Challenging a speed camera ticket due to no "change of speed" sign

Status
Not open for further replies.
Yeah I had some sympathy originally because that area really isn't the most intuitive for what the limit might be if driving it unfamiliar with the area and was previously somewhat easy to think you'd missed speed signage but the latest Street View updates do show they've improved on that.
 
Still obviously a scam and the OP has zero culpability whatsoever… something something cash grab… go catch real criminals.
 
Is he still saying he didn’t see all the signage?

I double down on my comments that his eyesight is clearly so bad, he shouldn’t have a licence.
 
2CTlny1.gif
 
Nigel Kingdon said:
Can't make that work for me. Prior to the 'safety' camera going in, no accidents even with a higher limit, therefore placement has to be for 'speeding' concerns (AKA revenue generation). Road limit was reduced and the revenue rolls in. Only an automaton could think that those 'not complying' are 'incompetent'. It is everyone right to challenge any law if they feel an injustice has been done.

This kind of back door autocracy is widespread, and the OP gets my vote for exposing yet another corrupt council. Any mechanism that is self incriminating, without recourse to a fair trial is in my mine the top of a very slippery slope.

In order to place the camera the greedy authorities would have had to draw up an amendment to the TRO governing that stretch, and they would have to cite why they wanted wanted it there, safety being the prime concern. They would also have to do the same for the reduction in the limit. These documents are available at the council offices that prepared them. Members of the public are entitled to view them. For larger councils you will have to make an appointment (not easy), and you will likely be given 10 minutes with them. Some more forward thinking councils have them available on line (but not Bournemouth).

Overturning a TRO amendment is possible, and if found to be illegally obtained, all fines generated from it have to be returned. This has happen previously. As you can imagine, the council concerned were reluctant to return the money and they made it so that individuals had to claim it back, serval years afte3r the event and provide documents showing the 'transgression'. Oddly enough they were not keen to let the public know all of this.
Click to expand...
Thank you for that.
I have to say your views are what everyone I have talked to says, face to face I mean.
People on forums are different, very different, it tends to bring out the worst in people and they just argue for the sake of it.
 
Feek said:
Is he still saying he didn’t see all the signage?

I double down on my comments that his eyesight is clearly so bad, he shouldn’t have a licence.
Click to expand...
Cobblers, we were lost having been sent on a detour as a result of a road closure.
I tend to ignore any sign that has a speed camera symbol on it because there are so many of them in areas with no speed cameras, they're essentially meaningless. Ironically had there just been a 30 repeater on its own, just a round sign with a red circle round it, I'd almost certainly have seen it.

>>he shouldn’t have a licence<<

As I said above forums tend to bring out many people's worst sides and you're just attempting to prove me right, but in the real world the facts would dispute your assertion :

No accidents since 1989 (excluding car park scrapes).
Only thee points on my licence (and two speed awareness courses) in 40 years.
 
Last edited:
Ok so the signs were there, you ignored them because "reasons", you're still crying about it.

Honestly just take a bit of account for your actions, this isn't a forum reply either if I knew someone in real life who'd done this I'd tell them it was their own fault as well and 99.9% of people would go "yeah I know, still irritating" and I'd agree with them and we'd both move on.

I bet all the people you've told about this you've omitted the speed limit signs you drove past and ignored just before the camera.
 
Last edited:
SheffMan said:
So narcissistic it was on the BBC :
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cx2e4qvv771o
Click to expand...

Im not sure that link proves what you think it does. The speed was reduced on that section not because there were a large amount of accidents there but to slow down traffic for a newly placed crossing for a nearby retail park encouraging more people to go there by foot. It went out for pubic consultation and the change was advertised for 21 days. It just shows how inattentive the average driver is, its quite pitiful really.

It really doesnt change the comment about your narcissistic behaviour, the fact you are still whining about it reinforces it
 
Last edited:
Bear said:
Im not sure that link proves what you think it does. The speed was reduced on that section not because there were a large amount of accidents there but to slow down traffic for a newly placed crossing for a nearby retail park encouraging more people to go there by foot. It went out for pubic consultation and the change was advertised for 21 days. It just shows how inattentive the average driver is, its quite pitiful really.

It really doesnt change the comment about your narcissistic behaviour, the fact you are still whining about it reinforces it
Click to expand...
Why do you need to reduce the speed limit if there is a light controlled crossing there ?
It's a total cobblers excuse.

Of more interest, digressing I admit, is your use of the term "narcissistic".
We were just discussing this at work, how could that term be appropriate for a discussion of speed cameras and speed limits ? I reckon one of the lads hit it on the head when he pointed out the word was not one you ever used to hear much, but it is used far more these days, and I agree with him.
I think it is because society is becoming more and more focussed on "society" and less and less on "individual freedoms", though somewhat ironically weird hair hairstyles and piercings are more accepted these days, as are unconventional family groups etc. But if you want your personal freedoms and it is thought - by some - to be "contrary to the good of society" (everything from disapproving of the Covid suppression measures to wanting to smoke [I don't smoke BTW]) you are considered selfish and, by implication, narcissistic.
For a Libertarian like myself that leaves me wide open to the term "narcissistic"
Well so be it.
 
After reading that, your a 'man of the land / sovereign citizen' aren't you.

No wonder you don't follow speed limits.
 
Last edited:
SheffMan said:
I tend to ignore any sign that has a speed camera symbol on it because there are so many of them in areas with no speed cameras, they're essentially meaningless.
Click to expand...

If they're meaningless then why are you whining about a speeding ticket? Did you actually get a speeding ticket or is this thread just a cry for attention? If you did actually get one, then clearly they aren't meaningless!

SheffMan said:
No accidents since 1989 (excluding car park scrapes), but seen plenty in my rear view mirror!
Click to expand...

Fixed that for you!

SheffMan said:
I think it is because society is becoming more and more focussed on "society" and less and less on "individual freedoms", though somewhat ironically weird hair hairstyles and piercings are more accepted these days, as are unconventional family groups etc. But if you want your personal freedoms and it is thought - by some - to be "contrary to the good of society" (everything from disapproving of the Covid suppression measures to wanting to smoke [I don't smoke BTW]) you are considered selfish and, by implication, narcissistic.
For a Libertarian like myself that leaves me wide open to the term "narcissistic"
Well so be it.
Click to expand...

Would you like some dressing with that word salad?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom