchester to a village called Wincle in the peak district, and I have to pass Macclesfield on the A6. Having said that, per say, what in general happens if you have been fined for speeding and at the time accept the police is right, but somehow later find out that it was not so clear cut. I mean, really what I am really asking is, once those points are in your paper, are they there to stay irrespective of, or could they be removed provided you could show the conviction was not right?
Speed limit repeater signs. - SteveH42
I'd assume that if you could prove you were not speeding then they would have to take the points off and reimburse the fine, plus I'd imagine you might get some legal fees back.

However, you'll have to prove the conviction was not right in the first place. I'd say it's unlikely they would not have spotted if they were trying to enforce the wrong limit on a stretch of road, as they would have caught hundreds of people. Personally, if I ever got a speed ticket, and I couldn't picture the circumstances and be sure I was actually speeding, I'd likely visit the area again to either work out the mistake I made, or find out if there was anything I could complain about such as hidden signs or misleading markings.

From what I can recall, BTW, the only 30 limits between HG and Macc are the stretch from HG to just after Fiveways, the stretch through Poynton (which now I think on, I believe has recently been extended to the edge of the housing), the 30 limits on the two roundabouts in Macc itself, and of course through Macc.
Speed limit repeater signs. - Mark (RLBS)
Thread now closed. Please see "Speeding (mostly excl cameras) VII" for continued discussion. M.

 

Value my car