New motorway enforecment cameras from next month

[jamei303]

The Road Traffic Offenders (Prescribed Devices) Order 2019 laid before parliament today provides for cameras to enforce motorway lane closures and hard shoulder use from the 10th of June

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2019/920/made

[OzzyR1]

Good.

[Squiddly Diddly]

jamei303 said:

The Road Traffic Offenders (Prescribed Devices) Order 2019 laid before parliament today provides for cameras to enforce motorway lane closures and hard shoulder use from the 10th of June

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2019/920/made

Will it enforce lane non use too?

[speedking31]

Would this be speed cameras, HADECS etc., issuing a ticket for >0 mph on a lane that shouldn't be being used?
Or is it HA CCTV cameras being used to identify registration numbers of vehicles using the hard shoulder.

How is legitimate use of the hard shoulder to be identified? Or is it a case of guilty until proved innocent and having to attend court to present your defence that you were actually broken down?

I realise the order says "a new type of generic device", but red light cameras already exist so wonder how this will operate.

Edited by speedking31 on Monday 13th May 14:00

[SteveR1979]

speedking31 said:

How is legitimate use of the hard shoulder to be identified? Or is it a case of guilty until proved innocent and having to attend court to present your defence that you were actually broken down?

The clue is that broken down cars don't generally keep moving because they are broken down.

[Terminator X]

OzzyR1 said:

Good.

Whilst I agree for this issue I see this as the thin end of the wedge as more and more "minor" infringements get picked up by ANPR etc and an auto ticket sent through the post. As an extreme example how long before a dropped fag end is picked up by a camera and facial recognition used to send an auto ticket. Tax by stealth imho.

TX.

Edit - camera's are already trained on areas where tickets being issued bring in a massive income / tax eg people turning right when they shouldn't etc. At the moment humans do this but when the "robots" start to get in on the action surely it can only proliferate ...

[WCNFSL117]

Yay, Mway driving is going to be even more of a drag to do.....

[Kuji]

Terminator X said:

OzzyR1 said:

Good.

Whilst I agree for this issue I see this as the thin end of the wedge as more and more "minor" infringements get picked up by ANPR etc and an auto ticket sent through the post. As an extreme example how long before a dropped fag end is picked up by a camera and facial recognition used to send an auto ticket. Tax by stealth imho.

TX.

Edit - camera's are already trained on areas where tickets being issued bring in a massive income / tax eg people turning right when they shouldn't etc. At the moment humans do this but when the "robots" start to get in on the action surely it can only proliferate ...

On the flip side, I wouldn't feel any remorse for the road users who get points for waiting until the chevrons at the end of a slip road to leave, or deliberately blocking people from merging in turn on a non-motorway carriageway.
Who knows, it might actually stop the same people from making those 'mistakes' every day on the same bit of road.

I base that as a road user who actually does believe that the rules apply equally to everyone.

[mcdjl]

Terminator X said:

Whilst I agree for this issue I see this as the thin end of the wedge as more and more "minor" infringements get picked up by ANPR etc and an auto ticket sent through the post. As an extreme example how long before a dropped fag end is picked up by a camera and facial recognition used to send an auto ticket. Tax by stealth imho.

I'm quite happy for those people to be taxed more.

[speedking31]

SteveR1979 said:

speedking31 said:

How is legitimate use of the hard shoulder to be identified? Or is it a case of guilty until proved innocent and having to attend court to present your defence that you were actually broken down?

The clue is that broken down cars don't generally keep moving because they are broken down.

A further clue is that between developing a fault at 70 mph on the carriageway and coming to a halt on the hard shoulder at 0 mph, you will be travelling at some intermediate speed on the hard shoulder and may pass one of these cameras during that period.

[Durzel]

Terminator X said:

OzzyR1 said:

Good.

Whilst I agree for this issue I see this as the thin end of the wedge as more and more "minor" infringements get picked up by ANPR etc and an auto ticket sent through the post. As an extreme example how long before a dropped fag end is picked up by a camera and facial recognition used to send an auto ticket. Tax by stealth imho.

TX.

Edit - camera's are already trained on areas where tickets being issued bring in a massive income / tax eg people turning right when they shouldn't etc. At the moment humans do this but when the "robots" start to get in on the action surely it can only proliferate ...

How do you propose automated enforcement detects a fag being thrown out of a window?

That's aside from the fact that chucking st out of your window is scummy behaviour anyway. If that's the sort of "minor" infringement being detected then roll on detection.

