|
My local by-pass has major road works taking place. Now the road is normally NSL so they have put up a 40 mph speed limit. Now, the first time I drove through it struck me that there is only one 40 mph at the start of the restriction and no repeater signs at all over quite a long distance. Here comes the question, does the lack of repeater signs make this temporary speed limit unenforcable?
|
I presume that your By Pass does not have street lighting?
If this is the case then if I recall correctly there will be no conflict with the BUA 30 limit that street lighting can mean, so therefore one 40 should suffice without the need for repeaters.
DVD
|
|
Taking issue here DVD. Street lights indicate a 30 mph (which I think is daft in this day and age and they should be properly signed - LA cheapskates), if other than a 30mph it should have repeaters on the posts including de-restriction signs. Temporary limits should be signed within the regs in exactly the same way as full-time limits. Always worth checking the orders if you get a ticket, quite suprising how many authorities forget to renew them especially if the roadworks overun, I had a chap cleared in a local case because of this basic error by the LA.
|
|
Sorry DVD - speed read,I do not take issue. Bad bottle of vino last night.
|
|
Sorry should have engaged brain before posting. The bit with temp speed limit is a dual carriageway and has street lighting which normaly have deristriction repeaters making it 70 mph not NSL as previously stated. They have covered up the deristriction repeaters but the temp 40 mph does not have any repeater signs. I asked the question because it is alleged that a raft of speed limits bought in 10 years ago are illegal due to cock-ups by Suffolk CC see: www.abd.org.uk/ . Made me wonder about the legality of the temp limit.
|
|
Hangover apart - I would say that there they are in error. They've obvously cottened that in normal times the lights without FDGLF repeaters render this road to be a 30 mph by virtue of the street light layout hence the repeaters in normal times. Covering the repeaters would therefore render the road to be a 30mph limit and sticking a 40 mph sign wthout 40 mph repeaters is unlawful and not enforcable so it probably defaults to a 30 mph limit....just an opinion though.Over to you DVD
|
|
What they have created is extremme confusion for the poor motorist as to what speed limit applies. I wonder what view the bench would take if it went to court?
|
|
This is a difficulty now for all. In the old days when you were stopped by the Police and booked you could, potentially, examine the road signs for any problems and gather evidence for you defence. However these days a summons/NIP plops onto the doormat up to 14 dyas later when the location you were booked at may be the other side of the country.
|
|
If I can be sure of my facts I will raise public awareness via the local radio station phone-in. We now have our very own pair of scamera vans in Suffolk. Now, whilst I don't condone speeding I do think if they are going to go round issuing FPN's willy nilly the legality of the speed limit implementation must be correct to the letter of the law.
|
What's the policy in your neck of the woods ? Do they have these camera signs where the mobile cameras patrol ?
Also lets be honest about this these 40s are there to protect workers and drivers whilst roadworks are in "progress" on what is normally a 70mph limit, consequetly there are two issues one is the reponsibility of the Highways people to properly protect the works with lawfuly placed signs, and secondly the responsibility of the driver not to drive at idiotic speeds with impunity despite the fact that the Highway authority, seemingly, have not complied with the letter of law. Two wrongs don't make a right. Not knowing the layout of the roads or the extent of the inturruption of normal services a safe driver should be able to identify a safe maximum speed without any nannnying signs. In my experience of late road work speed limits tend to be over cautious (if not in speed certainly in the envelope they cover). I could example roadworks around PU towers where despite any marked limits the Police are well justified in chucking the book at the speeders that are encountered.
|
|
The vans have only been in action a month and I haven't seen one in action yet so I don't know if they are hiding in the bushes. They do announce which roads they are going to be on during the course of the week. I have no quarrel with the 40 mph speed limit to protect the workers but it also extends for 0.3 of a mile going away from the works before the temporary desrestriction sign. I just think it would be very unfair if not illegal to be dishing out FPN's on this stretch of road given the lack of signing. Now drivers not slowing down on entering the road works is a another matter. I am feeling very vulnerable trundling along at 40 mph in a single lane coned off section seeing drivers in my mirror bearing down on me at 70 mph!
|
|
This is a difficulty now for all. In the old days when you were stopped by the Police and booked you could, potentially, examine the road signs for any problems and gather evidence for you defence. However these days a summons/NIP plops onto the doormat up to 14 dyas later when the location you were booked at may be the other side of the country.
and what is more in the case of road works disappeared.
Interesting that m'learned friends DVD & Pugulgy have to have a discussion about this particular limit, is it 40, is it 30, is it 70, yet the poor old motorist is expected to sort it all out as he drives along in real time.
My stance is that if the letter of the law is to be applied to the public, in this case drivers, then the letter of the law has to be similarly obeyed by the "authorities."
