Avon and Somerset Police using redlight camera for speeding
Discussion
4rephill said:
Your driver should be obeying the speed limit signs regardless of whether there's a camera there or not, and regardless of whether there are any camera warning signs or not.
Been there, done that, got the T-shirt, got the points on the licence, and at no time did I ever think it was someone else's fault, because it was My decision to break the Law!
All accepted points, driver holds his hands up. its not 2-3 its 7mph over not excusable.Been there, done that, got the T-shirt, got the points on the licence, and at no time did I ever think it was someone else's fault, because it was My decision to break the Law!
My question really relates to the point of the camera and misleading information on their website.
Cameras are sited to prevent accidents at areas supposedly were there is a risk or has been of serious injuries.
By not having accurate information on the camera on their website and being unclear on the cameras propose, the locals i have spoken to all state people do more than 30 along that section as they belief the camera is not working still or just red light.
If A&S police made it clear speed would go down and so would the risk profile of the road.
Its hard to argue the stealthy way they have switched, this camera was down for any other reason than revenue generation.
Gavia said:
Your point makes no sense at all. Most people drive at more than 30 in 30 limits, but not so much over that they will get caught by a static camera. Why someone would gamble that a camera is only a red light camera and speed through it is beyond me. The fact that it says it's a red light camera on the police website is completely irrelevant. These locals that you've spoken to must either all be banned, have a shedload of points, or be more moderate in their speeding.
I'd like to refer back to my comment over your spelling and grammar too, one or two typos occasionally is to be expected, but you consistently use "of" when the word is "have" and in this post have used propose for purpose and belief for believe. If you are a surveyor how do write accurate reports for people?
I am a chartered quantity surveyor.I'd like to refer back to my comment over your spelling and grammar too, one or two typos occasionally is to be expected, but you consistently use "of" when the word is "have" and in this post have used propose for purpose and belief for believe. If you are a surveyor how do write accurate reports for people?
I proof read work stuff and don't post it on my phone.
Gavia said:
Rather than just focusing on my second question, what about the bit that relates to the topic?
My point briefly is;If the end game is to slow people down and reduce serious collisions, then surely making it clear that it is a speed camera with signage and making sure their website is clear would be better than! The more stealthly approach they seem to operate and using a camera that doesn't flashing just issue lots of tickets.
The goal should be to slow people down not just penalise the speeders ask discreetly as possible.
There is a fairly simple explanation to the speed camera debate.
If it was all about road safety they would be honest about what cameras were where. They wouldn't make money instead covering their costs and putting the excess into further roads safety schemes.
In A&S case there was a clear intention to generate revenue from their camera. They have a budget short fall and spent money buying the cameras and re-commissioning selected sites that generate good returns.
Prime example is the M5 today, between 24-24 north bound they have put 50mph average specs. Now these are now active and the TM is out but two days have gone by with no works or workmen working.
If it was all about road safety they would be honest about what cameras were where. They wouldn't make money instead covering their costs and putting the excess into further roads safety schemes.
In A&S case there was a clear intention to generate revenue from their camera. They have a budget short fall and spent money buying the cameras and re-commissioning selected sites that generate good returns.
Prime example is the M5 today, between 24-24 north bound they have put 50mph average specs. Now these are now active and the TM is out but two days have gone by with no works or workmen working.
Edited by surveyor_101 on Wednesday 2nd November 13:33
singlecoil said:
That ridiculous theory of yours has been scotched more than once by various posters, and it just bounces of you.
If that's your level of reasoning then I'm glad you are not left to decide your own speed on the road.
What ridiculous about not profiting from cameras, I appreciate they must recover their costs.If that's your level of reasoning then I'm glad you are not left to decide your own speed on the road.
The goal should not be getting loads of convictions it should be getting people to slow down. Your not saving lives by getting pictures of cars speeding. Many of these cars may be untaxed/uninsured/unmoted they arent dealing with this. Only in april someone at work got stopped for speeding. In jluy we realised her car had no mot or tax since feb !
WD39 said:
This is the default criticism for PHers who highlight speeding, in any siuation. Although there are some on this site who have a lead right foot, the majority have a light touch, I'm sure.
Brake want people to slow down bottom line!Making these cameras purpose clearer and showing speed camera signs would help in this instance.
That is assuming the end game in reduction in speeding and accidents.
If it have the limit clear but nothing else and maximum prosecutions, then they are doing that well I would say.
oceanview said:
I live in Taunton where this lovely camera is and I ( and everyone I've asked in the last couple days) also thought it was just for red light jumping.
A couple chaps from work, few years back, had red light tickets from it.
If it is for speed as well, then it will make lots of money, that's for sure!
Same here and I am from taunton, I checked with A&S Police and they also claim its a 'redlight' camera. It a closely guarded secret.A couple chaps from work, few years back, had red light tickets from it.
If it is for speed as well, then it will make lots of money, that's for sure!
Its two lanes and after alot of two 40mph, so to get someone going 37 is no uncommon mistake.
drf765 said:
I'm missing your logic.
Are you suggesting that you would observe the limit if it was signed clearly?
What do you want the authorities to do? Maybe put a plate under the speed limit sign that says "We really mean it, 30 maximum please!"
It's not me who got caught, my logic is if the end game is slowing people down quietly switching a r slight camera without changing the signage or website does not slow people down, it's catches people speeding.Are you suggesting that you would observe the limit if it was signed clearly?
What do you want the authorities to do? Maybe put a plate under the speed limit sign that says "We really mean it, 30 maximum please!"
4rephill said:
Shouldn't the visible speed limit signs "give those who make such mistakes a fighting chance to rectify their error before it ends up costing them......"? 
