Reference....Government Rules

[mybrainhurts]

It's all here.....

www.dft.gov.uk/stellent/groups/dft_rdsafety/documents/divisionhomepage/030766.hcsp

[bluepolarbear]

Waste of money even producing it - it's spin

1) The "rules" are nothing of the sort, They are not enforceable
2) Even under the "rules" 15% of sites don't have to follow the rules
3) If the "rules" are not followed the convictions will still stand
4) There is no audit of compliance with the rules except by the SCP themselves.

>> Edited by bluepolarbear on Sunday 7th November 12:26

[catso]

Prelimiary Statement says; (slightly changed as I will not use the word 'Safety' to describe a scamera)

"Compliance with these rules has no bearing on the enforcement of offences by the use of speed cameras. Non compliance of these rules and guidelines by a partnership, or representative of a partnership, does not provide any mitigation of, or defence for an alleged offence under current UK law committed by a driver or registered keeper"

So thats alright then

Might as well not bother reading the rules.

[safespeed]

I was amazed to discover that the "rules blunder" still exists in the new version.

www.safespeed.org.uk/rules.html

I guess they must be thinking about the money. Now there's a surprise.

[james_j]

I wonder if we'll get any speed camera supporters making comments on this thread!