Sorry I had to put that last word in quotes out of contempt for the numpties running this place.
|
|
|
|
|
Hi Godfrey,
"70 mph not NSL as previously stated."
What is the difference on a dual carriageway between 70mph and NSL, please?
|
|
Hi Sean I didn't say it was a dual-carriageway with 70 mph limit and typed NSL in error implying 60 mph single carriageway default limit.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Godfrey,
If in doubt - check on my speeding site on page 2 of the BB?
Matt35
|
|
Sorry Matt I'm being particularly thick this morning, which speeding site should I be checking?
|
Godfrey,
My speeding camera check - July 17 - on page 2 of the website.
Matt35
|
|
Ho!Ho! Yes I had already been there. I put in the registration of the car I had 29 years ago. Must have been able to time travel to get a ticket LOL!
|
|
|
|
Godfrey
You should also check that they have the correct signage at the end of the works to revert back to the normal limits. This topic raised its head last year, when the M57 motoway was being resurfaced. They did have the end of road works sign, but no NSL sign. It created great confusion and had to check the highway code to be sure that they end of roadworks sign (picture of chap with sticky umbrella thing) was a legal sign to signify end of roadworks and that normal limits were back in force.
Regards
Jonathan
|
Godfrey
To try and understand the signing of restrictions go to
www.tinyurl.com/hfgz
scroll down to the 7th post which was mine on 12.05.03 1443. (Speeding VII)
After reading you should appreciate why they covered the signs indicating the NSL because of the street lights present which made their presence under normal circumstances necessary to indicate it was NOT a 30 zone.
They have now imposed a Temporary Speed Limit of 40 for which an Order would be required and a copy of this will rest with the Local Authority and Police. This outlines the length of road involved and as PU has stated there have been occasions when the length has been incorrectly stated leading to aquitals.
Signing by law is governed by the Traffic Signs and General Directions 2002 of which Reg 11 (2) outlines the need for repeater signs but only states " at regular intervals". No exact distance is specified. LA's work from Circular Roads which may define, but I do not have access.
You mention the works involve some three tenths of a mile. My own experience seems to suggest repeaters are not less than half a mile but you may get some idea from the ones that are covered up. How far are these apart?
Further there may be something in the Temporary Order indicating at what intervals repeaters whould be placed.
Your into a very complex subject as a result it allows certain legal eagles to run rings round Police and LA resulting in good feees so that they can drive around their Estate, wooded no less, in a 90 and even drink wine of a night. Lucky Bees.
(No offence intended )
Incidentally if J400ANT is reading this, how did you come on with the problem you highlighted?
DVD
|
|
DVD on the stretch of road in question there are several covered up repeater signs for the normal derestricted status but no repeaters for the 40 mph. From previous experience of temporary restrictions there have been repeater signs at regular intervals over a similar distance. The total distance of the road works is 0.7 miles and there is a stretch of 0.3 miles going away from the works before you get the end of limit sign. I've read your previous post and there still seems room for doubt. There is also a road safety issue with the lack of repeater signs at the start of the limit. I think I will have a word with my County Council rep in the first instance, Monday morning. Goodness knows how I can get hold of a copy of the temporary order quickly. Previous experience with the local highway authority would suggest they will try and fob me off.
|
So on the face of G, the lack of 40 repeater signs and the length, tends to indicate that the restriction is incorrectly signed - the consequences of such lie with the Bench in their verdict if anyone is prosecuted for speeding.
You are wise in your intention to have words with your county Council Rep (Traffic Management Dept) . As I have said there is a plethora of rules and regs in this field and very easy to make a mistake, especially if the signing has been contracted out to a Private Firm.
DVD
|
I wish Godfrey H better luck than I had in trying to get a discussion when a road was signed totally illegally.
They accepted my point that, due to their incompetence, depending upon the direction from which one entered the stretch of road one could legitimately believe the limit to be 30, 40 or even 60!
Took them 8 months to sort, at which point they made the whole lot 30.
|
|
FIF, looks like I'm on a hiding to nothing from the start! Ah well if I can bring to public attention the fact that if the "authorities" wish to dish out FPN's willy nilly they must also stick to the letter of the law. The ABD has called into question the legality of a number of Suffolk speed limits and at least one driver has had an appeal upheld. I just hate people who are paid out of my council tax money who can't do their job properly.
|
|
Well as FIF predicted I am having an uphill struggle with the authorities. My Council rep didn't want to know. I had to put in quite a lot of time tracking down the responsible council official without his help and eventually got hold of the right man. I got the impression he didn't really give a pfd. As there are also safety implications I also emailed the local Police traffic inspector. Like the county council, local Police don't really want to be contacted and the only email address they give out is a general one. No response from Police at all.
|
|
Of course they wont be interested. they would rather have the confusion so as to generate more revenue through scameras.
|
|
|
|
