Speed camera colours?

[Davi]

Has the requirement for speed camera's to be painted high vis now been completely removed?

About a week ago a speed camera I pass daily met it's sad demise via some sort of hot combustible material (what a shame). It was buried in a blue truvelo bag for a while.

Today I noticed the bag has gone, the camera has been reborn. Well, I didn't notice if I'm honest, as it's now grey. Is it going to become yellow again or not? I know a fair few motorists this morning would of fallen foul of it had it been fully operational (it didn't flash, but they were going at least 10mph oveer the limit)

[mcflurry]

AFAIK the police run ones don't need to be yellow, only the scam partnerships..

[Davi]

this is a scamera pratnership one. Maybe they are going to paint it yellow once it's caught enough people to cover the cost of the respray!

[flemke]

The original impetus for making cameras visible was that (starting in '01 or so) SCPs were only allowed to retain income generated by their cameras if the cameras were "highly visible".
Wanting to grab as much money as possible (but, "It's not about the money, only about safety", virtually every camera in Britain was soon made more conspicuous.

I don't know if this rule still applies, but in any case it should be irrelevant next year when the Gov't eliminates the netting-off scheme and SCPs are funded separately.

[havoc]

IIRC the new RTA removes the need for cameras to be painted high-vis.

Sure someone will be along soon to confirm/deny and say when it takes/took effect.

[vonhosen]

Only SCP cameras had to be yellow in order to qualify for netting off.

The funding arrangements are changing (netting off is going) & with it the requirement for yellow cameras.

[Davi]

is "changing" meaning this camera is currently OK though? as in, has it actually gone through, or will any captures made at present be unenforceable till the changes come into effect?

[catso]

Saw plenty of 'Nato' Green ones around Manchester the other week - blend in nicely with the trees around them, they've been there a couple of years......

Edited by catso on Wednesday 22 November 16:45

[vonhosen]

Davi said:

is "changing" meaning this camera is currently OK though? as in, has it actually gone through, or will any captures made at present be unenforceable till the changes come into effect?

It wouldn't affect the legality of any capture prosecutions at all. The camera doesn't even have to be visible at all to you for you to be prosecuted.

It was only to qualify for netting off that the placement, visibility & colouring conditions were introduced.

[Davi]

thanks for the clarification VH.

[J500ANT]

Our Avon & Somerset ones are painted in a yellow that looks grey in the dark. Does anyone think if I did a FOI request they would send me the code and I could get it mixed at B&Q?

[Major Bloodnok]

But what about all those Govt spokesbots that kept assuring us that cameras had a mainly deterrent value, and the high-visibility paint was to be preventative in getting people to reduce their speed, rather than simply copping them after the event?

[combemarshal]

I stick by my theory, If we all don't speed for a month they'd have to take them all down as they'd cost to much to run, simple!!

[flemke]

combemarshal said:

I stick by my theory, If we all don't speed for a month they'd have to take them all down as they'd cost to much to run, simple!!

I'm less confident about that, cm.
If that were to happen, I'd expect them simply to lower limits across the board.

[fluffnik]

mcflurry said:

AFAIK the police run ones don't need to be yellow, only the scam partnerships..

Which ones need to burn?

[Einion Yrth]

combemarshal said:

I stick by my theory, If we all don't speed for a month they'd have to take them all down as they'd cost to much to run, simple!!

And at the moment if they are running at a loss the operating costs of the scps are borne by the members of the partnership. In brief, your council tax goes up - it's a lose lose situation I'm afraid.

[Davi]

flemke said:

combemarshal said:

I stick by my theory, If we all don't speed for a month they'd have to take them all down as they'd cost to much to run, simple!!

I'm less confident about that, cm.
If that were to happen, I'd expect them simply to lower limits across the board.

exactly what I would imagine happening.

I can't see any way we will ever get rid of them now, too many idiots in the country that will lap up any BS the gov't feed them

[toni896]

catso said:

Saw plenty of 'Nato' Green ones around Manchester the other week - blend in nicely with the trees around them, they've been there a couple of years......

Edited by catso on Wednesday 22 November 16:45

They are the Watchman camera, at the mo, dont have type approval, although I think that was going to change.

[catso]

toni896 said:

They are the Watchman camera, at the mo, dont have type approval, although I think that was going to change.

So does that mean the photos are not admissable as proof?

[outnumbered]

So presumably they can go back to hiding the cameras behind signposts like they used to as well ?

A GPS camera locator becomes an absolute necessity now if you're travelling somewhere unfamilar.

[Or yes, VH, one could also stick to the posted limits, of course]