British motorists lose speed camera case

DESIGNED BY yourway321

I see from a recent deliverance in 'tips' that the advanced school of motorists advise -to keep in 3rd gear to maintain 30 mph in 30mph zones and that it will save fuel. Utter rubbish. Why do they think a car goes faster at low engine revs and that the optimum in fuel consumption of most modern cars is around 50mph. Many 2000 and newer cars are quite capable of 40mph in second gear and 70mph in 3rd.
Although it has nothing to do with speed they can even give incorrect advice when stationary as they advise holding in the button when engaging the hand brake. What do they think a ratchet was deigned for. Their advice to press down on the lever when the handbrake is engaged is the opposite to what is correct. I haven't met a mechanic alive who would condone their behavior.
I can't remember who said it but it goes-- It should never be allowed that those who critisize have not a fraction of the expertise,experience or knowledge of those who they critisize.

My daughter had an accident in her car at the age of 18. It was established in court that when she was distracted and clipped a kerb she was doing 55mph in a 40mph zone. She was on a main trunk road dual-carriageway, no pavements, grass verges, driving in a straight line in the inside lane on a downhill stretch and she was 'one and a half seconds' out of the 70mph limit. She did nothing else wrong.

Unfortunately the car came of the road and hit a tree. Her friend in the rear of the car, who had refused point blank to wear her seatbelt in my daughter's car, in fact in every car whether in the front or back seat, trgically did not survive the impact with the tree. My daughter's neck was brocken from the impact of her rear passenger.

She was dragged through the courts on a charge of causing death by dangerous driving. She was found guilty by a majority verdict of a jury consisting mainly of middle-aged women.

My daughters punishment for this accident - 3 years in prison and a 5 year driving ban.

Don't talk to me about speed limits or fines or what is constituted as dangerous driving. I can get pis..d out of my mind and drive past primary schools all day long at it is not classified as dangerous friving. If I am a policemen, even off-duty I can travel at over 100mph on an A-Road and I don't get charged with dangerous driving.

My daughter drove this satretch of road no different to me and thousands of others every day. She was held up by the Judge as "an example to other decent young people", as he described it. We don't have to look far to see who are the sick and evil minded people in our society.

The whole legal system relating to drivers is corrupt in the extreme and open to abuse on both sides of the fence.

If what Dave said in comment (11) most police forces allow 10% +2mph tolerence is a load of claptrap, I have been find on 2 occassions in the past at 34mph in 30mph zones, this applies to a number of acquaintences too.

my view on speed cameras or what ever people like to call them ,is quite simple the police are employed to implement them. so every driver should withdraw support for the police , do not be a witness to not make statements,do not assist in any way this is not illegal, as we are policed so far be consent lets us see the reaction of the police as public support for them is gretaly reduced.

I just got a speeding ticket. Ok I know I did it but what I can't find out is what it will cost me. I was doing 39 in a 30 mile limit. Btw I still think the cameras are a good idea. Doesn't make it right cos it was me!

I THINK IT IS ENEVITABLE FUEL WILL GO UP AS FUEL RUNS OUT AND THE ARABS HAVE GOT US BY THE SHORT AND CURLYS

I was given 3 points and a £60 fine when i was not even speeding, the officer who stopped me had no blue lights on and no siren, he was the most arrogant and PIG HEADDED officer i had ever met, when i was stopped another officer got out of the Van and urinated in a bush, (Is that even legal) even if it is it SHOULD NOT BE DONE IN PUBLIC VIEW (I AM DISGUSTED WITH THE POLICE SERVICE FOR THIS). I am a law obiding citizen studying a degree in aeronautical engineering, i dont need to speed in my car when i can fly at 900mph in a jet. I took the case to the C.A.B wrote some letters and got a reply saying YOUR WRONG WE ARE RIGHT, THIS CASE WILL NOT GO TO COURT the officer had nothing to prove i was speeding or anyone saying i was. when it comes to you against the word of the 'law' you are always wrong, DO I NOT HAVE ANY RIGHTS????? the system is apauling.

I am now put off from joining the police services and always think twice before calling them for any reason!

the way things are is apauling, it needs to be changed!

I have been fined for exceeding the 40 mph limit when I was in fact AT the limit.
I was accused of ding 46 mph - yet the pictures were not clear enough to measure the distance I had travelled - agreed by the magistrates. However the camera partnership representative said they had software which enabled them to click on a part of my vehicle number plate on the two pictures and IT calculated my speed! They failed to demonstrate this in court, yet I was found guilty.
The difference in distance between exceeding the limit or not would have been 175 mm!!!!
You can see the evidence and comment here: http://www.safespeed.org.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?t=15275

On the A46, just outside S-u-A, there is a speed camera which is on a 60mph stretch of road.

They are now doing roadworks just after the speed camera and as such going into the roadworks past the camera has been lowered to 40mph - no problem with that. Except on the other side of the road the speed limit was still 60mph since it was a way after the roadworks.

The national speed limit sign has now been painted over, and now placed about 10 yards after the camera and is about 600 metres after the roadworks. Going the opposite way, the national speed limit is resumed within metres of the end of the roadworks.

Can anyone guess which way and for what lane the camera is aimed at?

Thats correct, the lane that has been through the roadworks, has no speed limit signs until after the camera has been passed to which is goes back to 60mph.

If it was meant for safety, wouldn't it be better to point it at cars coming into the roadworks and 40mph limit, as opposed to cars that have passed the roadworks by some considerable distance.

I personally think the current system needs a review

Instead of each incident resulting in a fine, points or that course that was mentioned earlier, a three strikes and you're fined and banned for six months would be a better way to manage it.

Each incident would be recorded and a letter posted to the offender these would remain valid for 12 calender months.

That way the person who's accidentally gone over the speed limit or who has a faulty speedo, or indeed the radar device is faulty gets the warning he needs and the persistant and dangerous people would ultimately be taken off the road till they learn their lesson the issue of government theiving revenue from innocent drivers would go away and everyone would be happier about it.

It would also stop the high price lawyers making a mint getting their rich clients off, because they can't argue that it's unfair to prosecute Mr Mercedes from Buckinghamshire because his job depends on his vehicle, if the silly fool has been caught three times.

Thats my tuppence worth, not that it'll make any difference!

If the government wants us to deviate our speed even further from the economical 50-60mph band then it needs to reduce fuel duty. 20mph zones are a joke - 1st, 2nd, and 3rd gear all suck when it comes to the wallet.

Where I can I drive at a speed that allows 5th gear even if breaking the speed limit slightly. The only limit I never exceed is the 60 or 70mph.

tbh country lanes should be 50 and country A roads 56mph.

Those that burn out cameras the same night they get flashed don't pay anything if they don't get caught doing it.
This would be the wrong thing to do in SOME areas at CERTAIN times. Speeding during the day outside a school is foolish.

But there again driving at 56mph on a 40mph pedestrian free dual-carriageway, to reduce fuel use due to extortionate pricing by the government is a good idea.

Driving in a 30 at 40 after 10pm is beneficial if you know where the cameras are - saves time and fuel as it allows 5th gear instead of 4th.

If I see a person burning out a speed camera in money-spinning pedestrian free locations, I never actually saw them!!!

I am both disappointed and disgusted with the amount of speed cameras now being used on our roads, especially on Motorways. They are now there simply to make money and common sense has 'gone out of the window'.

I am a retired Police Traffic Patrol officer and when I was working, I used both diplomacy and common sense when stopping any motorist for speeding, taking into consideration such factors as location, time of day/night, attitude of the driver when stopped. I found that a quick 'talking to' instead of an automatic ticket leading to 3 penalty points was often very much appreciated. Result - a happier motorist, not now quite so resentful of the Police!
It was also quite common for us to be instructed by senior officers to park up (saving mileage and fuel!) as a visible presence and deterrent. Ok, this did not generate revenue as speed cameras do now, but as Police Officers, we were paid to provide a fair and honest service to the public. Speed cameras do not take any of this into consideration and motorists are targeted even during the early hours of the morning, often with there not being any other vehicles and pedestrians anywhere in sight.

I am not supporting excessive speeding by any means, because speed cameras do have their uses, outside schools being one prime example.
They are certainly not needed in such vast numbers on Motorways but of course, think of the revenue they generate!!! Drivers are now taking their eyes off the road just to watch out for speed cameras so perhaps they may even be causing road accidents.

What tends to be perhaps conveniently forgotten is that speed is not the only factor causing road accidents. Inattentiveness at the wheel of the vehicle when using a mobile phone, driving whilst drunk through alcohol or drugs are prime examples. It's no good increasing fines and dishing out penalty points for using phones when there is no longer a visible Police presence. It's now even more common to see someone using a mobile phone
whilst driving; after all, the chances of getting caught are very slim indeed.

There is no doubt in my mind that the Police are fast loosing public support. In today's headlines involving the murder of a teenage boy, a leading Police Officer is quoted as saying"we were disappointed by the public's response so far". I hope I am wrong, perhaps I will never know, but I suspect the excessive use of speed cameras may have a part to play in this, with members of the public getting more and more resentful.

Also, this Government needs to get it's act together and give the public what they really want instead of never ending spin and broken promises! Put more 'real' Police on the beat, build more prisons to accommodate the undesirables of our society and why haven't we already followed New York's lead by introducing Zero Tolerance!

This country of ours is fast descending into anarchy, the public feel they are being let down badly with increasingly poor support from out of touch Politicians, the Courts and the Police!

One last thing to put my comments in perspective ...

I've held a Full Driving license for 28 years, I'm a motorcyclist having had bikes up to 1100cc ..a regular car driver ..a public service vehicle driver (buses) a light goods vehicle driver on deliveries throughout the South East and London (always against the clock) and had company cars and travelled in excess of 30 to 40,000 miles a year.

I also hold an AMI (advanced motorcycle instructor licence) which qualifies me to teach people to ride motorcycles.

...and in all that time on the road, up until the point where I've been flashed by what I believe to be a faulty camera ..I've only been pulled over once by the police for a rear number plate light in which the bulb had blown in the early 80's.

So to those of you who read this and your thoughts are on the lines of, "if you do the crime, you do the time stop whining and grow a spine"

...just wait till it's you in this situation, you know you're innocent, but the only financially viable thing to do is pay up and take the points (or be offered the speed awareness course as I was for £111, where you're basically patronised and told you're a naughty boy but some youngster who hasn't even been alive for as long as I've held a license )

Because the alternative is possibly thousands of pounds in legal fee's, days off work to go to court, lost earnings and without any guarantee of winning against a system that is totally drenched in propaganda and a belief in technology that by it's very nature is inherently prone to error.

and see if your attitude is quite so smug then!

I'd just like to add to my previous post

Even if these devices were accurate up to 99.9% of the time, that'd mean that at this point in time, well over 11,000+ motorists have been convicted illeagally in this country.

To me it is clear what is going on, these machines have to be calibrated on a regular basis to maintain accuracy, but just like british telecom when you report a fault on the line, you're told that there is no fault, because it would make them liable, but you still see a BT van at the end of your street within a few hours ...coincidence?

In my opinion, it's only a matter of time till someone with sufficient financial support and political backing decides that enough is enough and takes on this problem and exposes the truth.

So ..let me get this straight ..the law in this country is expecting us to believe that 100% of these cameras are 100% accurate 100% of the time? ..I'm sorry, but we are people of the technology age and it's quite clear that is impossible.

I've been convicted for alledgedly doing 39 mph in a 30, when in reality I had pulled up virtually stationary at the time while looking for an address ..but as i can't prove it, I've been convicted of a crime I haven't committed.

I've no objection to speed cameras ..people do drive wrecklessly and those that do speed risk lives ..but I personally have no doubt the device that took my photo was faulty, but as there's no way I can prove it I'm lumbered with a fine that isn't mine to pay.

This is truly a scandal of epic proportions that when eventually exposed will cost the government millions in settlments.

If you do ever get stopped for speeding be polite and ask to see the calibration certificate of the device that cuaght you speeding, beit a gun or car following you. Every officer has to have, at the start of that days shift, a certificate of calibration. If not, go to court and it contest it on these grounds, you will get off.

I am not condoning speeding at all, its just a fact that the Police sometimes stop you for speeding when you are a few miles over the limit cos they are board or like your car and they don;t always have their kit calibrated.

The comments made in number 8 Dave 10th July are correct and endorsed by the IAM good comment I agree with every word

Derek: I would disagree with you there. I drive approximately the same distance per year as yourself and the first and last time I was fined for speeding was about 14 years ago (within a year of passing my test).
I did not moan and complain. i paid the fine and took the points. I also changed my driving style.
This is not to say that I do not speed. You can drive down the motorways all day / everyday at 80mph and not be fined (although I am not condoning this). All police regions that work with a safety camera partnership (which I believe they all do now) give a 10% + 2mph leniency so that covers the "accidentally" straying over the limit.

Dave: Would just like to state that I for one agree with your comments.

I'd like to comment on Edward's reply.
1. There has to be trade off between the ideal economical speed and local safe speeds. Whilst I feel limiting pollution is generally the most important issue, driving within the speed limit has to be a priority. I do not agree that 'Most of our roads are being limited to 40 MPH in areas that were once 60MPH', I do 25k miles a year and have not found this to be my experience. The vast majority or <60 mph limits I drive through are either in towns/villages or in perceived accident hotspots. I have no doubt that the optimum speed is generally 59mph, where possible this should be target speed.
2. I'm not persuaded by this argument. I'd like to comment on Edwards reply.
1. There has to be trade off between the ideal economical speed and local safe speeds. Whilst I feel limiting pollution is generally the most important issue, driving within the speed limit has to be a priority. I do not agree that 'Most of our roads are being limited to 40 MPH in areas that were once 60MPH', I do 25k miles a year and have not found this to be my experience. The vast majority or <60 mph limits I drive through are either in towns/villages or in perceived accident hotspots. I have no doubt that the optimum speed is generally 59mph, where possible this should be target speed.
2. I'm not persuaded by this argument. It's normally presented as a reason for upping the motorway driving limit. If you slow down, be a bit more courtious to other road users and stop treating driving as a battle, more people will get to their destinations in one piece. As the signs say, feel tired? Take a break. Why is it seen as macho (by nobody else but yourself) to drive fast, agressively for long periods of time?
3. If you stick to speed limits, whatever they are, you will save money.

I realise that my views will not go down well with some people, but why are we members of this website in the first place? Finding the cheapest fuel? So we are into reducing driving costs, this just takes it to the next logical (to me) step.

I take issue with the last post.
1) Reducing pollution. Most of our roads are being limited to 40 MPH in areas that were once 60MPH. Not so long ago it was found that the most ecnomical speed for the internal combustion engine as fitted in a car was 59 MPH. So unless that has changed we are now running our engines at a less efficient speed and therefore burning more fuel reletive to the speed being travelled.
2) If you reduce the speed disportionaly to the actual dangers presented by a particular stretch of road, it will lead driver to feel "safe" due to lack of mental stimulation and therefore loose concentration though boerdom and thus lead to a greater risk of an accident.
3) Refer to item 1 as burning more fuel costs you more.
4) Is the only comment that can really be agreed with.

Driving within the speed limit will go along way towards 4 things;

1. Reducing pollution
2. Reducing accidents
3. Saving you fuel money
4. Saving you paying out for fines

Sneaky speed cameras are everywhere. Now we learn that the Glasgow/London bombers were tracked from Scotland to London via automatic number plate reading cameras situated on M-ways and A roads. Does anyone know what these look like??? Also can anyone confirm how to tell that Gatso camera are armed? Something to do with the open/closed slots I believe. Word on the street says that average speed cameras cannot track your vehicle if it changes lanes between cameras.

What a great anti-terrorism device the speed camera could be. Put them all around airports, set them to flash at 5 mph and any car bombers caught on film would have to reveal their identify and would loose any right to not incriminate themselves. Hey why not put speed cameras in shopping mall to catch shoplifters and in homes for burglars?

Funny that - I never knew that Magna Carter had been repealed - you are innocent until proved guilty and that is UK law - perhaps someone should tell that to the judges in the European Court.

The smart arses who just drive to the local shops and spout "don't speed and you won't get fined" need to get into the real world. I drive 30,000 miles per annum - it is not possible not to break the speed limit on occassions in the real world. In the real world, anybody travelling that sort of mileage will have been flashed by a camera when even travelling in the opposite direction - they can and should be challenged as much as possible.

Well there's a SIMPLE answer. Don't Speed.

You do the crime... you do the time. Take it on the chin instead of being slopey shouldered and grow a spine.

I have gone green and was wondering why you don't show service stations that
sell Bio Diesel.......
And it is cheapest

Well now we all know what is classed as more important in this country.
If you comit a crime towards another idividual or company or even any other variety of criminal acts, you can claim the right of silence. But if you are a car driver, you can not as you dont have any rights.
Never mind lets all roll over and accept it as we usually do. Stiff upper lip and all that, wot old boy.