Gatso Roadside Cameras

liam8282

Wee_Willy_Harris wrote: »

And you get documentation as part of the offer. That documentation indicates the speed measured. Where are the sorrowful looking motorists gurning out of the pages of the Daily Mail whineing about the poor victimised motorist and stealth taxes. The Mail would LOVE that story (and probably pay far more than the cost of the speed awareness course for it). Yet they just don't exist.

Hardly headline news, "Driver gets speeding ticket, for speeding!", oh the shock of it.

The Mail had the information about a driver getting caught doing 33mph in a 30mph zone, the fact is they have heard it all before, just as it seems the majority of people on this thread have. So it is not worthy of a news report.

Wee_Willy_Harris

liam8282 wrote: »

Hardly headline news, "Driver gets speeding ticket, for speeding!", oh the shock of it.

The Mail had the information about a driver getting caught doing 33mph in a 30mph zone, the fact is they have heard it all before, just as it seems the majority of people on this thread have. So it is not worthy of a news report.

A guy caught doing 40 in a clearly posted 30 gets a story, various quotes and his face in the paper (looking suitably saddened and persecuted) yet YOU claim the reason we don't see the poor persecuted motorist with his little ticket reading 31, 32 or even 33 mph is because it is so common??? Rubbish.

liam8282

Wee_Willy_Harris wrote: »

A guy caught doing 40 in a clearly posted 30 gets a story, various quotes and his face in the paper (looking suitably saddened and persecuted) yet YOU claim the reason we don't see the poor persecuted motorist with his little ticket reading 31, 32 or even 33 mph is because it is so common??? Rubbish.

Well several people on here have experience of it, the newspaper article details it. So yes it does to appear to be quite common.

As I said, it is hardly front page news, "Driver gets a speeding ticket, for speeding"

You miss the point of the article, being drivers are supposed to know a 30mph zone going by the distance of lampposts, as there were no 30mph signs at that time, 2007.

BTW, do you have proof of when the signs were errected or what signs were on that road in 2007? If not, your description of the current road signage is pointless really.

Wee_Willy_Harris

liam8282 wrote: »

Well several people on here have experience of it, the newspaper article details it. So yes it does to appear to be quite common.

As I said, it is hardly front page news, "Driver gets a speeding ticket, for speeding"

You miss the point of the article, being drivers are supposed to know a 30mph zone going by the distance of lampposts, as there were no 30mph signs at that time, 2007.

BTW, do you have proof of when the signs were errected or what signs were on that road in 2007? If not, your description of the current road signage is pointless really.

The roadsigns indicating the speed limit on that stretch of road have been in place for a number of years and were in place prior to 2007.

liam8282

Wee_Willy_Harris wrote: »

The roadsigns indicating the speed limit on that stretch of road have been in place for a number of years and were in place prior to 2007.

Ok, I believe you.

BTW, have you got proof of the times and dates that each individual sign was put up?

The driver said he saw signs indicating 40mph, but no signs indicating a change to a 30mph zone.

So it is really only the 30mph signs that we are interested in, if you have got the times and dates those were erected. :rotfl:

liam8282

Also, it doesn't mention in the article whether or not it was actually the static speed camera that got him.

This means it could have been a mobile camera, opening up the rest of the road, as I originally tried to point out, not just the stretch around the static camera.

Wee_Willy_Harris

liam8282 wrote: »

Also, it doesn't mention in the article whether or not it was actually the static speed camera that got him.

This means it could have been a mobile camera, opening up the rest of the road, as I originally tried to point out, not just the stretch around the static camera.

The rest of the road is 40mph, right the way to the M1 junction.

Wee_Willy_Harris

liam8282 wrote: »

Ok, I believe you.

BTW, have you got proof of the times and dates that each individual sign was put up?

The driver said he saw signs indicating 40mph, but no signs indicating a change to a 30mph zone.

So it is really only the 30mph signs that we are interested in, if you have got the times and dates those were erected. :rotfl:

If you are interested, I'm sure the local council will happily provide you with that information.

king100

Just to reinginte this debate.

I happened to come across a Traffic Cop yesterday and asked him the question?

Can you get a ticket for speeding 33 in a 30?

His answer was NO.

Different police forces have different rules.

He gave me 3 examples from 3 different forces.

1. 10% rule - 30 to 33 - Not speeding
2. 5% rule +1 - 30 to 31.5 + 1 (32.5) Not speeding
3. 10% rule + 2 - 30 to 33 +2 (35) not speeding.

Thats answers it finally.

Harry_Flashman

Oh well, if a Traffic Cop said it, it must be true (heavy sarcasm).

The Traffic Cops seem to be the ones who can't cope with 'real' criminals, I take their opinions with a large amount of scepticism.