Average speed limit signage

[Chicken_Satay]

If average speed cameras are in use, is it a legal requirement to have signage telling you that they are in use?

Most roads where average speed cameras are in use (temporary or permanent) will have signs telling you that they are in use so I assumed it was a legal requirement.

I can't find the answer on Google...

[Biggus thingus]

My limited experience is that they have to put up signs warning that cameras are in use before they can stick one in a lay-by, behind a hedge, corner of the road, brow of a hill etc

Never seen one outside a school, care home, college or hospital funnily enough

[martinbiz]

Chicken_Satay said:

If average speed cameras are in use, is it a legal requirement to have signage telling you that they are in use?

Most roads where average speed cameras are in use (temporary or permanent) will have signs telling you that they are in use so I assumed it was a legal requirement.

I can't find the answer on Google...

No

[Chicken_Satay]

martinbiz said:

No

Can you quote the legal source of that information please?

[Dr Jekyll]

Chicken_Satay said:

martinbiz said:

No

Can you quote the legal source of that information please?

Why would there be a legal source to show something isn't required?

[Drogo]

https://www.westyorkshire.police.uk/ask-the-police...

"There is nothing in law that states that any speed camera device, whether fixed or mobile, must be marked in any way, signed or at a particular position. There are codes of practice and best practice guides that are set by police forces themselves but these are policies rather than law."

[Panamax]

Dr Jekyll said:

Why would there be a legal source to show something isn't required?

This.

Signs definitely not "required".

[Chicken_Satay]

Dr Jekyll said:

Chicken_Satay said:

martinbiz said:

No

Can you quote the legal source of that information please?

Why would there be a legal source to show something isn't required?

Because there is always guidance or rules and regulations for speed cameras, e.g there is a minimum distance over which an average speed camera can measure your speed so that you can be prosecuted for excess speed. Signage, whether required or not, will always be a topic of interest to anybody dealing with average speed cameras.

Additionally, providing justification for an answer given in response to a question in a forum such as this, is more useful to other viewers of the topic.

[markjmd]

Dr Jekyll said:

Why would there be a legal source to show something isn't required?

Isn't it reasonably likely that there would be legislation setting out the framework for the use of speed cameras generally? And if such legislation existed, that it would state whether and which signage must accompany their use?

[vonhosen]

markjmd said:

Dr Jekyll said:

Why would there be a legal source to show something isn't required?

Isn't it reasonably likely that there would be legislation setting out the framework for the use of speed cameras generally? And if such legislation existed, that it would state whether and which signage must accompany their use?

Legislation? No it's not likely at all.

There are guidelines that the Police themselves write that it is best practice to follow, but there are invariably caveats within the guidelines that them not being followed doesn't bar a prosecution.

It's like the old calibrated speedo myths.
Best practice, but not a legal requirement for them or a bar to prosecution without them.

[Pica-Pica]

On the subject of average speed limit zones, does the +10%+1mph before prosecution still apply?
How do they measure? (Yes, I guess they measure time over that distance).
Do they time ALL cars as they go through the various sets of cameras? Or do they pick up the faster ones (triggered at what over-speed?) and then time those ones through the next camera?
I tend to set my cruise or limiter at just below the +10%, so maybe 43 in a 40 average speed zone.

[giantdefy]

Pica-Pica said:

On the subject of average speed limit zones, does the +10%+1mph before prosecution still apply?

Probably but not guaranteed.

Pica-Pica said:

How do they measure? (Yes, I guess they measure time over that distance).

Your guess is good

Pica-Pica said:

Do they time ALL cars as they go through the various sets of cameras? Or do they pick up the faster ones (triggered at what over-speed?) and then time those ones through the next camera?

Since they don't measure speed only apply a time stamp to your vehicle reg via ANPR they do in fact record all vehicles.

Pica-Pica said:

I tend to set my cruise or limiter at just below the +10%, so maybe 43 in a 40 average speed zone.

You should be OK then.

[jm doc]

vonhosen said:

markjmd said:

Dr Jekyll said:

Why would there be a legal source to show something isn't required?

Isn't it reasonably likely that there would be legislation setting out the framework for the use of speed cameras generally? And if such legislation existed, that it would state whether and which signage must accompany their use?

Legislation? No it's not likely at all.

There are guidelines that the Police themselves write that it is best practice to follow, but there are invariably caveats within the guidelines that them not being followed doesn't bar a prosecution.

It's like the old calibrated speedo myths.
Best practice, but not a legal requirement for them or a bar to prosecution without them.

Strange then that the signage for bus lanes is so strict?

[Chicken_Satay]

jm doc said:

Strange then that the signage for bus lanes is so strict?

Exactly what I was thinking too.

[vonhosen]

jm doc said:

vonhosen said:

markjmd said:

Dr Jekyll said:

Why would there be a legal source to show something isn't required?

Isn't it reasonably likely that there would be legislation setting out the framework for the use of speed cameras generally? And if such legislation existed, that it would state whether and which signage must accompany their use?

Legislation? No it's not likely at all.

There are guidelines that the Police themselves write that it is best practice to follow, but there are invariably caveats within the guidelines that them not being followed doesn't bar a prosecution.

It's like the old calibrated speedo myths.
Best practice, but not a legal requirement for them or a bar to prosecution without them.

Strange then that the signage for bus lanes is so strict?

Strange how?

There are legislative requirements for bus lane signage as there is for speed limit signage.
There are type approvals for cameras for both bus lanes & speed enforcement.
But there isn't a legislative requirement for camera enforcement warning signage in order for speed enforcement to take place.

[jm doc]

vonhosen said:

jm doc said:

vonhosen said:

markjmd said:

Dr Jekyll said:

Why would there be a legal source to show something isn't required?

Isn't it reasonably likely that there would be legislation setting out the framework for the use of speed cameras generally? And if such legislation existed, that it would state whether and which signage must accompany their use?

Legislation? No it's not likely at all.

There are guidelines that the Police themselves write that it is best practice to follow, but there are invariably caveats within the guidelines that them not being followed doesn't bar a prosecution.

It's like the old calibrated speedo myths.
Best practice, but not a legal requirement for them or a bar to prosecution without them.

Strange then that the signage for bus lanes is so strict?

Strange how?

There are legislative requirements for bus lane signage as there is for speed limit signage.
There are type approvals for cameras for both bus lanes & speed enforcement.
But there isn't a legislative requirement for camera enforcement warning signage in order for speed enforcement to take place.

Strange then that the signage for bus lanes is so strict?

I think you must have missed what I posted Von.

[Durzel]

markjmd said:

Dr Jekyll said:

Why would there be a legal source to show something isn't required?

Isn't it reasonably likely that there would be legislation setting out the framework for the use of speed cameras generally? And if such legislation existed, that it would state whether and which signage must accompany their use?

But his point is why would the legislation document things that aren’t required? If signs used to be legally required, then arguably the newer legislation ought to explicitly say that they aren’t required in this instance, but signs have never been required.

You might as well ask why they don’t say that balloons don’t have to be tied to the cameras.

[Dr Jekyll]

jm doc said:

Strange then that the signage for bus lanes is so strict?

I think you must have missed what I posted Von.

Signage for bus lanes is analogous to signage for speed limits, not to signage for enforcement.

[IJWS15]

The limit is a maximum. The requirements cover how that is signed.

The average cameras are just a way of measuring your speed.

[markjmd]

Durzel said:

markjmd said:

Dr Jekyll said:

Why would there be a legal source to show something isn't required?

Isn't it reasonably likely that there would be legislation setting out the framework for the use of speed cameras generally? And if such legislation existed, that it would state whether and which signage must accompany their use?

But his point is why would the legislation document things that aren’t required? If signs used to be legally required, then arguably the newer legislation ought to explicitly say that they aren’t required in this instance, but signs have never been required.

You might as well ask why they don’t say that balloons don’t have to be tied to the cameras.

The point I was trying to make (admittedly perhaps not as well as I might) is that if legislation of any kind about the use of cameras did/does exist, and that legislation makes no mention of signs, then that would serve as pretty good confirmation that none are necessary.