Upper Thames St SPECS illegal
Discussion
This is a biggie - spread the news :thumbup:
[url]www.thisislondon.co.uk|http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/londonnews/articles/19495073?source=Evening%20Standard[/url]
Speed trap fines are scrapped in blunder
By Andrew Gilligan, Evening Standard
23 June 2005
Thousands of motorists caught in London's most controversial speed camera trap are to have fines refunded after Transport for London admitted one of the devices was in the wrong place.
The refunds - totalling £330,000 - are a serious blow to the credibility of one of London's highest profile speed trap sites.
The 20mph speed limit in Upper Thames Street rakes in about ?4,000 a day because drivers do not associate a busy dual carriageway with such a low limit. It has caused fury among the road's 60,000 daily users.
But the Standard has learned that one of the new digital Specs cameras on the street was wrongly installed outside the 20mph zone.
[b]The fault applies only to the westbound direction[/b], but more than 160 drivers a week have been wrongly fined £60 and given points on their licences. The London Safety Camera Partnership (LSCP), which operates the scheme, admitted in a statement today: "A sign marking the start of a 20mph speed limit zone on Upper Thames Street is incorrectly positioned.
"As a consequence motorists were being monitored for a 20mph limit whilst still in the 30mph zone for a short distance. We will refund all the fines paid and cancel all the licence endorsements. Whilst the signs are repositioned, mobile cameras will operate."
Nearly 5,600 motorists are affected by the error, it is understood. The fines refund will total at least £335,800.
The LSCP decided on the refunds at its project board meeting earlier this week, the Standard has learned. The partnership is now braced for legal action from furious drivers who may wrongly have lost their licences.
"It is a biggie," said one source. "It is a very sensitive decision."
The new cameras were installed almost eight months ago to cover a stretch of building works between London and Southwark bridges.
Unlike standard Gatso cameras, they measure speed between a pair of devices. A single camera out of place throws the entire scheme into chaos, with the result that everyone passing through must be refunded.
This year it emerged the Upper Thames Street scheme had collected £84,000 in fines in only three weeks.
[url]www.thisislondon.co.uk|http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/londonnews/articles/19495073?source=Evening%20Standard[/url]
Speed trap fines are scrapped in blunder
By Andrew Gilligan, Evening Standard
23 June 2005
Thousands of motorists caught in London's most controversial speed camera trap are to have fines refunded after Transport for London admitted one of the devices was in the wrong place.
The refunds - totalling £330,000 - are a serious blow to the credibility of one of London's highest profile speed trap sites.
The 20mph speed limit in Upper Thames Street rakes in about ?4,000 a day because drivers do not associate a busy dual carriageway with such a low limit. It has caused fury among the road's 60,000 daily users.
But the Standard has learned that one of the new digital Specs cameras on the street was wrongly installed outside the 20mph zone.
[b]The fault applies only to the westbound direction[/b], but more than 160 drivers a week have been wrongly fined £60 and given points on their licences. The London Safety Camera Partnership (LSCP), which operates the scheme, admitted in a statement today: "A sign marking the start of a 20mph speed limit zone on Upper Thames Street is incorrectly positioned.
"As a consequence motorists were being monitored for a 20mph limit whilst still in the 30mph zone for a short distance. We will refund all the fines paid and cancel all the licence endorsements. Whilst the signs are repositioned, mobile cameras will operate."
Nearly 5,600 motorists are affected by the error, it is understood. The fines refund will total at least £335,800.
The LSCP decided on the refunds at its project board meeting earlier this week, the Standard has learned. The partnership is now braced for legal action from furious drivers who may wrongly have lost their licences.
"It is a biggie," said one source. "It is a very sensitive decision."
The new cameras were installed almost eight months ago to cover a stretch of building works between London and Southwark bridges.
Unlike standard Gatso cameras, they measure speed between a pair of devices. A single camera out of place throws the entire scheme into chaos, with the result that everyone passing through must be refunded.
This year it emerged the Upper Thames Street scheme had collected £84,000 in fines in only three weeks.
All thanks to the hard work of some of the forum posters at www.pepipoo.com (and one chap's mates in particular). Not sure of the specifics but it just goes to show that it takes a bit of hard work by ONE PERSON and the whole thing can come crashing down.
Hopefully after all the receipts are counted and paid out the cost is much more than £330k.
Gareth
Hopefully after all the receipts are counted and paid out the cost is much more than £330k.
Gareth
Good. **** 'em.
And why on earth did they try to impose a 20mph limit on that road? For those that don't know it, it's a short section of urban dual carriageway that runs through a sort of canyon of office blocks. Most of the buildings are not accessed by pedestrians from the road. Those that are walking at street level have access to at least two foot bridges over it and a pedestrian crossing. I spent most of last year in an office that is built over the top of that road. The "view" from my desk was straight down onto it. Not a single crash in all that time, let alone an injury and all at the heady speed of 30mph. Traffic either flowed at about 40mph breaking for the gatsos, or at walking pace during rush hour.
>> Edited by ATG on Thursday 23 June 23:38
And why on earth did they try to impose a 20mph limit on that road? For those that don't know it, it's a short section of urban dual carriageway that runs through a sort of canyon of office blocks. Most of the buildings are not accessed by pedestrians from the road. Those that are walking at street level have access to at least two foot bridges over it and a pedestrian crossing. I spent most of last year in an office that is built over the top of that road. The "view" from my desk was straight down onto it. Not a single crash in all that time, let alone an injury and all at the heady speed of 30mph. Traffic either flowed at about 40mph breaking for the gatsos, or at walking pace during rush hour.
>> Edited by ATG on Thursday 23 June 23:38
crackedfinger said:
Wow - imagine the amount of increased insurance costs for all these drivers, will easily drive the total up!
Eh ?
Speeding fines have never made a difference to my insurance costs.
If it does, then change your insurance company.
Apart from that, it is a good result for all those caught
>> Edited by ledfoot on Friday 24th June 00:11
puggit said:
Whilst the signs are repositioned, mobile cameras will operate.
These feckers never stop, do they? Assuming, as it would appear, that is is the terminal signs, and not the cameras, that are in the wrong position, the TSRGDs have not been complied with.
Speed limit terminal signs must be 'as close as practicable' to the start of the limit.
Since the street lamps don't tell you that the limit is 20 MPH, that should be a defence.
>> Edited by jeffreyarcher on Friday 24th June 01:11
Contradictory/confusing report (or, more probably, spokesperson for the LSCP).
"The London Safety Camera Partnership (LSCP), which operates the scheme, admitted in a statement today: 'A sign marking the start of a 20mph speed limit zone on Upper Thames Street is incorrectly positioned.'
'As a consequence motorists were being monitored for a 20mph limit whilst still in the 30mph zone for a short distance.'"
The first statement refers to the sign, but the second clearly implies that it was the camera that was incorrectly sited. Or are they arbitrarily going to move the start of the 20 limit? Methinks checking the measurements in the Order would be sensible.
Streaky
"The London Safety Camera Partnership (LSCP), which operates the scheme, admitted in a statement today: 'A sign marking the start of a 20mph speed limit zone on Upper Thames Street is incorrectly positioned.'
'As a consequence motorists were being monitored for a 20mph limit whilst still in the 30mph zone for a short distance.'"
The first statement refers to the sign, but the second clearly implies that it was the camera that was incorrectly sited. Or are they arbitrarily going to move the start of the 20 limit? Methinks checking the measurements in the Order would be sensible.
Streaky
ATG said:To scam people for the money! Now it will cost them a lot more than they think, but it still won't stop them becasue no one's job will be on the line over this. The culture under this government is that politicians and civil servants do not answer for the consequences of their actions.
Good. **** 'em.
And why on earth did they try to impose a 20mph limit on that road?
I got busted by that camera on 28th May! Haven't put my hands up for the offence yet but doesn't look like I'll have to now.
When i read it in the Chinese last night, rushed home to confirm it - Upper Thames Street Westbound! Thats me!
Celebrated this last night. Still got a clean licence after all. Well happy about this!
When i read it in the Chinese last night, rushed home to confirm it - Upper Thames Street Westbound! Thats me!
Celebrated this last night. Still got a clean licence after all. Well happy about this!
tinman0 said:I think you should consider sueing for the stress
I got busted by that camera on 28th May! Haven't put my hands up for the offence yet but doesn't look like I'll have to now.
When i read it in the Chinese last night, rushed home to confirm it - Upper Thames Street Westbound! Thats me!
Celebrated this last night. Still got a clean licence after all. Well happy about this!
I'm sure that many of the posters on www.policespecials.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=25042 (courtesy of parrot of doom) would consider this wholly unjustified - Streaky
puggit said:Inconclusive. Either the sign or the camera was wrongly positioned. Details must be in the Order ... that's what needs checking.
Streaky - check out pepipoo for the technical ins and outs...
I couldn't follow them, but I'm sure you can
I recall a picture on a thread that did seem to suggest that the camera/sign position was wrong ... but a search doesn't reveal it.
Streaky
this problem was posted on pistonheads the DAY the cameras went up.
www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?f=10&h=&t=140080
in summary you enter the 20 zone at the camera. obviously the camera reads your plate well into the 30 zone. only an utter moron couldnt work this one out... hope some prick gets fired. also a 20 limit here is totally indefensible...
>> Edited by francisb on Sunday 26th June 12:54
www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?f=10&h=&t=140080
in summary you enter the 20 zone at the camera. obviously the camera reads your plate well into the 30 zone. only an utter moron couldnt work this one out... hope some prick gets fired. also a 20 limit here is totally indefensible...
>> Edited by francisb on Sunday 26th June 12:54
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff