9 NIPs in 11 days.
Discussion
Take a look at this PHers.
www.greatharwood.com
Follow the link on the left hand side. This poor woman (a 58 year old nurse incidently) will be facing 27 points and £540 in fines.
When decent people like this with careers involved in helping others less fortunate than themselves start losing their jobs through getting shafted by these Scamera Partnerships, the Muppets in charge are going to have a fcuk of a lot of explaining to do.
Any comments?
DAZ
:ducksforcover:
www.greatharwood.com
Follow the link on the left hand side. This poor woman (a 58 year old nurse incidently) will be facing 27 points and £540 in fines.
When decent people like this with careers involved in helping others less fortunate than themselves start losing their jobs through getting shafted by these Scamera Partnerships, the Muppets in charge are going to have a fcuk of a lot of explaining to do.
Any comments?
DAZ
:ducksforcover:
Hmm there are a few potential cases to argue here.
Why, on a road that was previously a 40 limit, did they drop the limit to 30 and simultaneously install a camera?
WHY?
We all drive on autopilot to some degree, but assuming that the changes were adequately signposted (it wouldnt suprise me if they werent) she really should have been paying more attention.
This shows once more the difference between enforcement by the traffic police, versus a camera.
Had this lady been stopped by the police doing 40 in a 30 limit shortly after the limit had been changed, it would perhaps not be an unlikely scenario that she would have been informed of the change, apologised and likely not been prosecuted.
She would then have moderated her pace slightly? Thats my guess.
Instead the automated system has dropped a large pile of NIPs on her mat. She is, for wont of a better phrase, screwed.
She had better pray for an understanding magistrate. Hopefully common sense will prevail in this case, and while I would be appalled if it didnt, I wouldnt be too suprised.
After all, she was SPEEDING. Which we all know is evil.
>> Edited by TheLemming on Friday 3rd January 16:20
Why, on a road that was previously a 40 limit, did they drop the limit to 30 and simultaneously install a camera?
WHY?
We all drive on autopilot to some degree, but assuming that the changes were adequately signposted (it wouldnt suprise me if they werent) she really should have been paying more attention.
This shows once more the difference between enforcement by the traffic police, versus a camera.
Had this lady been stopped by the police doing 40 in a 30 limit shortly after the limit had been changed, it would perhaps not be an unlikely scenario that she would have been informed of the change, apologised and likely not been prosecuted.
She would then have moderated her pace slightly? Thats my guess.
Instead the automated system has dropped a large pile of NIPs on her mat. She is, for wont of a better phrase, screwed.
She had better pray for an understanding magistrate. Hopefully common sense will prevail in this case, and while I would be appalled if it didnt, I wouldnt be too suprised.
After all, she was SPEEDING. Which we all know is evil.
>> Edited by TheLemming on Friday 3rd January 16:20
On one hand, its seems an abuse of cameras, but the police say : its been in place a month before being swithed on, there are signs and it was advertised in the press.
Add to this that there would be a flash in her mirror every time, and frankly she only has herself to blame for
a) not seeing a camera
b) road signs or markings on the road.
If she uses a road that much she has become blind to seeing anything change on it, frankly shes a danger to everyone.
You can never assume a road you have driven before isnt different every time.
A lesson I learnt on my test (20 years ago)
"familiarity breeds contempt" rings true.
eg I was amazed when the council reversed a local one way road as it was bad for the traffic flow. for WEEKS after cars would go the wrong way, and when I pointed it out to them, they still didnt understand why I was driving straight at them.
>> Edited by s2ooz on Friday 3rd January 16:27
Add to this that there would be a flash in her mirror every time, and frankly she only has herself to blame for
a) not seeing a camera
b) road signs or markings on the road.
If she uses a road that much she has become blind to seeing anything change on it, frankly shes a danger to everyone.
You can never assume a road you have driven before isnt different every time.
A lesson I learnt on my test (20 years ago)
"familiarity breeds contempt" rings true.
eg I was amazed when the council reversed a local one way road as it was bad for the traffic flow. for WEEKS after cars would go the wrong way, and when I pointed it out to them, they still didnt understand why I was driving straight at them.
>> Edited by s2ooz on Friday 3rd January 16:27
Interesting. SHE claims there were no signs. This is possible I believe. I'm going to check but I thought that in urban streetlit areas the speed limit was 30mph unless signed otherwise.
That doesn't sound quite right to me but if it is true then they could have simply removed the 40mpg signs stuck up a camera and made 540 quid in two weeks.
I have to say. She was massively inobservant to have been caught this badly. But all the same it does seem really tough on her....
That doesn't sound quite right to me but if it is true then they could have simply removed the 40mpg signs stuck up a camera and made 540 quid in two weeks.
I have to say. She was massively inobservant to have been caught this badly. But all the same it does seem really tough on her....
Interesting points guys.
But can we genuinely say she is a danger on this road having used it for 27 years and having driven without conviction for 33 years.
I take the point about her not noticing the camera flashes but in her defence I know there are some systems both fixed and mobile where no flash is emitted at the time that you have been done.
cheers
DAZ
But can we genuinely say she is a danger on this road having used it for 27 years and having driven without conviction for 33 years.
I take the point about her not noticing the camera flashes but in her defence I know there are some systems both fixed and mobile where no flash is emitted at the time that you have been done.
cheers
DAZ
My folks live just a couple of miles from Great Harwood, and when I was up there at Xmas, I just could not believe the proliferation of tax cameras in the area since I was last there a few months back. You really do find yourself taking your eyes off the road to watch out for them.
As for the camera on Whalley Road, it's very obvious, and she really should have seen it, signs or no signs. BUT it's a good, wide A-road, with houses set well back, and having lived in the area for many years, I can't recall it being a particular accident blackspot, so the old 40mph limit seemed fine.
Plus local rumour has it that this particular camera was installed some weeks before the limit was dropped to 30, but it wasn't catching enough people out...
As for the camera on Whalley Road, it's very obvious, and she really should have seen it, signs or no signs. BUT it's a good, wide A-road, with houses set well back, and having lived in the area for many years, I can't recall it being a particular accident blackspot, so the old 40mph limit seemed fine.
Plus local rumour has it that this particular camera was installed some weeks before the limit was dropped to 30, but it wasn't catching enough people out...
One of the things that also concerned me about this story was the way the council defended thier action in part by stating it had been announced in the press.
So how many people are actually likely to read that then? and there was me thinking that things like that affecting motorist would be more likely to be posted on roadsigns or something (not that we have an over population of those, but that's a different matter!)
I agree with the view that the woman must have been almost negligent to have missed the camera flashes that many times on the same bit of road though... perhaps she should budget for an eyesight test as well as her fines.
John
So how many people are actually likely to read that then? and there was me thinking that things like that affecting motorist would be more likely to be posted on roadsigns or something (not that we have an over population of those, but that's a different matter!)
I agree with the view that the woman must have been almost negligent to have missed the camera flashes that many times on the same bit of road though... perhaps she should budget for an eyesight test as well as her fines.
John
Gassing Station | Motoring News | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff