Monday 10th July 2006

Legal challenge for scameras

All speeding prosecutions to be overturned?

---

Ce n'est pas un Gatso...

Could all previous prosecutions resulting from speed cameras be deemed invalid?

It boils down to whether the cameras have had device-specific statutory instruments passed through the legislature -- and if not, whether any prosecutions based on the use of those devices is legal. It appears that the cameras may not legally exist -- and could mean that all speeding prosecutions based on their use have been illegally obtained.

In what founder of the Safe Speed road safety campaign Paul Smith described as "an interesting new challenge to speed camera evidence", Robbie the Pict has revealed an apparent flaw in the authorisation procedure for certain speed cameras. Robbie the Pict is the campaigner who overturned the Skye Bridge Tolls.

The flaw concerns the procedure that must be used to authorise devices. It appears that certain cameras have never been correctly authorised. On initial examination, according to Smith, it does appear that the flaw suggested exists, and may render unsafe convictions stretching as far back as 1992.

Smith said: "This flaw could force camera partnerships to repay literally millions of fines. The total bill could be hundreds of millions.

"Having spent thousands of hours examining the overall road safety effects of speed cameras, I am absolutely certain that they make the roads more dangerous.

It's long overdue that this failed policy was abandoned and if this flaw brings matters to a head we'll all be better off.

"We have had 13 years of speed cameras on UK roads, and have suffered by far the worst decade in the history of motoring in terms of road safety improvements. I am certain that 'bad policy' based on speed cameras is to blame. Department for Transport is in abject denial about the failure of its policies."

Links

• www.safespeed.org.uk
• Related story: Robbie the Pict goes to war against speed-camera laws

[Nostrils]

I dont doubt the facts presented in the article. 2 Cameras on the A312 Hayes By-pass have been in place more or less since it was built 10 years ago! The road was brand-new, so why the cameras! Initially the road, a dual carriageway did not have any speed references and cars were being booked for doing 70mph by the police, it was this that lead to the cameras being put in place. However, it later transpired that the road did not officially have a speed limit as planning and authorisation had not been sought. Quietly, those fined previously had their fines repaid and I understand their points re-instated.

The camera partnerships will be in a sorry state come next year when their funds will be channelled directly into the exchequer with no monies for replacement burnt and vandalised cameras and other resources.

On the basis of safety and these cameras, I travel the M25 from Jct 14 - Jct 8 everyday to/from work and constantly have to adjust my speed in-line with the displays. Obviously I have worked out which gantry contains cameras and not, but what I think is dangerous is when you are approaching a speed indicator gantry of 60 and 20/30 feet from the sign, it changes to 40, I slam on the brakes and hope the vehicle behind is as observent!

For obvious and dangerous speed, which the police used to find when actually patrolling our roads, then I say throw the book at them! But for safe speed, following the flow of traffic, these cameras are a pain the backside