PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Smart Motorway
mysterydriver123
post Mon, 9 Sep 2019 - 16:43
Post #1


New Member


Group: Closed
Posts: 9
Joined: 23 Jun 2019
Member No.: 104,425



.

This post has been edited by mysterydriver123: Tue, 10 Sep 2019 - 20:00
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
 
Start new topic
Replies (1 - 17)
Advertisement
post Mon, 9 Sep 2019 - 16:43
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
Logician
post Mon, 9 Sep 2019 - 17:03
Post #2


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 12,245
Joined: 28 Mar 2010
Member No.: 36,528



There are never different limits for different lanes, so your case would be a bit weak in court but I very much doubt you will hear anything and if you did the police might be persuaded to drop it as the newer HADECS3 cameras take a picture of the overhead signs as well as the vehicle. The proviso is that the old variable speed section to the West has the old cameras, but they never used to be used, not sure of the current situation.


--------------------



Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mysterydriver123
post Mon, 9 Sep 2019 - 17:07
Post #3


New Member


Group: Closed
Posts: 9
Joined: 23 Jun 2019
Member No.: 104,425



.

This post has been edited by mysterydriver123: Tue, 10 Sep 2019 - 19:58
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Logician
post Mon, 9 Sep 2019 - 17:09
Post #4


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 12,245
Joined: 28 Mar 2010
Member No.: 36,528



Probably the Met but it was arguments over the responsibility that prevented the Western section cameras being used for years. How reliable is your info about a 10% + 3 enforcement? Normal enforcement starts at 10% + 2, but can be set higher to cut down on numbers, going to +3 sounds hardly worthwhile.


--------------------



Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mysterydriver123
post Mon, 9 Sep 2019 - 17:13
Post #5


New Member


Group: Closed
Posts: 9
Joined: 23 Jun 2019
Member No.: 104,425



.

This post has been edited by mysterydriver123: Tue, 10 Sep 2019 - 20:00
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Aiden
post Mon, 9 Sep 2019 - 21:30
Post #6


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 36
Joined: 20 Apr 2019
Member No.: 103,503



QUOTE (Logician @ Mon, 9 Sep 2019 - 18:09) *
Probably the Met but it was arguments over the responsibility that prevented the Western section cameras being used for years. How reliable is your info about a 10% + 3 enforcement? Normal enforcement starts at 10% + 2, but can be set higher to cut down on numbers, going to +3 sounds hardly worthwhile.


I had raised an FOI request back in September 2018 regarding the authorities for whom are responsible for the HADEC 3 camers around the M25 orbit. The data would still be highly reliable as of a year later as there weren't plans for further cameras. Please review what junction you were between and cross reference it to the document attached in the FOI request to determine the responsible force for that particular camera.

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/use_...ncoming-1239364

Back in 2016, the Met had their prosecution level set at 10% + 3MPH. We know this because FOI requests made that year for min and max speeding offences always showed the minimum being 10% + 3MPH. This was a list of all cameras throughout the Met's jurisdiction which if I can find in the office tomorrow, I shall post. I should mention that knowing their is a 10% + 3mph limit doesn't mean you set this as your speed limit. It's a buffer zone. Stick to the posted limit. Since 2017 onwards, the Met refuse to disclose this information so that buffer zone could have changed.

EDIT: Prosecution levels set for their cameras....officers can still prosecute at just 1mph over the limit if they wanted.

This post has been edited by Aiden: Mon, 9 Sep 2019 - 21:33
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mysterydriver123
post Mon, 9 Sep 2019 - 22:14
Post #7


New Member


Group: Closed
Posts: 9
Joined: 23 Jun 2019
Member No.: 104,425



.

This post has been edited by mysterydriver123: Tue, 10 Sep 2019 - 19:59
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
TryOut
post Mon, 9 Sep 2019 - 22:46
Post #8


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 95
Joined: 7 May 2019
Member No.: 103,734



QUOTE (Aiden @ Mon, 9 Sep 2019 - 22:30) *
QUOTE (Logician @ Mon, 9 Sep 2019 - 18:09) *
Probably the Met but it was arguments over the responsibility that prevented the Western section cameras being used for years. How reliable is your info about a 10% + 3 enforcement? Normal enforcement starts at 10% + 2, but can be set higher to cut down on numbers, going to +3 sounds hardly worthwhile.


