Defective/Missing Speed Zone Change Signs, Potentially caught doing ~45 in a 30... Options

[twixx]

I was driving on unfamiliar roads earlier and cleared the brow of a hill to find a speed van parked up in a lay by.

However, it was unclear to me at the time, what the actual limit was, as the earlier stretch of the road that I was on was a 50 limit, and didn't recall seeing any signs signalling a change in speed zone.

I thought I learnt during my theory, that the entry to a zone with a new limit is signified by TWO signs on either side of the road...

Sure enough when I have travelled back along the route, I've found that there is only a single sign showing the change in limits which is positioned on the opposite side of the road. The next repeater sign was roughly 100 yards further on, but literally 10 yards in front of where the van was parked. Effectively meaning you'd see the repeater at the same time as the van. In my panic, I saw the van and not the repeater.

The road can be seen on Google maps below. I was travelling on Syday Lane (50mph) - The Avenue (30mph) - Station Road

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/place/Syday+L...33;4d-1.3092096

You can also see in the Google maps link that the left hand side of the road entry to the speed zone is missing still.

I'm clutching at straws, but I don't generally speed, and am more so annoyed with the fact that I'm potentially going to get penalised because of badly signed zones.

The images below show the direction in which I was travelling, with areas highlighted.





This image, shows entry into the Zone from the other direction.





Thoughts?

This post has been edited by twixx: Thu, 15 Nov 2018 - 10:55

[Advertisement]

[peterguk]

So a clear terminal sign and a repeater.

I think you'll struggle in court.

[Jlc]

Sign requirements were ‘relaxed’ a little while back (TSGRD2016) - as long as the limit is adequately conveyed.

However, it does look like the sign is missing. That excess will see a fixed penalty of 3 points £100 - at least it’s below the threshold for a summons. Challenging in court is difficult and risks more points, larger fine and most importantly costs. (Guideline costs are from £620 should you be found guilty at trial)

The positioning of the repeater is in your favour but is no means a simple defence.

This post has been edited by Jlc: Sun, 11 Nov 2018 - 22:25

[Korting]

The problem with having one sign on the opposite side of the road is that it can be obstructed by traffic on the opposite side of the road, especially lorries and buses and though you cant prove that there was such a vehicle blocking your view, it certainly isn't impossible.

Now lets say a lorry had broken down at just that spot, you wouldn't see the sign at all.

So if you do get a NIP, you might just have a defence.

[cp8759]

If the repeater were missing you'd have a good case, but given the presence of the repeater I think you'll struggle.

[nosferatu1001]

Even trhough you are caught BEFORE the repeater?

[Logician]

WE are told it is standard operating procedure to check that the signage is correct when setting up a speed check operation. If you do get a NIP. I suggest when you send your reply nominating yourself, you enclose a letter pointing out that one sign was missing and a picture, as you have here. There is a chance they will drop the case. As has been said, going to court is a bit of a gamble, the court might find that the limit was adequately conveyed, in which case it could be considerably more expensive for you than a fixed penalty.

[cp8759]

Even trhough you are caught BEFORE the repeater?

Depends on how far before the repeater.

[Jlc]

I think the informal 'appeal' is worth a try - there was a sign on the nearside, see here. (Thanks for Google's time machine...)

[mdann52]

The only other thing to be aware of is also a system of street lighting present from the 30 signs up the hill (which looking on google maps has 4 sets of streetlights between the Lane and College Road), which could well enforce a 30 limit on its own without signage. The 30 terminal signs appear to start after the top of the hill when the streetlights stop. Happy to be corrected if mistaken however!

[NewJudge]

The 30 terminal signs appear to start after the top of the hill when the streetlights stop. Happy to be corrected if mistaken however!.

Is the OP sure that the limit was 50 before the terminal sign? If the streetlights signified a restricted road (i.e. no other limit was in force thus making it a 30mph limit) then the terminal signs (and repeaters) simply continue that limit where the lighting system ends. What was on the other side of the one "30" sign that remained?

This post has been edited by NewJudge: Mon, 12 Nov 2018 - 19:34

[mdann52]

The 30 terminal signs appear to start after the top of the hill when the streetlights stop. Happy to be corrected if mistaken however!.

Is the OP sure that the limit was 50 before the terminal sign? If the streetlights signified a restricted road (i.e. no other limit was in force thus making it a 30mph limit) then the terminal signs (and repeaters) simply continue that limit where the lighting system ends. What was on the other side of the one "30" sign that remained?

From streetview, the terminal signs are before the start of the village and the streetlighting, (the streetlighting is only present on the uphill section), then the repeaters take over once the streetlighting ends again. So looks like the drop is signed in itself, and terminals cover the section of road that isn't lit

[twixx]

The 30 terminal signs appear to start after the top of the hill when the streetlights stop. Happy to be corrected if mistaken however!.

Is the OP sure that the limit was 50 before the terminal sign? If the streetlights signified a restricted road (i.e. no other limit was in force thus making it a 30mph limit) then the terminal signs (and repeaters) simply continue that limit where the lighting system ends. What was on the other side of the one "30" sign that remained?

This is the reverse of the remaining sign which shows National.

https://goo.gl/maps/WfhAtVyT4LL2


Either way, I received the NIP yesterday - as expected. I'm just gonna own up and pony up, doesn't sound like its worth a fight.

This post has been edited by twixx: Thu, 15 Nov 2018 - 10:55

[The Rookie]

That depends really on the alleged speed......

A simple query about the missing sign may get them to drop it, if they don't you could then decide to fold.

This post has been edited by The Rookie: Thu, 15 Nov 2018 - 12:20

[twixx]

That depends really on the alleged speed......

A simple query about the missing sign may get them to drop it, if they don't you could then decide to fold.

43 in 30

[The Rookie]

So you’ll be looking at £100 and 3 points, over 50 and the increasing fine would give you more incentive to contest it, but I’d still try and informal approach, costs nothing.

[twixx]

So you’ll be looking at £100 and 3 points, over 50 and the increasing fine would give you more incentive to contest it, but I’d still try and informal approach, costs nothing.

Tried informal, was told in response signage wasn't their issue and I should contact the council to report missing signage.

£100 + 3 followed 2 days later.

Happy Christmas to all...........

[Jlc]

Slightly disingenuous - the council may indeed be responsible for maintaining the signs but it potentially affects the enforceability.

Basically take the 3 points or take a risk at court...

[notmeatloaf]

I would 100% challenge it.

That terminal sign totally contravenes TSRGD guidelines that states speed limit terminal signs cannot be incorporated into a village name sign, they must be put into the same backing board.

There is no border around the village name so it cannot possibly be argued that the speed limit terminal hasnt been incorporated into the sign.

As has been said TSRGD now only requires adequate guidance if the limit to be conveyed but I think it is a long, long shot to argue that a sign specifically prohibited by TSRGD should be an acceptable part of that.

For the OP the best bet is to convince the police to drop it to avoid the time and expense if court. So write a polite letter back saying that you never speed, were genuinely unaware of the limit and, when revisiting the scene noticed one terminal sign was missing and the other one be was wholly non compliant with the TSRGD 14.51 guidance regarding these signs. Hopefully they will drop out of embarrassment because it is very, very sloppy not to be checking this in my opinion.

[southpaw82]

I'm not as sure - the lack of a border alone is a precarious ground on which to say the speed limit sign is incorporated in the name plate. It's clearly separate from it such that a driver is not misled.