Mobile camera rules...

Author
Discussion

ZZR

Original Poster:

913 posts

252 months

Thursday 8th September 2005
quotequote all
If a mobile camera is setup does it have to be capable of being seen by passing motorists before they fall into it's detection zone? I beleive this is the case for fixed cameras, 40 meters?

There is one setup sometimes on Lower/Upper Thames Street in London on the west bound end at the exit of the tunnel, but completely hidden from view by placing it on the adjoining on-ramp, up on the outside of the tunnel, which means the first real view is in your mirrors once you have passed it, too late!!

Paul

ZZR

Original Poster:

913 posts

252 months

Thursday 8th September 2005
quotequote all
found this on dft site:

www.dft.gov.uk/stellent/groups/dft_rdsafety/documents/page/dft_rdsafety_025918.hcsp

Visibility of Mobile enforcement sites: Camera operatives at the mobile camera sites should wear fluorescent clothing and abide by all Health and Safety requirements. Vehicles should be clearly marked as camera enforcement vehicles with reflective strips (uniquely identifying them as speed camera enforcement vehicles). Covert operations can in exceptional circumstances be allowed but must be recorded by the partnership.

bluepolarbear

1,665 posts

247 months

Friday 9th September 2005
quotequote all
Rules for both fixed and mobile camera's are simple - there is only one.

1) The device used must be type approved and the operating instructions follow any specific notes in the type approval.

The type approval is a technical document not an operational one. There are no operational rules. If they hide in a bush, just round a corner, 1 metre into a 30mph limit change - they can do you and it will be legal.

Do not believe anything else they tell you - it is spin.

trax

1,537 posts

233 months

Friday 9th September 2005
quotequote all
As above, there are no rules to say what where and when they can go about their business. Generaly they will park were they can make the most money, visibility, safety, targeting accidents sites, reducing acidents are of no major concern.

There are some rules regading locations, but that is only to be able to keep their ill-gotten gains, these are very flexible, so they can abide by the rules, but not fullfill the rules aim. i.e. a road has to have had X amount of accidents for them to be able to keep the money, so they wait with glee for someone to have the accidents, then are allowed to target the safe bit of that road, usually where people tend to speed, and not near where the accidents occur, and sit there rubbing there hands in glee.

bigdods

7,172 posts

228 months

Friday 9th September 2005
quotequote all
From experience hiding fixed and mobile cameras is becoming the norm in Northants where I live. I wonder if they employ a man to check the sites and relocate road signs and bushes to cover the cameras..... Two I particularly like, coming up the A43 towards towcester there is one painted yellow, but its hidden right behind a big road sign - and the other is a talivan on the A422 at Brackley, parks on the grass verge on the bend by tescos occasionally, van is out of sight round the corner with just the open rear door poking round the corner with the camera sticking out.

outnumbered

4,090 posts

235 months

Friday 9th September 2005
quotequote all

I can't understand why they're allowed to hide mobile cameras. The rules were changed when the scammers started to keep the penalty revenue, to ensure that fixed cameras had to be visible (previously, they were often hidden behind a convenient sign or tree).

Why wouldn't the same apply to mobile cameras, now that they are increasingly using mobiles to make up for lost fixed site revenue ?

Wonder if Safespeed could do something here..

sleepezy

1,807 posts

235 months

Friday 9th September 2005
quotequote all
Well anybody travelling on the A14 from Peterborough to Cambridge this evening would have had trouble spotting the van parked in the dark on the J23 roundabout before it picked them up.

I didn't think the vans could work at night?

bigdods

7,172 posts

228 months

Saturday 10th September 2005
quotequote all
I am guessing that as long as the camera is visible in some way then they are covered...in the case of the A43 there is a big speed camera sign about 5 yds before the camera on the other side of the big road sign where you can see it. BUT as northants put these signs up all over the place regardless of whether there is actually a camera its use as a warning is limited.

zzr

Original Poster:

913 posts

252 months

Saturday 10th September 2005
quotequote all
This camera was completely hidden from view until you had passed it and the van was parked on the on-ramp onto the road it was monitoring, again even further hidden from view.

No warnings at all, so how is that promoting road safety?

zoomzoomzoom

27 posts

246 months

Sunday 11th September 2005
quotequote all
I think the so called "rules" regarding revenue camera operation are simply "guidelines" and nothing more.

I was on the A11 today in pretty heavy rain and there was a talivan sniping drivers. Whilst we and other sensible motorists were travelling at the speed limit or below, it didn't stop some people from panic braking, irrespective of the speed at which they were travelling. Not something I'd want to encourage with standing water and poor visibility.

Thankfully my girlfriend is a good driver and wasn't driving quickly, WAS leaving an adequate distance between our car and the car in front and WAS NOT
involved in any of the panic braking.


You've gotta love these 'safety' cameras.

My rant continues... I also saw a scamera sign in some roadworks on the way home. It had the scamera symbol and then the words "for safety reasons". The fact they had to add the bit about safety suggests to me that other cameras may NOT be for safety then? Surely this is true, otherwise the additional text wouldn't be needed in this case? Confused.

simonrockman

6,861 posts

256 months

Sunday 11th September 2005
quotequote all
I liked the story of two kids standing out of view, but ahead of and behind a scamera. The first held a sign saying "speed trap ahead". The second a bucket and a sigh saying "Tips".

now this has been proven to be illegal, but what if the camera was also fake. Then you have a neat little revenue generating scam.

Hmm, methinks the treasury has got there first.

Simon