I had raised an FOI request back in September 2018 regarding the authorities for whom are responsible for the HADEC 3 camers around the M25 orbit. The data would still be highly reliable as of a year later as there weren't plans for further cameras. Please review what junction you were between and cross reference it to the document attached in the FOI request to determine the responsible force for that particular camera.

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/use_...ncoming-1239364

Back in 2016, the Met had their prosecution level set at 10% + 3MPH. We know this because FOI requests made that year for min and max speeding offences always showed the minimum being 10% + 3MPH. This was a list of all cameras throughout the Met's jurisdiction which if I can find in the office tomorrow, I shall post. I should mention that knowing their is a 10% + 3mph limit doesn't mean you set this as your speed limit. It's a buffer zone. Stick to the posted limit. Since 2017 onwards, the Met refuse to disclose this information so that buffer zone could have changed.

EDIT: Prosecution levels set for their cameras....officers can still prosecute at just 1mph over the limit if they wanted.

Here is one at 35 in a 30, 10% +2mph

http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=130193

Thread started 9 Sep 2019

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Aiden
post Tue, 10 Sep 2019 - 13:43
Post #9


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 36
Joined: 20 Apr 2019
Member No.: 103,503



QUOTE (TryOut @ Mon, 9 Sep 2019 - 23:46) *
QUOTE (Aiden @ Mon, 9 Sep 2019 - 22:30) *
QUOTE (Logician @ Mon, 9 Sep 2019 - 18:09) *
Probably the Met but it was arguments over the responsibility that prevented the Western section cameras being used for years. How reliable is your info about a 10% + 3 enforcement? Normal enforcement starts at 10% + 2, but can be set higher to cut down on numbers, going to +3 sounds hardly worthwhile.


I had raised an FOI request back in September 2018 regarding the authorities for whom are responsible for the HADEC 3 camers around the M25 orbit. The data would still be highly reliable as of a year later as there weren't plans for further cameras. Please review what junction you were between and cross reference it to the document attached in the FOI request to determine the responsible force for that particular camera.

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/use_...ncoming-1239364

Back in 2016, the Met had their prosecution level set at 10% + 3MPH. We know this because FOI requests made that year for min and max speeding offences always showed the minimum being 10% + 3MPH. This was a list of all cameras throughout the Met's jurisdiction which if I can find in the office tomorrow, I shall post. I should mention that knowing their is a 10% + 3mph limit doesn't mean you set this as your speed limit. It's a buffer zone. Stick to the posted limit. Since 2017 onwards, the Met refuse to disclose this information so that buffer zone could have changed.

EDIT: Prosecution levels set for their cameras....officers can still prosecute at just 1mph over the limit if they wanted.

Here is one at 35 in a 30, 10% +2mph

http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=130193

Thread started 9 Sep 2019


I did come across this thread yesterday and thought maybe the met now work at a +2. Could be possible. The met did start becoming secretive about individual speeding offences from around 2017, so wouldn't be surprised if it's been +2 since then.

Here's something I was looking for about speeding offences: https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/spee...rom_all_stati_2

From what I can see, in a 30, prosecution was set at 36. Again - it's been four years since so a lot can change!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mysterydriver123
post Tue, 10 Sep 2019 - 16:02
Post #10


New Member


Group: Closed
Posts: 9
Joined: 23 Jun 2019
Member No.: 104,425



.

This post has been edited by mysterydriver123: Tue, 10 Sep 2019 - 19:59
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Broadsman
post Tue, 10 Sep 2019 - 18:27
Post #11


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,002
Joined: 17 Oct 2012
Member No.: 57,735



QUOTE (mysterydriver123 @ Tue, 10 Sep 2019 - 17:02) *
Does anybody know whether there is any truth in what I have read regarding the Hadecs 3 Camera defaulting to enforcing NSL rather than the variable speed if it detects that one or more of the speed limit displays are not working?

Also.. If anybody would care to watch this video and tell me if they think they can see any flash from the camera reflecting onto the adjacent cars next to me? I can't, and also the car in front appeared to be going the same speed as me or even faster, again I can't see any flash from the camera and it was quite a dull miserable day too. Also , generally speaking when drivers see a flash they automatically put their brakes on - and no brake lights appeared from anyone.

I can't shorten the video but it's about 20 seconds in.

As you can tell I am rather concerned about this... It's going to be a long 14 days mellow.gif

https://youtu.be/WJSR7DYfWNk


Having just (last night) completed a SAC it doesn't matter that your lane didn't have a speed indicated on the gantry. As was said earlier, different lanes don't have different speeds, you'd noticed yours didn't have a sign and chose to ignore the other signs.

Van up your backside, was he that close he was pushing your accelerator for you?

Just cos the car in front is doing the same speed as you, that's double bubble for the authorities, once from that driver and once from you.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mysterydriver123
post Tue, 10 Sep 2019 - 18:32
Post #12


New Member


Group: Closed
Posts: 9
Joined: 23 Jun 2019
Member No.: 104,425



.

This post has been edited by mysterydriver123: Tue, 10 Sep 2019 - 19:59
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
The Rookie
post Tue, 10 Sep 2019 - 20:44
Post #13


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 42,813
Joined: 9 Sep 2003
From: Warwickshire
Member No.: 317



How childish!


--------------------
There is no such thing as a law abiding motorist, just those who have been scammed and those yet to be scammed!

S172's
Rookies 1-0 Kent

Council PCN's
Rookies 1-0 Warwick
Rookies 1-0 Birmingham

PPC PCN's
Rookies 10-0 PPC's
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mickR
post Tue, 10 Sep 2019 - 21:03
Post #14


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 3,251
Joined: 5 Jan 2007
From: England
Member No.: 9,919



How disrespectful when someone deletes posts after people take the time to resopond. Thanks to broadsman it didnt quite work tho. I wonder if anyond will bother next time the OP posts?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
southpaw82
post Tue, 10 Sep 2019 - 21:11
Post #15


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 30,268
Joined: 2 Apr 2008
From: Not in the UK
Member No.: 18,483



QUOTE (mickR @ Tue, 10 Sep 2019 - 22:03) *
How disrespectful when someone deletes posts after people take the time to resopond. Thanks to broadsman it didnt quite work tho. I wonder if anyond will bother next time the OP posts?

What makes you think there will be a next time?


--------------------
Moderator

Any comments made do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon. No lawyer/client relationship should be assumed nor should any duty of care be owed.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
JTadi1234
post Tue, 10 Sep 2019 - 21:42
Post #16


Member


Group: Closed
Posts: 11
Joined: 20 Feb 2019
Member No.: 102,547




I am the OP,
I have just logged in on old account that I managed to recover the password for.

I apologise to anyone I upset by deleting the comments, my only reason was because I had the answers I was looking for and had sought advice from elsewhere so the post was no longer needed.

Because there was no obvious way of deleting the thread I just removed the comments.

I appreciate those who took the time (and thanked the individuals as I replied) to respond and offer their advice, but if I wish to have something removed that I posted online then I have every right to do so rolleyes.gif

The fact that my other account has been disabled from posting suggests I've had a lucky escape, can someone disable this account too please? biggrin.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mickR
post Tue, 10 Sep 2019 - 21:53
Post #17


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 3,251
Joined: 5 Jan 2007
From: England
Member No.: 9,919



Good idea wink.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Fredd
post Tue, 10 Sep 2019 - 23:26
Post #18


Webmaster
Group Icon

Group: Root Admin
Posts: 7,598
Joined: 30 Mar 2003
From: Wokingham, UK
Member No.: 2



QUOTE (JTadi1234 @ Tue, 10 Sep 2019 - 22:42) *
The fact that my other account has been disabled from posting suggests I've had a lucky escape, can someone disable this account too please? biggrin.gif

Happy to oblige, although you might like to check whether search engine caches make removing traces of your rather unremarkable posts that effective!


--------------------
Regards,
Fredd

__________________________________________________________________________
Pepipoo relies on you
to keep this site running!
Donate to Pepipoo now using your
Visa, Mastercard, debit card or PayPal account
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

Closed TopicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



Advertisement

Advertise here!

RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: Monday, 21st October 2019 - 01:31
Pepipoo uses cookies. You can find details of the cookies we use here along with links to information on how to manage them.
Please click the button to accept our cookies and hide this message. We’ll also assume that you’re happy to accept them if you continue to use the site.