Are scamera vans situated at accident blackspots?
Discussion
I recently got done by a Kent scamera van, and although the photo did not show who was driving, have decided to accept the penalty as I do not wish the trauma of a court appearance.
I emailed the highways dept and asked for data relating to the location where I was done.
They sent me data showing that in the past 3 years there have been 2 accidents both with minor injuries sustained.(the classification is minor, serious, fatal).
I was previously of the impression that these vans and indeed fixed cameras were ONLY situated at sites where serious injury/fatalities had been sustained.
My opinion of the Kent police which was previously at an all time low has now sunk even further.
Can anyone enlighten me about the siting of these vans?
I emailed the highways dept and asked for data relating to the location where I was done.
They sent me data showing that in the past 3 years there have been 2 accidents both with minor injuries sustained.(the classification is minor, serious, fatal).
I was previously of the impression that these vans and indeed fixed cameras were ONLY situated at sites where serious injury/fatalities had been sustained.
My opinion of the Kent police which was previously at an all time low has now sunk even further.
Can anyone enlighten me about the siting of these vans?
Where was the camera van?
Some of the Kent locatons are exceedingly sneaky and are not visible. Well not unless you are going in the opposite direction to the one they are trapping in.
In my opinion the use of statistics in Kent is also extremely misleading as the cameras I know are nowhere near the accident blackspots.
Some of the Kent locatons are exceedingly sneaky and are not visible. Well not unless you are going in the opposite direction to the one they are trapping in.
In my opinion the use of statistics in Kent is also extremely misleading as the cameras I know are nowhere near the accident blackspots.
The camera van was at the junction of willingdon St and Deeringwood Drive on the eastern outskirts of maidstone.
If you know this road you will know that there is a Trevelo up the hill towards Sutton Rd, with warning signs along the road. The scamera that got me was in the layby at the bottom of the hill. As you say, it was not visible to me until I was on top of it.
before anyone who doesn't know the road jumps in,I should also say that the exit for this layby is further up the road and clearly visible
Puggit, I think this was one of these where there is the potential to make most money.
Spoke to the Scamera office today to see when my licence will come back to be told it could be a couple of weeks as there is a backlog.
I said that I could understand that as the money must be rolling in
If you know this road you will know that there is a Trevelo up the hill towards Sutton Rd, with warning signs along the road. The scamera that got me was in the layby at the bottom of the hill. As you say, it was not visible to me until I was on top of it.
before anyone who doesn't know the road jumps in,I should also say that the exit for this layby is further up the road and clearly visible
Puggit, I think this was one of these where there is the potential to make most money.
Spoke to the Scamera office today to see when my licence will come back to be told it could be a couple of weeks as there is a backlog.
I said that I could understand that as the money must be rolling in
Edited by TVR keith on Thursday 26th October 14:28
TVR keith said:
I said that I could understand that as the money must be rolling in
In my experience placement of scamvans and police speed traps has non scientific reasoning that you're better off not trying to understand but I'll try and explain my findings a bit. Justification can be that an accident happened 3 years ago or 3 miles down the road at a roundabout or whatever and it doesn't need to have a car that was speeding involved in it either. In order to catch a large quantity of people speeding you need to place the camera in a place where it is safe to speed as generally people don't want to kill themselves. To be successful they need to be hidden as observant drivers will likely spot them leading to lack of crackers at the Crimbo ball.
Wilcommen til Northampton
Safety concern over speed camera van
A ROAD safety group has expressed concern at photographs showing a police road safety camera van obscuring a pedestrian crossing.
The pictures were taken by a Chronicle & Echo reader who spotted the vehicle in Red House Road, Moulton Park, on Monday morning.
The officer was stationed there to encourage motorists to slow down and catch those that did not on film.
But, having seen the pictures, safety groups said there was a definite danger to pedestrians caused by the position of the van.
A spokeswoman for the Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents (ROSPA) said: "We haven't come across anything like this before.
"It is essential that enforcement vehicles are not positioned in a way which might endanger road users. They shouldn't make it difficult for motorists to see pedestrians and shouldn't stop pedestrians seeing cars."
The Northampton man who photographed the van on Monday said he contacted the Chron because he was so surprised that a police vehicle would be allowed to park so near to a crossing.
The man who asked not to be named, said: "It was a pretty silly place to put the van and I told the young man inside.
"I was told the lights would stop the vehicles so pedestrians would know when to cross but I know in the real world that doesn't always happen.
"The only way you could see from that position is to stick your head out and risk getting it knocked off by a lorry."
Sgt Nick Gough, of the Safety Camera Team, said: "We have recently been operating speed checks in this area, following concerns from people who regularly use the road.
