Another what is the limit question.

[Flat in Fifth]

Local town centre development means the bus station has been closed. Thus a number of temporary bus stops have been placed along a particular road, and pedestrian activity increased as a consequence.

In the wisdom of the powers that be, an oxymoron if ever there was one, have decided to modify the speed limit on this stretch of road. Fair enough one might think.

What used to be a 2+2 urban DC subject to a 40 limit, one lane being a bus lane is now subject to a red ringed 20 limit.

Setting aside the issue of what were TPTB thinking about as drivers regularly ignore the bus lane, did they think that if someone is ignoring the bus lane regs they will obey a 20 limit. ^(n+1)

The question is about the 20 limit itself as it confuses the hell out of us. At start you get two red ringed signs, and 20 roundels painted along the road. The old 40 repeaters have been covered up.

However there are no signs to mark the end of the 20 limit. So where does it end?

I reckon, without having looked at the TRO, at the next junction with another road, a road which is subject to a 40 limit and does have repeaters on it.

Second question, with the defective signing, would the 20 limit be enforceable? Nobody has been nicked afaik just wondering.

Just as an aside, even though a lot of bus traffic has been rerouted down this road, the fricking bus lane still is completely devoid of buses for 98.3% of the time. Further

Edited by Flat in Fifth on Thursday 14th June 10:52

[SS2.]

Flat in Fifth said:

However there are no signs to mark the end of the 20 limit. So where does it end?

Some info here and here.

The links are only to Traffic Advisory Leaflets on the DfT website but they may contain some stuff of use..

Other than that, its a trawl through TSRGD, RTRA, etc..

[Mr Whippy]

SS2. said:

Flat in Fifth said:

However there are no signs to mark the end of the 20 limit. So where does it end?

Some info here and here.

The links are only to Traffic Advisory Leaflets on the DfT website but they may contain some stuff of use..

Other than that, its a trawl through TSRGD, RTRA, etc..

Probably ends after the legal spacing for repeaters ends.

Ie, if the road is DC and the repeaters stop after say 200 yards or whatever it is, then it is a national speed limit again. If it is seperated DC then that is 70mph.

Stupid really, 20mph on DC is just crazy however you look at it unless it was intended for heavy pedestrian use imho.

Dave

[7db]

There's no legal spacing for repeaters...

The 20 can be a 20 zone or a 20 limit. They have different rules so need to find out which it is.

In practice the 20 limit ends where the TRO says it ends. Whether there is sufficient signage for enforcement would be for a court to decide.

If there are no initial 30 signs in the subsequent restricted road, that usually prevent enforcement, but I don't think is fatal to a prosecution if hey fancy it.

[esselte]

7db said:

There's no legal spacing for repeaters...

The 20 can be a 20 zone or a 20 limit. They have different rules so need to find out which it is.

In practice the 20 limit ends where the TRO says it ends. Whether there is sufficient signage for enforcement would be for a court to decide.

If there are no initial 30 signs in the subsequent restricted road, that usually prevent enforcement, but I don't think is fatal to a prosecution if hey fancy it.

So they leave you to guess where it ends and then say "Ha ha,sorry you're wrong"?

[7db]

esselte said:

7db said:

There's no legal spacing for repeaters...

The 20 can be a 20 zone or a 20 limit. They have different rules so need to find out which it is.

In practice the 20 limit ends where the TRO says it ends. Whether there is sufficient signage for enforcement would be for a court to decide.

If there are no initial 30 signs in the subsequent restricted road, that usually prevent enforcement, but I don't think is fatal to a prosecution if hey fancy it.

So they leave you to guess where it ends and then say "Ha ha,sorry you're wrong"?

Yes - but not what I say about enforcement. They can say ha ha you're wrong, but they can't penalise you for it if the signage isn't up to scratch.

[Flat in Fifth]

esselte said:

7db said:

There's no legal spacing for repeaters...

The 20 can be a 20 zone or a 20 limit. They have different rules so need to find out which it is.

In practice the 20 limit ends where the TRO says it ends. Whether there is sufficient signage for enforcement would be for a court to decide.

If there are no initial 30 signs in the subsequent restricted road, that usually prevent enforcement, but I don't think is fatal to a prosecution if hey fancy it.

So they leave you to guess where it ends and then say "Ha ha,sorry you're wrong"?

Exactly, you enter the area from a 30, the old 40 signs have been replaced by the red ringed 20s, and the 20 repeaters. Yet contrary to the advice given in one of the advisory leaflets kindly linked by SS2 there are no signs when leaving the DC onto a SC which is actually 40. The confusion when locals and visitors mix is noticeable, it's a 20!, no it isn't it's a 40! get out of my effing way!

It's a classic local council balls up.

Tbh my original post was more of an excuse for a rant about the bus lane thing too. I mean considering the number of pedestrians floating about in the morning and evening, 40 can be a bit dodgy admittedly, add in the Pelican X-ing, the unofficial X-ing points, and right turning cross traffic at a couple of junctions. However you now have the situation with traffic in the RH lane either queuing when it's busy or trundling down at 20 mph, with the recidivists wazzing up the inside on the bus lane at around 40.

All in front of the local nick and magistrates courts too,
:sigh: draws office window blinds. :sticks head in sand smiley:

Edited by Flat in Fifth on Thursday 14th June 13:40

[Mr Whippy]

I always assumed that if a DC was say 40mph, with repeaters and a central seperation, and then you say cross over a roundabout onto the next section of DC (say a Ring road for example) and there are no repeaters here, or signs to say NSL, then it is just determined by road type, which in this case is 70mph NSL?

Does what you said to my earlier post 7db, suggest that if a DC is posted as 30mph upon entry, and it has no repeaters or other signage, that it stays at 30mph over it's entire length? What happens if you stop the car and swap drivers? Is it the new drivers perogative to have known what speed limit sign preceeded the road in question which would otherwise by an NSL 70mph limit?

Bit of a vague area it seems. I've always just used the repeaters/road type, whichever prevails (or disappears in the case of repeaters) afterall, if repeaters stop then what is to suggest that the above driver swap doesn't happen and the limit has to be determined from present road type conditions and not from pre-requisite knowledge from 600 yards down the road?

Dave

Edited by Mr Whippy on Thursday 14th June 13:42

[Flat in Fifth]

I've always assumed that if the signage etc is defective, then it reverts to either 30 or NSL dependant upon whether a system of street lighting is in place or not.

[safespeed]

Flat in Fifth said:

I've always assumed that if the signage etc is defective, then it reverts to either 30 or NSL dependant upon whether a system of street lighting is in place or not.

It doesn't say that in the 84 Act, but it does say that a speed limit cannot be enforced if the signage is defective. I've had long conversations with Richard Bentley on this one, and I tend to agree with his view that if signing failures render the speed limit unenforcable, there is no speed limit.

An interesting one for a court one day.

[Flat in Fifth]

safespeed said:

Flat in Fifth said:

I've always assumed that if the signage etc is defective, then it reverts to either 30 or NSL dependant upon whether a system of street lighting is in place or not.

It doesn't say that in the 84 Act, but it does say that a speed limit cannot be enforced if the signage is defective. I've had long conversations with Richard Bentley on this one, and I tend to agree with his view that if signing failures render the speed limit unenforcable, there is no speed limit.

An interesting one for a court one day.

But what about the provisions of the 70 miles per hour, 60 miles per hour and 50 miles per hour (Temporary Speed Limit) Order 1977 as continued indefinitely by the 70 miles per hour, 60 miles per hour and 50 miles per hour (Temporary Speed Limit) (Continuation) Order 1978 (S.I. 1978/1548)

??

It depends what you and Richard Bentley mean by "no limit."

If, for example, you mean there is intended to be a 50 limit on an unlit SC however the signing and/or TRO is defective, then in law that 50 limit does not exist. I would agree.

What it does not mean that there is literally No limit. As in >100mph could be legal which was the case when NSL signs meant No Speed Limit, ie prior Dec 65. Hence my assertion that in this case it would revert to NSL for example.

Personally a great supporter of Richard and his tripod logic btw.

[safespeed]

Flat in Fifth said:

safespeed said:

Flat in Fifth said:

I've always assumed that if the signage etc is defective, then it reverts to either 30 or NSL dependant upon whether a system of street lighting is in place or not.

It doesn't say that in the 84 Act, but it does say that a speed limit cannot be enforced if the signage is defective. I've had long conversations with Richard Bentley on this one, and I tend to agree with his view that if signing failures render the speed limit unenforcable, there is no speed limit.

An interesting one for a court one day.

But what about the provisions of the 70 miles per hour, 60 miles per hour and 50 miles per hour (Temporary Speed Limit) Order 1977 as continued indefinitely by the 70 miles per hour, 60 miles per hour and 50 miles per hour (Temporary Speed Limit) (Continuation) Order 1978 (S.I. 1978/1548)

??

It depends what you and Richard Bentley mean by "no limit."

If, for example, you mean there is intended to be a 50 limit on an unlit SC however the signing and/or TRO is defective, then in law that 50 limit does not exist. I would agree.

What it does not mean that there is literally No limit. As in >100mph could be legal which was the case when NSL signs meant No Speed Limit, ie prior Dec 65. Hence my assertion that in this case it would revert to NSL for example.

Personally a great supporter of Richard and his tripod logic btw.

I'm trying to recall the 84 Act... From memory...

No statutory provision imposing a speed limit ... unless the speed limit is signed in accordance with the regulations... ? Something like that.

I'll dig it out later.

[Dwight VanDriver]

I don't think that it has ever been tested by High Court but seems logic to me that if you have an ill signed 20 in a 30 then if the 20 is defective that leaves the Order for the 30 still in place. Likewise if an ill signed 50 with NSL at either side, if that 50 is defective then the NSL applies.

If a person is caught doing 80 in an ill signed 50 and rightly contests on bad signing I have never known that they drop the 50 breach and substitute offence against NSL.

Would agree with RB if NSL was signed as such but as Fif points out its an unsigned blanket limit by the Order he quotes.

dvd

Edited by Dwight VanDriver on Thursday 14th June 15:14

[Mr Whippy]

Dwight VanDriver said:

I don't think that it has ever been tested by High Court but seems logic to me that if you have an ill signed 20 in a 30 then if the 20 is defective that leaves the Order for the 30 still in place. Likewise if an ill signed 50 with NSL at either side, if that 50 is defective then the NSL applies.

Thats basically how I go. Revert to the maximum speed for that road type unless otherwise posted. Ie, 60 NSL single carriageway, 70mph Motorway/DC with central res, 30mph with street lighting at prescribed intervals.

All pretty obvious really. I guess it's when signage is wrong/dodgy and you have to argue the logic/point.

Dave

[7db]

safespeed said:

Flat in Fifth said:

I've always assumed that if the signage etc is defective, then it reverts to either 30 or NSL dependant upon whether a system of street lighting is in place or not.

It doesn't say that in the 84 Act, but it does say that a speed limit cannot be enforced if the signage is defective. I've had long conversations with Richard Bentley on this one, and I tend to agree with his view that if signing failures render the speed limit unenforcable, there is no speed limit.

An interesting one for a court one day.

The NSL isn't a speed limit on the road, it's a class limit on the vehicle. It's arguable that this is enforceable regardless of signage. I've never seen heard of it argued one way or the other. It would be interesting indeed.

The limit on the road is a matter of fact. It either is 200yrd-lit or it is not. If it is, then it either has had it's restriction removed by a TRO or it is a 30. If it is unlit, it either has been restricted by a TRO or it is NSL.

Signage is a separate issue to the actual limit on the road. If signage is deficient, and it's not a lit road, then no prosecution. I've heard of enforcement being suspended on a restricted road system because of a single deficient terminal 30 sign. Generous of the enforcing authority in my view.

[7db]

Mr Whippy said:

What happens if you stop the car and swap drivers? Is it the new drivers perogative to have known what speed limit sign preceeded the road in question which would otherwise by an NSL 70mph limit?

It is the drivers legal responsibility to know the limit and stick to it. It is the HA/LAs responsibility to sign it to help him.

[Flat in Fifth]

7db said:

The limit on the road is a matter of fact. It either is 200yrd-lit or it is not. If it is, then it either has had it's restriction removed by a TRO or it is a 30. If it is unlit, it either has been restricted by a TRO or it is NSL.

OK then, so on that logic, take two unlit NSL roads which join at a roundabout.

The roundabout and the roads are lit for 300m from the roundabout in each direction. No limit signs or repeaters anywhere.

On that basis, ie the system of lighting <183m, the road would be NSL, then 30 on immediate approach / departure and on the island itself unless there was a TRO removing the restricted status.

That would be a money earner, putting ideas into scamps heads.

[7db]

Flat in Fifth said:

OK then, so on that logic, take two unlit NSL roads which join at a roundabout....

That's the classic pathological example. Tis not a problem with the logic, tis one with the formulation of the law. You'd have a good wriggle for lack of signage, I suspect -- where does the limit end -- 182yrds after the last light or at the last light?!

[Flat in Fifth]

7db said:

Flat in Fifth said:

OK then, so on that logic, take two unlit NSL roads which join at a roundabout....

That's the classic pathological example. Tis not a problem with the logic, tis one with the formulation of the law. You'd have a good wriggle for lack of signage, I suspect -- where does the limit end -- 182yrds after the last light or at the last light?!

I know I'm just being an argumentative git!

as penance they are on me....

[flemke]

7db said:

Mr Whippy said:

What happens if you stop the car and swap drivers? Is it the new drivers perogative to have known what speed limit sign preceeded the road in question which would otherwise by an NSL 70mph limit?

It is the drivers legal responsibility to know the limit and stick to it. It is the HA/LAs responsibility to sign it to help him.

Taking that literally, the law would require that every driver know in advance the limit on every road on which he was going to travel.
Whilst that might be an extreme interpretation of the law, if the law could in fact be applied thus, the law quite obviously would be defective and morally invalid.