GATSO camera with no road markings - enforceable?

[Conscript]

Wondered if I might get some clarification on this.

It was always my understanding that GATSO type speed cameras would flash if you passed them over the designated speed limit, but that in order to prosecute you, the photographs taken needed to show the markings on the road, giving a clear and infallible proof that the target car was was indeed speeding.

However, there are several camera locations I know of where the road has been resurfaced, but the speed markings have not been reinstated. And this is not only in the case of recent road works; we're talking resurfacing that took place +1 year ago, but the lines have not been repainted despite the camera still being there - and the other standard road markings have been repainted.

My gut feeling is that speed cameras are now not being funded as well by local councils and that they might even be inactive - therefore, they are left in place as a deterrent, but their markings have been left to be covered by the new surfacing works.

Obviously, I don't want to test the theory but wondered what others thought - would a ticket issued by a GATSO with no speed markings be enforceable after all? Or is the lack of markings in these cases indicative of a now redundant and inactive camera?

Some example sites I had in mind - in most cases, the Streetview shots are recent enough to show the markings have been removed.

A2 Westbound @ Bexleyheath
http://goo.gl/maps/VjyEM

A2 Eastbound @ Bexleyheath/Crayford
http://goo.gl/maps/19D78

A226 @ Gravesend (markings still visible here, but the road was resurfaced about 8 months ago)
http://goo.gl/maps/JOOla

[marshalla]

Enforceable.

Your understanding is wrong.

The road markings are for a secondary check and there are other ways of doing that.

[mygoldfishbowl]

Don't need lines to prosecute.

[johnao]

marshalla said:

Enforceable.

Your understanding is wrong.

The road markings are for a secondary check and there are other ways of doing that.

That's interesting. What are those "other ways" of gathering secondary evidence?

[marshalla]

johnao said:

That's interesting. What are those "other ways" of gathering secondary evidence?

Other features in the photos and accurate measurements, or chalk marks and accurate measurements based on the photos. Nothing sneaky, just applied rare sense (it used to be called common, but there's so little of it about these days).

[Conscript]

marshalla said:

Enforceable.

Your understanding is wrong.

The road markings are for a secondary check and there are other ways of doing that.

marshalla said:

Other features in the photos and accurate measurements, or chalk marks and accurate measurements based on the photos. Nothing sneaky, just applied rare sense (it used to be called common, but there's so little of it about these days).

That clears that up concisely then. Thank you!

Next question then - why did they ever bother with the markings in the first place if they aren't really needed?

Simply a case of they were useful as an aid but as they aren't necessarily required, they just don't bother reinstating them after fresh surfacing to save on cost?

[marshalla]

Conscript said:

That clears that up concisely then. Thank you!

Next question then - why did they ever bother with the markings in the first place if they aren't really needed?

Simply a case of they were useful as an aid but as they aren't necessarily required, they just don't bother reinstating them after fresh surfacing to save on cost?

Yes.

[SS2.]

Conscript said:

Next question then - why did they ever bother with the markings in the first place if they aren't really needed?

Because the timing marks make it far simpler to provide / confirm the secondary evidence than the original method of photogrammetry.

[covboy]

SS2. said:

Conscript said:

Next question then - why did they ever bother with the markings in the first place if they aren't really needed?

Because the timing marks make it far simpler to provide / confirm the secondary evidence than the original method of photogrammetry.

And if there is more than one car in the shot - Which one was committing the offence (eg with a car travelling towards the camera)

[MattHall91]

Moving on slightly then, how about receiving a parking fine when the double yellows have worn away or been resurfaced over?

[Aretnap]

MattHall91 said:

Moving on slightly then, how about receiving a parking fine when the double yellows have worn away or been resurfaced over?

If the double yellow lines were sufficiently worn that drivers would not have been aware of the restriction then a parking ticket should not be issued - or at least if it was, the poor state of the lines would give you grounds for appeal.

However you don't need Gatso road markings to tell you that you're not allowed to speed, so it's a very different scenario.

[Speed Badger]

Speaking from a Met Police perspective - as these locations are, the offenses would not be enforceable if no secondary check markings are present. The ticket would not be issued and would be NFA'd (no further action).

[Type R Tom]

TFL haven't bothered to sort the markings as this strech is down for average speed in the next few months.

EDIT: Found the link - http://www.tfl.gov.uk/info-for/media/press-release...

Edited by Type R Tom on Tuesday 24th February 12:57

[supermono]

I've been in vehicles that have set off speed cameras on bits of road with no markings (rear facing square GATSO) on several occasions over the years and according to the driver in each case nothing has ever come of it.

My belief is nobody has been done although I guess if you were doing 100 in a 30 they might make an effort. Anyone have a first hand account of being done? I doubt it very much

[Type R Tom]

supermono said:

I've been in vehicles that have set off speed cameras on bits of road with no markings (rear facing square GATSO) on several occasions over the years and according to the driver in each case nothing has ever come of it.

My belief is nobody has been done although I guess if you were doing 100 in a 30 they might make an effort. Anyone have a first hand account of being done? I doubt it very much

They don't always have the camera units in them, they get rotated.

[jbsportstech]

Type R Tom said:

TFL haven't bothered to sort the markings as this strech is down for average speed in the next few months.

EDIT: Found the link - http://www.tfl.gov.uk/info-for/media/press-release...

Edited by Type R Tom on Tuesday 24th February 12:57

Thats interesting didn't know red light cameras could deb used for speed enforcement!

[SS2.]

supermono said:

My belief is nobody has been done..

When Gatso Type 24 cameras were first deployed in the UK (1992 ?), they were installed without timing marks painted onto the road surface. These came later, following concerns that the approved method of checking the two pictures using photogrammetry was too labour intensive.

Whilst it's possible that no SCP uses this method any more, it can't be said that no one has ever been prosecuted / penalised using photogrammetry to provide the secondary check.

[supermono]

SS2. said:

When Gatso Type 24 cameras were first deployed in the UK (1992 ?), they were installed without timing marks painted onto the road surface. These came later, following concerns that the approved method of checking the two pictures using photogrammetry was too labour intensive.

Whilst it's possible that no SCP uses this method any more, it can't be said that no one has ever been prosecuted / penalised using photogrammetry to provide the secondary check.

It cannot be said but it can be believed, as I do that nobody has. I'm sure there will be someone along soon to say they have if they have.

The Speed Camera Parasites (SCPs) are full of BS to support the cause, a third of all accidents lie, the unbelievable reductions in accidents they claim to make, etc, so this lines myth might well be one of them.

[SS2.]

supermono said:

The Speed Camera Parasites (SCPs) are full of BS to support the cause, a third of all accidents lie, the unbelievable reductions in accidents they claim to make, etc, so this lines myth might well be one of them.

It's no myth, and the information has been provided and verified by the Home Office.

[Big Rumbly]

marshalla said:

Enforceable.

Your understanding is wrong.

The road markings are for a secondary check and there are other ways of doing that.

No,I think your understanding is wrong.

Gatso installations in the UK and in Queensland, Australia are characterised by a measurement strip on the road surface, which is a series of white lines painted on the road, which are used with two photographs taken by the camera. If the camera is set to take two photographs, with a known time interval between them, this time interval will be 0.5 or 0.7 seconds - 0.5 is better for high speed roads and 0.7 better for low speed roads. The vehicle's position, relative to the white road markings in the two photographs, can be used to calculate the vehicle speed.In the UK, the evidence is only admissible in court if the speed measured by the radar and the speed calculated from the distance travelled between the photographs agrees within 10%. The speed indicated by the radar unit is too unreliable to be used as the sole means of evidence as it is prone to error due to multiple reflections etc. Further, it does not distinguish between multiple vehicles in shot.

This, as far as I am aware is still the case.