driver awareness course

Iceweasel

Muscle750 wrote: »

If it wasn't a 250 mile round trip I'd be there tomorrow to see if there are two signs one either side of the road stating 30 mph if there aren't I'm of the belief after speaking to a friend at the highways agency they are on dodgy ground

A 250 mile round trip is nothing if you really want to be sure of the facts, and retain a clean licence / opt for a course / go to court.

The awareness course is the easiest and cheapest way out.

But my understanding is that if there are street lights on a stretch of road and no 40mph roundels or small repeater 40mph signs, then the limit (by default) has to be 30mph.

Basically - they have to tell you when it's 40 rather than tell you when it's 30.

Aretnap

If the force is in the national scheme, you can do the course in any other area which is also part of the national scheme. Most forces are now in the national scheme - off the top of my head the only ones which aren't are Dorset and Wiltshire (and Scotland, where there are no courses at all).

Johno100

Iceweasel wrote: »

A 250 mile round trip is nothing if you really want to be sure of the facts, and retain a clean licence / opt for a course / go to court.

The awareness course is the easiest and cheapest way out.

That's a bit of a sweeping generalisation. For me it would not be cost effective, seventy odd quid of petrol and a day off work, plus the cost of the course would far out way the tiny increase (if any) in insurance premiums and the £100 fine. But I do agree it is not worth the hassle of going to court because the system is stacked against you.

Stoke

Isn't there a rule that says once a speed limit changes, there is a large sign to inform you, then every 100 yards a smaller one reminding you? This would be for anything between 40 and 60. I forget the distance but it's closer than you think, excluding when you are driving down a 30 zone with street lamps (e.g. no need sign, street lights indicates 30mph) or a National Speed Limit zone.

Hoof_Hearted

The best advice is to take the course and just swallow it.

You will find the course is full of disgruntled people from all walks of life who are annoyed at being caught just over the limit.

By all means prosecute those taking liberties, but catching non-criminals a few miles over the limit just alienates people from the police.

Some "holier than thou" will disagree, inevitably....

Iceweasel

Stoke wrote: »

Isn't there a rule that says once a speed limit changes, there is a large sign to inform you, then every 100 yards a smaller one reminding you? This would be for anything between 40 and 60. I forget the distance but it's closer than you think, excluding when you are driving down a 30 zone with street lamps (e.g. no need sign, street lights indicates 30mph) or a National Speed Limit zone.

The repeater signs are for when the limit is greater than the built-up area default limit of 30mph - no repeaters are necessary if the limit is 30mph.

Iceweasel

Johno100 wrote: »

That's a bit of a sweeping generalisation. For me it would not be cost effective, seventy odd quid of petrol and a day off work, plus the cost of the course would far out way the tiny increase (if any) in insurance premiums and the £100 fine. But I do agree it is not worth the hassle of going to court because the system is stacked against you.

Perhaps a generalization but ......

I wouldn't take a day off work.

The fuel wouldn't be £70 - surely? - my fuel cost would be around 25 litres.

I was thinking of a young person perhaps having further penalties in the future, or applying for a job where driving was part of it.

Also for most young persons insurance premiums are pretty high so even a 10% increase might be a substantial sum.

Anyhow - be that as it may - I would go for the course - as going to court benefits only the legal system and those who work within it.

Inch_High_2

Iceweasel wrote: »

The repeater signs are for when the limit is greater than the built-up area default limit of 30mph - no repeaters are necessary if the limit is 30mph.

Are you sure?

What if there are no lampposts or they are more than 200 metres apart?

Iceweasel

Inch_High wrote: »

Are you sure?

What if there are no lampposts or they are more than 200 metres apart?

Well Inch High - I have to say that I am NOT sure of that.

The fact I haven't seen any, or at least not been AWARE of any, doesn't mean that they do, or should, exist,and been erected/placed on the road in question here. Maybe I too need an awareness course. LOL

We should of course be able to rely, and trust, that the local authorities do everything strictly by the rules - but I know that many don't - especially with things like yellow lines and parking bays.

Again - another reason for the OP to visit and measure the distance between the street light?

Probably not - easier to take the course. As an earlier poster said - the odds are stacked against you going to court to defend this.

Inch_High_2

Iceweasel wrote: »

Well Inch High - I have to say that I am NOT sure of that.

The fact I haven't seen any, or at least not been AWARE of any, doesn't mean that they do, or should, exist,and been erected/placed on the road in question here. Maybe I too need an awareness course. LOL

We should of course be able to rely, and trust, that the local authorities do everything strictly by the rules - but I know that many don't - especially with things like yellow lines and parking bays.

Again - another reason for the OP to visit and measure the distance between the street light?

Probably not - easier to take the course. As an earlier poster said - the odds are stacked against you going to court to defend this.

So you just post what you consider to be fact and correct others when you don't in fact know the first thing about signage.

You my friend are priceless and the reason why people shouldn't rely on forum advice.