[NIP Wizard] A303 average speed Options

[Dsn1720v]

NIP Details and Circumstances
What is the name of the Constabulary? -
Date of the offence: - August 2023
Date of the NIP: - 22 days after the offence
Date you received the NIP: - 28 days after the offence
Location of offence (exact location as it appears on the NIP: important): - A303 Between Podimore Roundabout and Hazelgrove Roundabout Eastbound Somerset
Was the NIP addressed to you? - Yes
Was the NIP sent by first class post, second class or recorded delivery? - First
If your are not the Registered Keeper, what is your relationship to the vehicle? - Courtesy vehicle
How many current points do you have? - 0
Provide a description of events (if you know what happened) telling us as much about the incident as possible - some things that may seem trivial to you may be important, so don't leave anything out. Please do not post personal details for obvious reasons - 329AM, Clear road, with good weather conditions. New and unfamiliar vehicle. Road is normally a 50mph, and the road works start as a 50mph and drop down to 30mph for a small section. No roadworkers present at time of the offence. No other road uses present at time of the offence.

Road signs had due/condensation on them making the signs difficult to distinguish.

Cruise control was set at 50 at the beginning of the road works.

NIP Wizard Responses
These were the responses used by the Wizard to arrive at its recommendation:
Have you received a NIP? - Yes
Are you the Registered Keeper of the vehicle concerned (is your name and address on the V5/V5C)? - No
Is the NIP addressed to you personally? - Yes
Although you are not the Registered Keeper, were you the keeper of the vehicle concerned (the person normally responsible for it) at the time of the alleged offence? - No
As you were not responsible for the vehicle, somebody else has named you as the driver. Were you driving? - Yes
Which country did the alleged offence take place in? - England

NIP Wizard Recommendation
Based on these responses the Wizard suggested that this course of action should be considered:

• The law requires you to provide the information requested in the Section 172 notice within the 28 day period, naming yourself as the driver. If you are considering obtaining formal legal advice, do so before returning the notice.
  
  You should note that there is nothing to be gained by responding any earlier than you have to at any stage of the process. You are likely to receive a Conditional Offer of a Fixed Penalty (COFP) and further reminder(s). If you want to continue the fight, you should ignore all correspondence from the police until you receive a summons. You need to understand from the outset that while you will receive much help and support from members on the forums, you will need to put time and effort into fighting your case and ultimately be prepared to stand up in court to defend yourself.

Generated by the PePiPoo NIP Wizard v3.3.2: Wed, 13 Sep 2023 11:26:39 +0000

[Advertisement]

[The Rookie]

Alleged speed and limit?

It’s not clear if you were caught in the 50 or 30, or which signs had dew on them, though making them hard to read so as to not be readable seems a stretch.

Are the signs are a system of street lighting? Are they positively illuminated?

[Dsn1720v]

Sorry, caught in the 30, at 50.

All signs unlit, in an unlit stretch of carriageway.

[Jlc]

Sorry, caught in the 30, at 50.

That is likely to be too fast to be disposed of outside court. (Usual threshold is 49mph for a fixed penalty)

[Dsn1720v]

Yes that is my issue. Due to my job I'm unable to have any more than 3 points, as this would result in me losing my job. (I am a company director, newly started, but my insurance would go up so much that it would be unaffordable, thus I would not be able to work for the amount of money my business contracts out for)

As I'm a limited co. Would I be able to return the Nip after 26 or so days, naming the business, then waiting another 26 or so days after that to respond as naming the driver? As that would buy me 3 months into the time out limit?

It was not intentional speeding, as I feel the 50mph shows. I had set the speed at the beginning of the roadworks.

[andy_foster]

You are not a limited company. No limited company was driving, regardless of how Amazon might see you.

You cannot name your limited company on the s. 172 response.


This post has been edited by andy_foster: Wed, 13 Sep 2023 - 12:58

[Jlc]

As that would buy me 3 months into the time out limit?

You won't architect a timeout. (And it's flawed as already noted)

It was not intentional speeding, as I feel the 50mph shows. I had set the speed at the beginning of the roadworks.

It's an interesting argument that the large excess is proof it wasn't 'intentional'. But speeding doesn't require intent.

It is likely to be 5 or 6 points - that 1mph over the fixed penalty limit is harsh indeed. Alternatively you can be sentenced with a short ban but that isn't likely to be 'insurance friendly either'.

You can always run a defence but I think you'll struggle to convince the bench that the limit wasn't adequately conveyed. Terminal signs should only be placed at the start of limit charge - so as you were knowingly in a 50mph limit those terminal signs wouldn't be 50mph again. Unless you have some strong evidence this dew makes a 5 look like a 3 then it's going to be difficult.

Have you checked the TRO is in order?

[Dsn1720v]

Not overly sure where Amazon came into this?

It's an interesting argument that the large excess is proof it wasn't 'intentional'. But speeding doesn't require intent.

No I know it doesn't require intent, but I feel that as the signs weren't particularly obvious to the significant change in speed (they are the same size as the rest of the 'repeater' sign) it could be portrayed to show that I had the intention of law abiding.

It is likely to be 5 or 6 points - that 1mph over the fixed penalty limit is harsh indeed. Alternatively you can be sentenced with a short ban but that isn't likely to be 'insurance friendly either'.

Yes either of those will result in a loss of job/income/company.

You can always run a defence but I think you'll struggle to convince the bench that the limit wasn't adequately conveyed. Terminal signs should only be placed at the start of limit charge - so as you were knowingly in a 50mph limit those terminal signs wouldn't be 50mph again. Unless you have some strong evidence this dew makes a 5 look like a 3 then it's going to be difficult.

It's not that it made it look like a 5 or a 3, but the way the sign reflected with the headlights of the car, actually made them quite difficult to distinguish at all. I remember at the time thinking how bad it was to see what it said (and that was one of the 50's)

Have you checked the TRO is in order?

Edit..
I have just checked the website, there is no current TRO in place for the a303.

This post has been edited by Dsn1720v: Wed, 13 Sep 2023 - 13:20

[Jlc]

No I know it doesn't require intent, but I feel that as the signs weren't particularly obvious to the significant change in speed (they are the same size as the rest of the 'repeater' sign) it could be portrayed to show that I had the intention of law abiding.

Terminal signs are usually larger - the TSGRD used to specify the sizes. But now it's just 'adequately conveyed'. Drop the 'intention' argument.

I have just checked the website, there is no current TRO in place for the a303.

'The website'? I wouldn't conclude there isn't an active TRO so easily.

[Dsn1720v]

Sorry, Somerset's website where the TRO's are listed. I've had a google.search for TRO a303 and haven't yielded any results.

[Jlc]

Sorry, Somerset's website where the TRO's are listed. I've had a google.search for TRO a303 and haven't yielded any results.

I wouldn't trust a website (someone may not have updated it or it's not a road the council are responsible for)

Google may not reveal it either. Contact Highways England as they seem to list the A303 as 'theirs'.

This post has been edited by Jlc: Wed, 13 Sep 2023 - 14:18

[andy_foster]

Looking on GSV (drop the little yellow man on the westbound carriageway and look behind you - westbound was filmed August 2023, eastbound 2021) there appear to be numerous fairly large 30 mph roundels (with average speed camera warnings) very close to the carriageway (contraflow - narrow lanes, 1 in each direction). The roundels appear to be a similar or same size to the terminal signs where the limit reverts to 50 - however, absent photos of the signs substantially obscured by dew, or evidence that the signage at the material time was substantially less adequate than GSV showed, I would suggest that an adequate signage defence would be somewhat optimistic.

Also, whilst I have not always had the regard for speed limit signs as some might suggest was appropriate, in 35 years of driving, I can't recall ever noticing a speed limit sign being unreadable due to dew. I have seen plenty obscured by snow, but snow at this time of year would be a trivial pursuit question.

Other than at the Podmore roundabout end, westbound, I did not see any streetlights on GSV (did not go all the way to the end of the roadworks or the next roundabout) - meaning that the default speed limit would have been 70. The terminal signs for the 50 limit looked "permanent" whereas the terminal sign for the 30 limit was clearly temporary. I cannot be sure whether the 50 limit itself is permanent, or whether it is intended as the first step in temporarily reducing the limit to 30. A permanent 50 mph limit would require a Traffic Regulation Order (and terminal and repeater signs, etc.). A temporary limit would generally have a Temporary Traffic Regulation Order (basically the same as a regular TRO, but with an end date, and possibly location defined as being between appropriate signs within a defined stretch of road, as opposed to applying to a defined stretch of road.

If there is no valid order in place, there is no valid speed limit in force other than the default speed limit (which would be 60 on a contraflow as it is then a single carriageway).
If there is a valid 50mph order in place and no valid 30mph order, then the speed limit is 50.
If there is a valid 30mph order in place, I would suggest that you are very much running out of straws to grasp at.

As has been said, absence of proof is not proof of absence. TROs (and TTROs) would be created and held by the relevant highway authority - depending on the location and type of road.
If you can get a response in writing from a highway authority that they are responsible for that section of road, and that there were no Traffic Orders in force on that stretch of road at the material time, you would have more than enough to put the prosecution to proof that there was a 30mph limit in law. Otherwise, the fact that it is not listed on a website you expected to find it on is neither here nor there.

edit: to add to Jlc's comment, if it is a trunk road (generally identifiable as such by Highways England (looks at watch to check whether they are still calling themselves that) listing it as theirs, they will be the relevant authority.
If you start off with the wrong authority and are polite, they will probably point you in the direction of the appropriate authority.

