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

[Lunar_Fox]

From government website

Fortunately or unfortunately I have no choice but to accept the ticket as I live in Sheffield, 5 hours e/w from Bournemouth where the case would be heard.
At least that simplifies the issue for me !
But the basic principle, that non locals should not be more likely to get prosecuted than locals, remains. I would like to try and do something about that, however unlikely it may be to happen......

You don't have to go to court, you can send a written mitigation statement. And I think mentioned elsewhere you may get an awareness course if you have attended on in the last 5 years. You can take that course online or in person at any county.

 

[SheffMan]

From government website

You don't have to go to court, you can send a written mitigation statement. And I think mentioned elsewhere you may get an awareness course if you have attended on in the last 5 years. You can take that course online or in person at any county.

To be honest I have already agreed to take an awareness course.
Possibly hard though it may be for some to understand, I'd rather go to a face to face one, I find those Online things a PITA (and the chances of me having 2 or 3 hours of uninterrupted time on the lap top at home is minimal). But the letter says if I want that option I have to travel down to Dorset ! Two points about that :

1 - Again that's unfair on non locals, who are not only more likely to get done by that camera but then (effectively) do not get the option of a live course.

2 - When I had to do my first awareness course (six years ago) the offence was in Lincoln, but I could pick anywhere to do the coure (I actually did it in Rotherham). Has this changed recently ?

 

[Kenai]

1 - Again that's unfair on non locals, who are not only more likely to get done by that camera but then (effectively) do not get the option of a live course.

Back in reality, it's actually more likely relatively local people would get caught, because locals have the potential confusion of it having been a 40 limit for years and possibly even was a 40 last time they drove it, whereas non-locals don't have this prior assumption or knowledge to provide any confusion.

 

[tom_e]

I'm disappointed you rolled over and took the course to be honest, you had such a good arguement to get out of it.

 

[SheffMan]

I'm disappointed you rolled over and took the course to be honest, you had such a good arguement to get out of it.

I have done an FOI as to how many tickets are issued from that camera, I await the results with interest.

 

[SheffMan]

Back in reality, it's actually more likely relatively local people would get caught, because locals have the potential confusion of it having been a 40 limit for years and possibly even was a 40 last time they drove it, whereas non-locals don't have this prior assumption or knowledge to provide any confusion.

I would agree for the first few months, maybe even the first year ? Not so sure after 2 years.

 

[Kenai]

I would agree for the first few months, maybe even the first year ? Not so sure after 2 years.

After an adequate length of time, it's then simply equally likely that anybody would get caught (local or not), because then it's more about the basic competence of the particular individual driver.

 

[SheffMan]

After an adequate length of time, it's then simply equally likely that anybody would get caught (local or not), because then it's more about the basic competence of the particular individual driver.

I don't agree with you at all.
I know pretty much all the speed limits in Sheffield.

You seem to be repeating the argument that "competent drivers" always know what the speed limit is. Well judging by the number of speeding offences, and the proportion of drivers who have had at least one speeding ticket, then that implies that the great majority of drivers are "incompetent". So where are you placing the bar as to competency ?

Working out the speed limit is particularly difficult on urban primary routes (40 to 30 to 40 etc), and the argument that "if there are streetlights (but no other signs)" it's 'obviously 30mph' is no longer the case at all. Just in case anyone did not read this on the other current speed camera thread this is very interesting and makes a lot of sense :

The streetlights/no streetlights thing was a very elegant and simple solution to enable the 30 limit to be instituted in 1934, when many thousands of new signs would be needed to mark boundaries and waiting for them all to be erected would take too long. It also enabled the idea that a competent motorist could look around and determine the limit from their surroundings, which is admirable - both the law and the motorist are aided if it's possible to work out the correct speed limit no matter where you are. But that was all predicated on there being two possible states for a road (lit/not lit) and two possible limits (30/none).
When local limits came along that could override those defaults, they were bolted on to the existing system with as much elegance as could be achieved through the use of repeater signs, maintaining the principle of the competent motorist looking around and working it out. But as time has gone by and speed limits have become more complex the whole idea has been stretched to breaking point.
We are now in a situation where we already have several developments that mean a competent driver can't really rely on reading their surroundings at any given moment. There's the 20/30 disparity between Wales and the rest of the UK, but before that we had the change of rules around repeaters that reduced the requirement to one somewhere within the limit rather than enough to make them visible throughout. Many years back Scotland decided that the lights = 30 rule did not apply on classified roads, so there you need to know whether you're on an A or B road before evaluating the lighting levels and calculating the limit. And before even that the decision was taken to exempt motorways from the rule about lighting, so you also have to know whether or not you're on a motorway.

 

[Kenai]

You seem to be repeating the argument that "competent drivers" always know what the speed limit is.

They should do, yes. Ascertaining what the speed limit is, is a very basic part of driving competence.

Well judging by the number of speeding offences, and the proportion of drivers who have had at least one speeding ticket, then that implies that the great majority of drivers are "incompetent".

It certainly does imply that, yes. That and/or that people simply don't care - many will get tickets from not caring what the limit is, rather than an inability to understand what it is. Everyone knows the limit on a motorway is 70mph for a regular car but plenty will whistle along at 90mph as a choice and some will get caught doing it.

So where are you placing the bar as to competency ?

Well, driving past this and thinking it means you're in a 40mph limit is not within the realms of what I would call 'competent', if that helps.

Working out the speed limit is particularly difficult on urban primary routes (40 to 30 to 40 etc),

It isn't really, not for competent drivers, they put up signs and stuff to help.

 

[SheffMan]

They should do, yes. Ascertaining what the speed limit is, is a very basic part of driving competence.

It certainly does imply that, yes. That and/or that people simply don't care - many will get tickets from not caring what the limit is, rather than an inability to understand what it is. Everyone knows the limit on a motorway is 70mph for a regular car but plenty will whistle along at 90mph as a choice and some will get caught doing it.

Well, driving past this and thinking it means you're in a 40mph limit is not within the realms of what I would call 'competent', if that helps.

It isn't really, not for competent drivers, they put up signs and stuff to help.

Those signs are no where near the camera site, but this is pointless anyway, classic example of someone arguing for the sake of it, tell you what, we'll just agree to disagree.

 

[Lunar_Fox]

To be honest I have already agreed to take an awareness course.
Possibly hard though it may be for some to understand, I'd rather go to a face to face one, I find those Online things a PITA (and the chances of me having 2 or 3 hours of uninterrupted time on the lap top at home is minimal). But the letter says if I want that option I have to travel down to Dorset ! Two points about that :

1 - Again that's unfair on non locals, who are not only more likely to get done by that camera but then (effectively) do not get the option of a live course.

2 - When I had to do my first awareness course (six years ago) the offence was in Lincoln, but I could pick anywhere to do the coure (I actually did it in Rotherham). Has this changed recently ?

that is surprising and annoying. I am guessing that must be a local decision to only offer the course locally. I thought other counties offer you to the option to take it anywhere (I think aside from Manchester maybe) as its a national database of those who take the course that the police use to determine if to offer you the course plus insurance companies have access to the database as well.

 

[Kenai]

Those signs are no where near the camera site, but this is pointless anyway,

They don't need to be, once you've passed them, you're into the 30 limit.

You don't pass any other limit signs between there and the camera, so what would make anyone think it was a 40 by the time you got to the camera?

classic example of someone arguing for the sake of it, tell you what, we'll just agree to disagree.

We don't need to "agree to disagree", you just need to grow up a bit and admit when you've made a mistake rather than trying to pretend the world is against you and it's all too hard to understand, rigged against travelling drivers etc. when the reality is that you got caught in a scenario that actually isn't confusing at all, you just weren't paying enough attention to your driving, which given how hard you claim driving to be, you probably ought to be a bit more conscious about doing.

(edit for embarrassing spelling mistake)

 

[Lunar_Fox]

It certainly does imply that, yes. That and/or that people simply don't care - many will get tickets from not caring what the limit is, rather than an inability to understand what it is. Everyone knows the limit on a motorway is 70mph for a regular car but plenty will whistle along at 90mph as a choice and some will get caught doing it.

I'll have to say that I commute on motorway and do a fair amount of driving evening and weekend driving and the days of a lot of people doing 90 seem to be over. Either its the cost of fuel or the increases in cameras but I normally have cruise control at around 77mph and rarely get overtaken.

 

[Bear]

Those signs are no where near the camera site, but this is pointless anyway, classic example of someone arguing for the sake of it, tell you what, we'll just agree to disagree.

Its irrelevant its nowhere near the camera site, theres multiple advanced postings of the speed limit. Im with Kenai here, it is basic competance and observational skills, driving isnt just about pressing the go and stop pedal and moving that wheel in front of you yet for far too many people thats all it is to them. Its not surprising how many people close pass a cyclist and when the police pull them over (when they do a close pass operation) the number of drivers dont even remember seeing a cyclist. Lots of looking but not seeing

 

[Feek]

Wait, are these the signs closest to where he was done, that he drove past?

 

[Kenai]

Wait, are these the signs closest to where he was done, that he drove past?

Yes

 

[Bear]

Yes

Should have gone to Specsavers

 

[Kenai]

Should have gone to Specsavers

Or started a parliamentary petition, one or the other

 

[Feek]

Yes

Then this whole thread is a joke.

I live in Sheffield and therefore I am unfamiliar with the roads and constantly changing speed limits down there.
I could not understand how I got caught out so I have subsequently spent much time examining Google streetview and there does not appear to be on of those large "change of speed limit sign" down to the lower 30 from the higher 40 limit it undoubtedly was just 200 yards up the road on the other side of the roundabout !

Blind as a bat. Seriously, if you drove past those signs above and didn't realise you were entering a 30 zone then you don't deserve to have a driving licence.

 

[SheffMan]

you got caught in a scenario that actually isn't confusing at all,

This is rubbish, you must be the only person that thinks the speed limit is obvious in all scenarios. What with the advent of variable limits it isn't even "obvious at all times" on the motorway anymore.
I suspect you are just arguing for the sake of it but just to check, have you read this ? It makes total sense to me and if you have read it I cannot see how you can have written what you have :

The streetlights/no streetlights thing was a very elegant and simple solution to enable the 30 limit to be instituted in 1934, when many thousands of new signs would be needed to mark boundaries and waiting for them all to be erected would take too long. It also enabled the idea that a competent motorist could look around and determine the limit from their surroundings, which is admirable - both the law and the motorist are aided if it's possible to work out the correct speed limit no matter where you are. But that was all predicated on there being two possible states for a road (lit/not lit) and two possible limits (30/none).
When local limits came along that could override those defaults, they were bolted on to the existing system with as much elegance as could be achieved through the use of repeater signs, maintaining the principle of the competent motorist looking around and working it out. But as time has gone by and speed limits have become more complex the whole idea has been stretched to breaking point.
We are now in a situation where we already have several developments that mean a competent driver can't really rely on reading their surroundings at any given moment. There's the 20/30 disparity between Wales and the rest of the UK, but before that we had the change of rules around repeaters that reduced the requirement to one somewhere within the limit rather than enough to make them visible throughout. Many years back Scotland decided that the lights = 30 rule did not apply on classified roads, so there you need to know whether you're on an A or B road before evaluating the lighting levels and calculating the limit. And before even that the decision was taken to exempt motorways from the rule about lighting, so you also have to know whether or not you're on a motorway.