The red light/speed camera combination is not really there to catch drivers who accidentally make "mistakes" with their speed, they're set up to catch those drivers who decide to deliberately put their foot down when the light goes to amber in order to try to "beat" the red light.
When it comes to drivers who speed up to race through amber lights, and get caught driving through red lights: Tough s
t! - Amber means stop, not: "put your foot down and take a chance!"
Bare in mind, you come on a two lane 40mph, no speed camera signs. You then just 80 yards prior to the camera the limit signs on the left could be hidden behind a van, on the right is partially obscured by a hedge! Its not the best signed posted limit>The red light/speed camera combination is not really there to catch drivers who accidentally make "mistakes" with their speed, they're set up to catch those drivers who decide to deliberately put their foot down when the light goes to amber in order to try to "beat" the red light.
When it comes to drivers who speed up to race through amber lights, and get caught driving through red lights: Tough s
t! - Amber means stop, not: "put your foot down and take a chance!"https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.0178138,-3.08848...
drf765 said:
37+ in a 30 through an amber light. Maybe speeding isn't the most suitable or only offence to prosecute.
Amber is be prepare to stop and the junction is empty in the photo, it would have changed after the driver was committed, so again comes down to speed. There is no redlight offence, I suspect you have never passed an amber light in your driving career.
driver was trying to avoid getting stuck at the lights as taunton has the worst phased and placed traffic lights in the country! His wife had got locked out after their two year old had shut the door behind her! So can imagine he was speeding because of that.
Edited by surveyor_101 on Friday 4th November 13:42
Edited by surveyor_101 on Friday 4th November 13:43
Edited by surveyor_101 on Friday 4th November 13:56
Gavia said:
Even after multiple edits you've still left your comment about what an amber light means in there.
Have a read of this
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-highway-code/light...
My money is on the driver seeing a green light for a while and getting his foot down to get through it on amber.
Driver did have his foot down he was in a 40 moment before, as for the comment of foot traffic. Its 4 lanes and has many crossing people don't tend to brave it without using the crossings.Have a read of this
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-highway-code/light...
My money is on the driver seeing a green light for a while and getting his foot down to get through it on amber.
I noted yesterday that on the side of the road the vehicle was caught the check marks are no consistant and some lines are missing. Is this any grounds to challenge or should he apply for the speed awareness as they wont tell me if he is entitled without applying.
Gavia said:
No chance on the technicality.
You don't apply for a Speed Awareness Course, one might be offered if the driver qualifies based on driving history, current points and speed he was travelling at.
You do in avon and somerset the ticket came to my firm, (and it offered the firm speed awarness!)You don't apply for a Speed Awareness Course, one might be offered if the driver qualifies based on driving history, current points and speed he was travelling at.
Speed awareness is on the notice to driver but he last was caught in Oct 2013 (course was nov 13) and can't remember if it was before the 18th October. When he called and asked they said you will have to apply and we will let him no if he can take the option. I expect they are keen as they charge one of the highest fees in the country think its like £95-105? Remember they got some stick when they put it up!
_dobbo_ said:
Oh well in that case it's fine to be booting it accelerating into a 30 zone at nearly 40 miles an hour, because "people don't tend to brave it". The guy shouldn't be getting a speeding ticket he should be getting a medal.
He carried the 37 from the 40 limit the other side of the camera, he didn't 'boot it' as you suggest also you will see he is braking down to 30 as he enters the built up area._dobbo_ said:
See how you've said the driver had his foot down?
So he's got his foot down but he's braking but he knew the limit and the camera but he sped anyway but his kid was locked out but the signs were obscured but the hedges but the camera but but but but but WHAT ON EARTH is the point you are trying to make?!
Point is they got him even without the proper signage in place. He could of been (and many others) prevented from speeding had the published accurate information on their website. Hiding the purpose of a speed camera seems to me to have no tangible benefit to road safety.So he's got his foot down but he's braking but he knew the limit and the camera but he sped anyway but his kid was locked out but the signs were obscured but the hedges but the camera but but but but but WHAT ON EARTH is the point you are trying to make?!
Clearly the drivers complaint to the police has worked as they have altered their website and now list this as a speed camera and 0 red light cameras.
Like I said if the name of of the game was safety rather than revenue!
Driver has learnt his lesson and opted for speed awareness (brain washing) coffee and biscuits at the Holiday Inn, for the princely sum of £105 more than the FNP! Again other forces do it for £50-60 but avon and somerset need to cover their inaccurate website operating costs!
This is delivered by a registrar who knows nothing about road safety or driving, but if you need a death or marriage cert she is your girl.
Thank you, good night much love.
_dobbo_ said:
What you're saying is that this guy regularly checks the website to see which cameras might catch him, then only slows down to obey the speed limit for the cameras he believes to be active.
So getting caught isn't fair because he'd have slowed to the limit had he known this particular camera was active.
Got it. I'm weeping for the poor guy getting caught in such an elaborate trap.
My point is if its about road safety lets get the speeds down, if its about enforcement and revenue generation lets not pretend otherwise.So getting caught isn't fair because he'd have slowed to the limit had he known this particular camera was active.
Got it. I'm weeping for the poor guy getting caught in such an elaborate trap.
1. Ok thanks!
2. No it costs £105 which is more £5 more than the FPN. My point was they charge more for education than about any other force!
3. Yes the one I attended a few years back was, I think she didn't even drive! Lady on my course had been married by her and she said outside of the room she/us were never to mention the course and her role ever again, its all confidential.
Edited by surveyor_101 on Thursday 10th November 13:11
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff