Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: First time post.
FightBack Forums > Queries > Speeding and other Criminal Offences
Taxialx
Hello,
I was flashed by a speed camera on the a22 London road junction of halsford green in Sussex on the 31st of August, iam alleged to have been traveling at 38mph in a 30 zone. I went to the scene today as it was 255am when I was flashed and my memory of it was a little sketchy. I was very surprised to have been flashed by a camera as I had my sat nav set up an it was shown as a 40mph zone.i hadn't seen any camera signs or 30mph signs at the time. When I went back today I noticed that the speed camera was obscured by branches and leaves from a near by garden. There is a sign to say its 30mph but it's also obscured by trees and branches.my sat nav was also saying 40mph today. I know I shouldn't have relied on the sat nav for the speed limit but the signage was not visible at 255am and partially blocked by branches it's all I had to go on. I'm a licenced London taxi driver so getting more points on my licence is not what I need right now. Does anyone here think I would have a chance of wining in court?
mrh3369
Have you got picture of the obscured speed limit signs? Post them up if you have them.
Jlc
The speed camera being obscured is of no use.

Is there a system of street lighting? How far past the 30mph terminal sign is the camera?
Taxialx
Hi I just took this from street view it shows the lighting

I took photos but I'm struggling to upload them to the laptop, once I have done that I will post them
jewels2009
Could you fill out the nip wizard / pointer ?

it gives the gravey its sauce?

Taxialx
Sorry not sure what a nip wizzard is?
southpaw82
Top right of the screen.
Taxialx
Ok thanks
Jlc
GSV Link

Looks like a restricted road (30mph) to me. The street lights act as repeaters to the 30mph terminal sign. Even if that sign was obscured a defence might only fly if you were caught just past the sign. (i.e. the restricted limit would be in force unless signs to the contrary)

If it was previously a 40mph then just taking those repeaters down and changing the terminal sign (from 40 to 30) is sufficient for the limit to be legal. There might have been a reduced limit warning when it changed but doesn't help.
Taxialx
Hi
I have managed to upload some pictures,

Click to view attachment
southpaw82
Pictures of your sat nav thinking it was 40 are irrelevant. The crucial photos are of the obscured 30 signs.
Taxialx
Here's one
southpaw82
Is there?
Taxialx
Won't let me do it file to big

Can I email them to one of you guys and you post them I'm stumped
southpaw82
Click here
Taxialx
http://photobucket.com/albums/ag167/taxialx
Many thanks southpaw I'd have been here a month of Sundays other wise smile.gif
BaggieBoy
So the obscured "30" sign is just an optional speed camera warning sign. I suspect the actual 30 terminal signs are OK. Can't see a defence here.
southpaw82
As above - there should be two large 30mph signs, one on each side of the road, on entering the limit. Were there?

Lack of signs (or obscured) signs is normally a defence (s. 84(4) of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984). However, this is not so on a restricted road (30mph by virtue of a system of street lights). The blue sign with a camera sign and 30mph sign on it is entirely optional, so it being obscured is even less of a defence.

If you were a short way into the limit you may have special reasons not to endorse (guilty but no points) but I suspect you were some way into the limit?
Taxialx
I cam from the north 40mph dropped my customer off before the roundabout, u turned and headed back north, there are no other signs denoting the speed on the road
I feel this is unfair at 255 am it's blocked by leaves, why have signs if they are not visible
southpaw82
Are you sure you were in a 40? In any case, the signs are the street lights, which presumably were visible?
Taxialx
So legally local councils don't need to put signs up? I'm supposed to second guess lights? Is the sat nav not mitigating?

Or the signs not being in plain sight not mitigation?
southpaw82
QUOTE (Taxialx @ Tue, 21 Oct 2014 - 22:10)
So legally local councils don't need to put signs up? I'm supposed to second guess lights? Is the sat nav not mitigating?


A restricted road is shown by a system of street lights. Terminal 30mph signs do have to be placed but their absence is no defence. You don't need to second guess lights - it's in the Highway Code. The sat nav is irrelevant - complain to the manufacturer.
Jlc
From the north, it is a 40mph here and the terminal signs for the 30mph (London Road) are here.

Repeaters are required (as per the 40mph above) but in a restricted (30mph) the system of lighting acts as the repeaters. The terminal signs are present - 30mph repeaters are not allowed. (The reason for this is if you start your journey inside a restricted limit, seeing the lighting, then you should assume it's 30mph unless you see a repeater to the contrary)

QUOTE (Taxialx @ Tue, 21 Oct 2014 - 22:11) *
So legally local councils don't need to put signs up? I'm supposed to second guess lights? Is the sat nav not mitigating?

Or the signs not being in plain sight not mitigation?

It appears correctly signed. Lights are obvious (more so in the dark). The SatNav is irrelevant and will have a disclaimer.
Taxialx
It's a busy A road, it's changes from 60-30. And vica versa it's not a tiny suburban road,the previous stretch was 40mph.southpaw this Seems really unfair
southpaw82
I can only advise you as to the law. Whether it's fair or unfair is a matter for your own sense of fairness I'm afraid.
Taxialx
Many thanks jlc and southpaw. I think it has to be worth a punt with a decent lawyer no chance of a result?
southpaw82
QUOTE (Taxialx @ Tue, 21 Oct 2014 - 23:06)
Many thanks jlc and southpaw. I think it has to be worth a punt with a decent lawyer no chance of a result?


Personally, I don't believe you have a defence. I also don't see much merit in a special reasons argument. Miracles can happen but they're rare. Your money though.
Taxialx
Thanks for the reply, would I end up with 6 points? As punishment for contesting it?
BaggieBoy
You would only get 3 points in court, see:
kanga
QUOTE ("Taxialx")
So legally local councils don't need to put signs up?

When there are street lights, repeaters aren't allowed in 30 mph limits.

QUOTE ("Taxialx")
I'm a licenced London taxi driver so getting more points on my licence is not what I need right now.

Then may I gently suggest that reading the Highway Code might be beneficial?
squaredeal
QUOTE (Taxialx @ Tue, 21 Oct 2014 - 23:13) *
Thanks for the reply, would I end up with 6 points? As punishment for contesting it?

Have you already been on a Speed Awareness course then? That speed is within the threshold, and it sounds like you would be an ideal candidate to remind you of what you learnt to pass your test. That would mean no points.
Jlc
QUOTE (Taxialx @ Tue, 21 Oct 2014 - 23:13) *
Thanks for the reply, would I end up with 6 points? As punishment for contesting it?

It's not the points that's the issue.

Going to a contested trial could see costs of £620+ should you lose.

As already noted special reasons (not to endorse) might be a better strategy where you would have to plead guilty but given the limit appears to be correctly signed this would probably fail. I doubt a solicitor could sway them.
Taxialx
I went on a speed awareness course 2years ago so I'm not eligible.
I like the sound of the special reasons not to endorse jlc how does that work?
mynamegoesinhere
QUOTE (Taxialx @ Wed, 22 Oct 2014 - 12:28) *
I like the sound of the special reasons not to endorse jlc how does that work?


If you had been caught very soon after the limit went from 40 to 30, and the 30 terminal signs were obscured, you may have been able to argue that you were not aware of the change of limit; that you thought it was still a 40.

But seeing as that doesn't apply in your case, I don't see that being successful.

The street lights, in the absence of repeater limit signs, should have been enough to inform you that the limit was 30.
Jlc
QUOTE (Taxialx @ Wed, 22 Oct 2014 - 12:28) *
I like the sound of the special reasons not to endorse jlc how does that work?

As already noted it probably doesn't appear to apply here...

But briefly it must be a mitigating or extenuating circumstance, not a defence (guilty plea only) and is something the court ought to take into account when imposing punishment.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2019 Invision Power Services, Inc.