N.B. For the truly bored, "their's" struck me (and the spell-checker) as being wrong, but I wasn't sure why - it is possessive and there is no risk of ambiguity with a contraction, so why shouldn't there be an apostrophe? Pronouns. Pronouns do not carry a possessive apostrophe - his, hers, yours, theirs, etc. The more you know...

This post has been edited by andy_foster: Wed, 13 Sep 2023 - 14:39

[Dsn1720v]

Thanks.

I have contacted them, they guy on the phone couldn't find it. So he's made a request for some one to contact me with more information.

If there is no TRO in place, does this mean it isn't enforceable?

Also, whilst I have not always had the regard for speed limit signs as some might suggest was appropriate, in 35 years of driving, I can't recall ever noticing a speed limit sign being unreadable due to dew. I have seen plenty obscured by snow, but snow at this time of year would be a trivial pursuit question.

In honesty, I've been driving for 18 years now, and do on average 40-50,000 a year, and I have never experienced it either. Which is why it stood out so much to me that "oh, that's incredibly difficult to read with the reflection from the headlights"

Yes there's a little part of it that's street lit at podimore, then nothing until sparkford. It was between the roundabout and the 30 where I first noted the signs were somewhat difficult to read.

The other thing I noted yesterday when I went back through that stretch, is the 30 sign, is just before a bright flood light (presumably to highlight registration plates) which might have also been a factor as to why I did not see the 30 change. I just can't understand why I did not see the 30, as I'm very good for things like this normally (as a RoSPA Gold, and HGV licence holder) I can only think of these factors as to why.

[Rallyman72]

It is easy to find details of the scheme on the National Highways website so it falls within their remit.

https://nationalhighways.co.uk/our-roads/so...#latest-updates

There is also a specific email address for the project team for any enquiries:

A303SparkfordtoIlchesterDualling@highwaysengland.co.uk

And the 30mph limit commenced in May:

https://www.somersetlive.co.uk/news/somerse...roduced-8473814

The proposed temporary limits for the project are in this document, interestingly they don't seem to match those actually implemented:

https://infrastructure.planninginspectorate...-%20tracked.pdf

And finally a TRO for the scheme, however without reading it through in detail it seems to relate to post completion restrictions:

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2021/125/schedule/3

[Dsn1720v]

So I travelled the same route today.

Interestingly, the first set of signs is obscured by a speed camera sign. The second 'repeater' sign, is on the opposite side of the road, where, if an HGV was travelling towards you, a vehicle with high sides or even a vehicle with poorly adjusted lights, would have obscured that sign. Leaving the one sign that I do remember seeing, just as you exit the 30 limit.all of course, too late by then. I have dash cam footage, so will be working out the distance of which the signs are visible from. As I do feel, that there may be a defence there.

[PodimoreGuy]

Extra info that might be helpful here.

* The speed limit is an average speed zone. The zone is very short ~800 meters.

* The signs and cameras are all on Google Maps. Western camera pair: https://maps.app.goo.gl/1pPxUCX468vXXQMo8 Eastern Camera pair: https://maps.app.goo.gl/mjHL9sWGSqbS8yjx8

* The 30 limit region is *within* a 50 limit region. I suspect that's what catches out lots of people - there are hundreds of 50 signs, and the 30 signs look visually similar to the 50 repeaters, so are quite easy to miss.

[666]

Extra info that might be helpful here.

* The speed limit is an average speed zone. The zone is very short ~800 meters.

* The signs and cameras are all on Google Maps. Western camera pair: https://maps.app.goo.gl/1pPxUCX468vXXQMo8 Eastern Camera pair: https://maps.app.goo.gl/mjHL9sWGSqbS8yjx8

* The 30 limit region is *within* a 50 limit region. I suspect that's what catches out lots of people - there are hundreds of 50 signs, and the 30 signs look visually similar to the 50 repeaters, so are quite easy to miss.

Do you mean they're numbers on a white background within a red circle?

[NewJudge]

* The speed limit is an average speed zone. The zone is very short ~800 meters.

No it isn't. The speed limit is absolute and any infraction of it, even over a short distance, is an offence. What you mean is that it is enforced by an average speed camera system which measures the time taken for a vehicle to cover a known distance. This means a driver might exceed the posted limit in some parts but, provided he travels at a speed low enough to compensate in other parts, he may avoid detection.