"Several changes to signs and the pedestrian crossing facility have been made in recent weeks. Following a site inspection of the safety camera van at this location it has been agreed that in future it will be positioned further away from the pedestrian crossing.
"Obviously road safety is our prime concern, and we try to take all aspects of this into consideration whenever we are involved in our operations on the county's roads."
nick.spoors@northantsnews.co.uk
25 October 2006
Safety concern over speed camera van
A ROAD safety group has expressed concern at photographs showing a police road safety camera van obscuring a pedestrian crossing.
The pictures were taken by a Chronicle & Echo reader who spotted the vehicle in Red House Road, Moulton Park, on Monday morning.
The officer was stationed there to encourage motorists to slow down and catch those that did not on film.
But, having seen the pictures, safety groups said there was a definite danger to pedestrians caused by the position of the van.
A spokeswoman for the Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents (ROSPA) said: "We haven't come across anything like this before.
"It is essential that enforcement vehicles are not positioned in a way which might endanger road users. They shouldn't make it difficult for motorists to see pedestrians and shouldn't stop pedestrians seeing cars."
The Northampton man who photographed the van on Monday said he contacted the Chron because he was so surprised that a police vehicle would be allowed to park so near to a crossing.
The man who asked not to be named, said: "It was a pretty silly place to put the van and I told the young man inside.
"I was told the lights would stop the vehicles so pedestrians would know when to cross but I know in the real world that doesn't always happen.
"The only way you could see from that position is to stick your head out and risk getting it knocked off by a lorry."
Sgt Nick Gough, of the Safety Camera Team, said: "We have recently been operating speed checks in this area, following concerns from people who regularly use the road.
"Several changes to signs and the pedestrian crossing facility have been made in recent weeks. Following a site inspection of the safety camera van at this location it has been agreed that in future it will be positioned further away from the pedestrian crossing.
"Obviously road safety is our prime concern, and we try to take all aspects of this into consideration whenever we are involved in our operations on the county's roads."
nick.spoors@northantsnews.co.uk
25 October 2006
Edited by rich 36 on Thursday 26th October 14:47
Sgt Nick Gough said:
"Obviously road safety is our prime concern, and we try to take all aspects of this into consideration whenever we are involved in our operations on the county's roads."
and
"What do you think of me new Rolex"
and
"What do you think of me new Rolex"
It is so obvious I'm surprised he thought he had to tell everyone.
The road in question has in fact undergone some layout changes
gone for good is the pikey inhabited lay-by
where once motorists had the luxury of a soft (caravan) landing should they lose grip on the long sweeping bend.
Clearly the 'scameratti' still fell the pikey prescence
as one who lost a limb still feel an itch.
I find it warmly touching, in a cold cynical world.
gone for good is the pikey inhabited lay-by
where once motorists had the luxury of a soft (caravan) landing should they lose grip on the long sweeping bend.
Clearly the 'scameratti' still fell the pikey prescence
as one who lost a limb still feel an itch.
I find it warmly touching, in a cold cynical world.
Edited by rich 36 on Thursday 26th October 15:04
This IS a case of the police using the van to rake in money.
Although a 30 limit is in force and I always stick to it for most of the road, at this point the road passes through a steep valley.
Everyone speeds up for a few yards to get up the other side. By doing this most cars would be able to continue in 4th or maybe 3rd gear.
Hitting the bottom of the hill means that most cars have to change to 2nd gear. Obviously for heavy vehicles the situation is worse.
I now stick to 30 all the way, looking at my speedo in between terrified glances at the lorry/van etc in my mirror, that is trying to push me faster, and I don't blame them.
Not an especially safe way to travel, but thats the law so it must be safe.
That is to say nothing of the extra polution caused by vehicles struggling up the hill in low gear.
I won't even bother to mention delays to traffic caused as the Blair government/Highways dept/Kent County Council/ Kent police obviously don't give a s**t about that as long as the money comes in to keep these spineless low lifes in their overpaid jobs
Although a 30 limit is in force and I always stick to it for most of the road, at this point the road passes through a steep valley.
Everyone speeds up for a few yards to get up the other side. By doing this most cars would be able to continue in 4th or maybe 3rd gear.
Hitting the bottom of the hill means that most cars have to change to 2nd gear. Obviously for heavy vehicles the situation is worse.
I now stick to 30 all the way, looking at my speedo in between terrified glances at the lorry/van etc in my mirror, that is trying to push me faster, and I don't blame them.
Not an especially safe way to travel, but thats the law so it must be safe.
That is to say nothing of the extra polution caused by vehicles struggling up the hill in low gear.
I won't even bother to mention delays to traffic caused as the Blair government/Highways dept/Kent County Council/ Kent police obviously don't give a s**t about that as long as the money comes in to keep these spineless low lifes in their overpaid jobs
TVR keith said:
This IS a case of the police using the van to rake in money.
Although a 30 limit is in force and I always stick to it for most of the road, at this point the road passes through a steep valley.
Everyone speeds up for a few yards to get up the other side. By doing this most cars would be able to continue in 4th or maybe 3rd gear.
Hitting the bottom of the hill means that most cars have to change to 2nd gear. Obviously for heavy vehicles the situation is worse.
I now stick to 30 all the way, looking at my speedo in between terrified glances at the lorry/van etc in my mirror, that is trying to push me faster, and I don't blame them.
Not an especially safe way to travel, but thats the law so it must be safe.
That is to say nothing of the extra polution caused by vehicles struggling up the hill in low gear.
I won't even bother to mention delays to traffic caused as the Blair government/Highways dept/Kent County Council/ Kent police obviously don't give a s**t about that as long as the money comes in to keep these spineless low lifes in their overpaid jobs
Although a 30 limit is in force and I always stick to it for most of the road, at this point the road passes through a steep valley.
Everyone speeds up for a few yards to get up the other side. By doing this most cars would be able to continue in 4th or maybe 3rd gear.
Hitting the bottom of the hill means that most cars have to change to 2nd gear. Obviously for heavy vehicles the situation is worse.
I now stick to 30 all the way, looking at my speedo in between terrified glances at the lorry/van etc in my mirror, that is trying to push me faster, and I don't blame them.
Not an especially safe way to travel, but thats the law so it must be safe.
That is to say nothing of the extra polution caused by vehicles struggling up the hill in low gear.
I won't even bother to mention delays to traffic caused as the Blair government/Highways dept/Kent County Council/ Kent police obviously don't give a s**t about that as long as the money comes in to keep these spineless low lifes in their overpaid jobs
Thats why there is a hardstanding for a mobile camera on the brand new West Malling by-pass. The accident record must justify it!
When I was at school in the 1960's we were taught the kerb drill. Later i remember the green cross Code and the Tufty club, later versions of the same thing.
I never see anything like that now.
Driving (slowly) past schools when the little bast**ds are about they just brazenly walkin front of me.They seem have to been taught that it is the drivers responsibility to stop.
Perhaps before long the issue in the event of running one over will be that the driver has commited an act that is politically incorrect, or against their human right, rather than the fact that someone has been injured or worse.
The trouble is it gets worse. I was taught that if I didn't cross the road safely and got runs over i would be dead. End of story.
Later in life I started to drive, and when crossing a stream of traffic I do my kerbside drill. So far its worked.
What will happen when these kids who think its cool, their "right" to just walk out in front of a vehicle start to drive?
I never see anything like that now.
Driving (slowly) past schools when the little bast**ds are about they just brazenly walkin front of me.They seem have to been taught that it is the drivers responsibility to stop.
Perhaps before long the issue in the event of running one over will be that the driver has commited an act that is politically incorrect, or against their human right, rather than the fact that someone has been injured or worse.
The trouble is it gets worse. I was taught that if I didn't cross the road safely and got runs over i would be dead. End of story.
Later in life I started to drive, and when crossing a stream of traffic I do my kerbside drill. So far its worked.
What will happen when these kids who think its cool, their "right" to just walk out in front of a vehicle start to drive?
To justify the business keeping the money, they have to site at accident blackspots. The problem is they get a very large leeway like 3 miles, and as the accident blackspots are dangerous, people drive slowly near them (usually), and the accidents are unlikely to have been caused by speeding anyway. So they park on the same road but where the accidents dont occur, but where safe speeding does occur. Now why do you think they do that?
They then make up loads of figures that the camera at the non accident blackspot has stopped the accidents at the blackspot (regression to the mean was the real reason why the accidents stop), just to justify them being there.
Sense and safety is not a concern, it is just a business method of speed law enforcement. Saves money on using police officers to do it, as the business pays for itself, but has no relevence to road safety whatsoever.
They then make up loads of figures that the camera at the non accident blackspot has stopped the accidents at the blackspot (regression to the mean was the real reason why the accidents stop), just to justify them being there.
Sense and safety is not a concern, it is just a business method of speed law enforcement. Saves money on using police officers to do it, as the business pays for itself, but has no relevence to road safety whatsoever.
chrisgr31 said:
Thats why there is a hardstanding for a mobile camera on the brand new West Malling by-pass. The accident record must justify it!
I noticed that too!
Although with the stupid lane merging arrangement coming off the M20 roundabout, it won't be too long before the accident statistics for that stretch of road increase to 'justify' it.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff