Who do I complain to about badly placed traffic signs that possibly led to damage my

AdrianC

Oldfatgrumpy wrote: »

I do have some sympathy with the frustration caused by a 30mph zone that can't under reasonable conditions be driven through at 30.

When did anybody ever promise that the speed limit was a safe and appropriate speed, even in good conditions?

martinsurrey

Oldfatgrumpy wrote: »

Whilst, in the real world, I don't think the OP has a leg to stand on here, I do have some sympathy with the frustration caused by a 30mph zone that can't under reasonable conditions be driven through at 30. I think that speed bumps should be designed to restrict one's speed to the legal limit- i.e I should be able to safely drive over a speed bump at 30 in a 30 zone. I'd expect a bump in a 20 zone to be OK to drive over at 20. Considering the damn things are supposed to confine one's speed to the legal limit, if the local authority wants people to drive at 15 or 20 in a 30 zone, change the speed limit!

http://www.landrover.co.uk/vehicles/freelander-2/index.html

http://www.topgear.com/car-reviews/ferrari/458

one of them can take the OP's bump at about 50 without trouble, the other would struggle at 10, I'll let you guess which way around it is.

point is, bumps effect cars differently, they are there to make you think about your speed.

tonyh66

Oldfatgrumpy wrote: »

Whilst, in the real world, I don't think the OP has a leg to stand on here, I do have some sympathy with the frustration caused by a 30mph zone that can't under reasonable conditions be driven through at 30. I think that speed bumps should be designed to restrict one's speed to the legal limit- i.e I should be able to safely drive over a speed bump at 30 in a 30 zone. I'd expect a bump in a 20 zone to be OK to drive over at 20. Considering the damn things are supposed to confine one's speed to the legal limit, if the local authority wants people to drive at 15 or 20 in a 30 zone, change the speed limit!

Im guessing the lumps are there because there is a school further up the road and they need to slow traffic down at that point.

pappa_golf

tonyh66 wrote: »

Im guessing the lumps are there because there is a school further up the road and they need to slow traffic down at that point.

yes , an ideal place for going at 30 mph , with bad visibility NOT

Car_54

Oldfatgrumpy wrote: »

Whilst, in the real world, I don't think the OP has a leg to stand on here, I do have some sympathy with the frustration caused by a 30mph zone that can't under reasonable conditions be driven through at 30. I think that speed bumps should be designed to restrict one's speed to the legal limit- i.e I should be able to safely drive over a speed bump at 30 in a 30 zone. I'd expect a bump in a 20 zone to be OK to drive over at 20. Considering the damn things are supposed to confine one's speed to the legal limit, if the local authority wants people to drive at 15 or 20 in a 30 zone, change the speed limit!

It has never been suggested that the speed limit represents a safe speed. Drivers are expected to use their judgement and drive at an appropriate speed for the conditions, while never exceeding the limit..

The alternative would be a plethora of different speed limits applied at every bend, junction etc. - and wired up to change with the weather conditions. Not the most practical approach.

Oldfatgrumpy

AdrianC wrote: »

When did anybody ever promise that the speed limit was a safe and appropriate speed, even in good conditions?

Did that really need saying? I haven't driven the best part of a million miles without learning to do it in a manner consistent with the road conditions thanks very much.

I know the bumps are there to restrict the murderous progress of idiots who should never have been allowed to drive, but they punish us all.

AdrianC

Oldfatgrumpy wrote: »

Did that really need saying? I haven't driven the best part of a million miles without learning to do it in a manner consistent with the road conditions thanks very much.

Given the comment it was in reply to? Yes, it clearly did.

bigjl

theone999 wrote: »

This is from a google car with the most advanced multi directional cameras in broad day light.

try again at night in a personal vehicle.

If you couldn't read that sign or cut the corner and it was out of your line of sight then it would be your fault imho.

Would you drive over a pedestrian lying in the road for example? What about debris from another vehicle?

Or would expect both of those to be sign posted aswell?

bigjl

theone999 wrote: »

No, jesus.

I turned right like a normal person. If you look at the photograph, the speed bump is quite a bit on, it is enough to reach 30mph from 10mph. I was still accelerating when I hit it, so might be a few mph less but most likely 25 or above.

If you were doing 10mph when you turned into that road how did you miss the very obvious sign at the junction?

bigjl

theone999 wrote: »

No I didn't.

In my first post, I drew a picture of where the sign was, and where I would have reasonably expected signs but weren't there.

The sign being where it was was unlit and no point coming up to junction and turning right would my head have faced it straight on.

How do you expect my headlights to even light it up at that angle?

When cars are coming the other way, personally I focus on the trajectory of coming cars on the two roads as I turn and rather than looking for unlit signs on pavement at bad angles for right turns.

You seem to have a problem with me driving up to the speed limit. I don't understand why. Now yes, it's true when I drive in unfamilar areas, I might drive slower than the speed limit naturally just because I don't know where I am. But I knew that road was there from a map, and I knew it went quite far ahead. But obviously I didn't know it was full of speed bumps.

You seem to have an issue with seeing obstacles on the road in front of you.

Do you need potholes signposted for you aswell?