HADECS NSL Enforcement Tolerances |
HADECS NSL Enforcement Tolerances |
Sun, 28 Jun 2020 - 19:08
Post
#1
|
|
New Member Group: Members Posts: 2 Joined: 28 Jun 2020 Member No.: 108,997 |
Evening all,
Long time lurker first time poster here. Question that's been on my mind - and I know this might not be an easy one to answer with confidence. What's general tolerance of HADECS3 when a motorway is NSL with no reduced limit showing? Now, I know this is set force by force and will likely vary depending on location. I'm aware what the ACPO guidelines are, and I have no reason not to believe that when the VSL is reduced, ACPO tolerances are used. There's plenty of evidence of that on this forum alone. However, I haven't personally seen anything around 79 for when NSL is in place and was wondering what the lowest recorded NIPs on here were under these circumstances - plenty of people seem to fly past me and the cameras when I'm doing 75/76? I was thinking it might be interesting to build up a picture of the various different sections of motorway and the lowest speeds at which these have been enforced at NSL, going from previous threads on this forum. Of course, I could be completely wrong and just missed quite a few threads where people have been done for 79, but still worth asking IMO. This post has been edited by nch_: Sun, 28 Jun 2020 - 19:43 |
|
|
Advertisement |
Sun, 28 Jun 2020 - 19:08
Post
#
|
Advertise here! |
|
|
|
Sun, 28 Jun 2020 - 19:48
Post
#2
|
|
Member Group: Life Member Posts: 24,220 Joined: 9 Sep 2004 From: Reading Member No.: 1,624 |
You would have thought that in your time lurking you would have learned that random/hypothetical questions not concerning an active case don't go in the speeding offences forum.
-------------------- Andy
Some people think that I make them feel stupid. To be fair, they deserve most of the credit. |
|
|
Sun, 28 Jun 2020 - 19:52
Post
#3
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 87 Joined: 13 Mar 2020 Member No.: 108,253 |
You would have thought that in your time lurking you would have learned that random/hypothetical questions not concerning an active case don't go in the speeding offences forum. Would this not be better suited under Technical Discussion of Enforcement Devices? |
|
|
Sun, 28 Jun 2020 - 20:17
Post
#4
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 56,261 Joined: 9 Sep 2003 From: Warwickshire Member No.: 317 |
The evidence seems to suggest they stick to the NPCC guidelines which have replaced the (now a defunct organisation) ACPO guidance and enforce at 79mph upwards.
-------------------- 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 |
|
|
Sun, 28 Jun 2020 - 20:19
Post
#5
|
|
Member Group: Life Member Posts: 24,220 Joined: 9 Sep 2004 From: Reading Member No.: 1,624 |
Would this not be better suited under Technical Discussion of Enforcement Devices? IMHO, no (assuming that you mean better than the Flame Pit). It is not a technical discussion about how the cameras work, potential flaws, how to verify, etc., but a slightly nebulous policy question. Despite many of 'the usual suspects' glibly stating that hadecs enforces NSL at the ACPO* guidelines, I have seen little evidence to support that. If, as suspected. the tolerances are set higher when NSL is being enforced, I suspect that those that actually know won't be inclined to divulge such information, and I don't think we are getting enough cases to be able to draw any meaningful/accurate conclusions. *Yes, I know that ACPO no longer technically exists, but the guidelines are still largely followed as if they were set in stone. -------------------- Andy
Some people think that I make them feel stupid. To be fair, they deserve most of the credit. |
|
|
Sun, 28 Jun 2020 - 20:21
Post
#6
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 87 Joined: 13 Mar 2020 Member No.: 108,253 |
Would this not be better suited under Technical Discussion of Enforcement Devices? IMHO, no (assuming that you mean better than the Flame Pit). It is not a technical discussion about how the cameras work, potential flaws, how to verify, etc., but a slightly nebulous policy question. Fair enough. |
|
|
Sun, 28 Jun 2020 - 20:52
Post
#7
|
|
New Member Group: Members Posts: 2 Joined: 28 Jun 2020 Member No.: 108,997 |
Apologies - I had intended for this to go into discussion rather than S&OCO, must have had the wrong tab open when I clicked New Topic. My mistake as well for saying ACPO instead of NPCC. Old habits die hard.
As for tolerances, I certainly didn't create this with the intention to find out from the mouths of those who set this up. More to have a look at existing cases on here, even if it's not a huge sample size, and see if anyone knew if there was anything close to the NPCC guidelines. I would certainly agree with Andy that it seems as if they are set higher than this. To put it bluntly, this is mainly just asking more seasoned members if they can recall any cases of someone being sent an NIP for an NSL limit on a smart motorway when they were within the speed awareness course thresholds, and not any higher. |
|
|
Sun, 28 Jun 2020 - 21:37
Post
#8
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 56,261 Joined: 9 Sep 2003 From: Warwickshire Member No.: 317 |
Despite many of 'the usual suspects' glibly stating that hadecs enforces NSL at the ACPO* guidelines, I have seen little evidence to support that.. I certainly recall seeing cases posted on here for 80 in the NSL (I’ll do a search in a minute to see if I can find the forces mentioned) so if there is any extra allowance, it’s not very generous. Besides it would narrow the band eligible for revenue generating courses. -------------------- 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 |
|
|
Mon, 29 Jun 2020 - 11:08
Post
#9
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 13,581 Joined: 28 Mar 2010 Member No.: 36,528 |
For a long time the variable limits on the M25 to the West of London were not in fact enforced at all, owing to a dispute about who should do it.
-------------------- |
|
|
Tue, 30 Jun 2020 - 06:05
Post
#10
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 3,285 Joined: 5 Jan 2012 Member No.: 52,178 |
For a long time the variable limits on the M25 to the West of London were not in fact enforced at all, owing to a dispute about who should do it. That's the latest excuse, is it? I thought it was the font. Or just incompetence somewhere along the way (the most likely explanation). This post has been edited by The Slithy Tove: Tue, 30 Jun 2020 - 13:06 |
|
|
Tue, 30 Jun 2020 - 10:07
Post
#11
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 56,261 Joined: 9 Sep 2003 From: Warwickshire Member No.: 317 |
The font applied to most managed motorways, not just the M25.
And I still think it’s flawed, a 50 looking far to like a 60. Very easy when in a 60 limit to glance at the sign and think it’s still a 60 when it is in fact dropping to 50. Especially in the dark and rain. -------------------- 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 |
|
|
Fri, 3 Jul 2020 - 08:56
Post
#12
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 1,217 Joined: 24 Mar 2013 From: Scotland Member No.: 60,732 |
And I still think it’s flawed, a 50 looking far to like a 60. Very easy when in a 60 limit to glance at the sign and think it’s still a 60 when it is in fact dropping to 50. Especially in the dark and rain. I agree, as someone who only occasionally travels on roads using these signs I've been near to missing those 60 to 50 changes. Maybe I have missed some. That was why I thought it would be nice if a changed limit was highlighted in some way. |
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: Wednesday, 17th April 2024 - 06:43 |