[tinnitusjosh]

SteveR1979 said:

The clue is that broken down cars don't generally keep moving because they are broken down.

what if you happen to pass the camera / under the gantry on the hard shoulder whilst slowing to a stop, or accelerating to rejoin the main carriageway?

[SteveR1979]

speedking31 said:

further clue is that between developing a fault at 70 mph on the carriageway and coming to a halt on the hard shoulder at 0 mph, you will be travelling at some intermediate speed on the hard shoulder and may pass one of these cameras during that period.

But if the traffic isn't solid why would you scoot down the hard shoulder for any other reason??

[speedking31]

SteveR1979 said:

speedking31 said:

further clue is that between developing a fault at 70 mph on the carriageway and coming to a halt on the hard shoulder at 0 mph, you will be travelling at some intermediate speed on the hard shoulder and may pass one of these cameras during that period.

But if the traffic isn't solid why would you scoot down the hard shoulder for any other reason??

People don't break down when the motorway is busy? IME that is one of the most likely times to break down.

You are envisaging a system that monitors all lanes and decides, using algorithms, whether it is acceptable to use the hard shoulder at any particular time or not. I would be surprised if it's that sophisticated, and if it is, that it is that accurate.

[MB140]

SteveR1979 said:

speedking31 said:

How is legitimate use of the hard shoulder to be identified? Or is it a case of guilty until proved innocent and having to attend court to present your defence that you were actually broken down?

The clue is that broken down cars don't generally keep moving because they are broken down.

What about a car that has gone into limp mode. My 123d did it once on the m40. I didnt want to be doing 30mph on the motorway even on the inside lane. I was on the hard shoulder and hazard lights on until I got to the next exit.

[Cliftonite]

tinnitusjosh said:

SteveR1979 said:

The clue is that broken down cars don't generally keep moving because they are broken down.

what if you happen to pass the camera / under the gantry on the hard shoulder whilst slowing to a stop, or accelerating to rejoin the main carriageway?

Then you will have a reasonable defence in order to avoid the fine.

[jamei303]

It has taken the government some time. The process was begun in 2017 with the The Road Traffic Offenders (Additional Offences) Order 2017:

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2017/294/articl...

This makes it clear that they are seeking to enforce regulation 9 of the Motorways Traffic (England and Wales) Regulations 1982 which restricts use of the hard shoulder but also sets out the exemptions (such as breakdown) which will remain in place.

[oyster]

Terminator X said:

OzzyR1 said:

Good.

Whilst I agree for this issue I see this as the thin end of the wedge as more and more "minor" infringements get picked up by ANPR etc and an auto ticket sent through the post. As an extreme example how long before a dropped fag end is picked up by a camera and facial recognition used to send an auto ticket. Tax by stealth imho.

TX.

Edit - camera's are already trained on areas where tickets being issued bring in a massive income / tax eg people turning right when they shouldn't etc. At the moment humans do this but when the "robots" start to get in on the action surely it can only proliferate ...

I guess we could employ extra police officers to patrol, then follow, interrogate and issue fines in person to such fag end droppers?

If you want to waste more tax?


Or we could actually make good use of modern technology and automate activity that doesn't need much, or any, human intervention.

Or perhaps you're ok with litter?

[Seight_Returns]

The legislation 2 posts above that specifies when it's acceptable to drive or stop in the hard shoulder or drive in a closed lane is completely reasonable and includes all the edge cases that people have identified here where they've responsibly used the hard shoulder.

This isn't about income generation from people who drive at 43 in a 40 - it's about using technology to prosecute people who drive like tts. We should welcome this just as warmly as we should technology used a catch people who break into houses.

I've no idea how this got twisted to include people who throw cigarettes out of car windows - but FWIW these people are tts fully deserving of punishment too.

[Ian Geary]

Cliftonite said:

tinnitusjosh said:

SteveR1979 said:

The clue is that broken down cars don't generally keep moving because they are broken down.

what if you happen to pass the camera / under the gantry on the hard shoulder whilst slowing to a stop, or accelerating to rejoin the main carriageway?

Then you will have a reasonable defence in order to avoid the fine.

Pfft. Call me cynical, but that would be damn hard to prove, especially in the guilty until proved innocent world of motoring offences.

For discussions sake: How would one realistically prove a car was in limp mode? Film it? Pay a dealer for a diagnostic report? How would one prove a blow out? A letter from a tyre company?

More importantly, how would the courts make the burden of evidence reasonable without being far too easy to fake.