Flashed by Gatso - No signs, no speed limits, no warning...
Discussion
Guys
I picked up my Focus RS from the bodyshop today (A E Ledger in Worthing, West Sussex)
Their road leads directly into a 'through town' duel carriageway.
I pulled out at the junction and was flashed by a camera after litereally 3 seconds !
I must've been doing 40 ish.
There were no speed limit signs, no camera warning signs etc viewable from the road I left.
I arrived by train too, so didn't drive there.
If I get a ticket come through, can I contend it !?
Cheers!!
I picked up my Focus RS from the bodyshop today (A E Ledger in Worthing, West Sussex)
Their road leads directly into a 'through town' duel carriageway.
I pulled out at the junction and was flashed by a camera after litereally 3 seconds !
I must've been doing 40 ish.
There were no speed limit signs, no camera warning signs etc viewable from the road I left.
I arrived by train too, so didn't drive there.
If I get a ticket come through, can I contend it !?
Cheers!!
In all fairness it's painted bright yellow and is REALLY obvious. If you couldn't spot the camera, I don't think a sign warning you about it would've made much difference... 
This one here: http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?f=q&hl=en&ge...
I know it well. I often try and see what speed I can reach by the crest of the bridge afterwards.. 30-70 acceleration FTW!
This one here: http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?f=q&hl=en&ge...
I know it well. I often try and see what speed I can reach by the crest of the bridge afterwards..
30-70 acceleration FTW!- before you all f*cking start, I'm not being serious.
Edited by Funk on Thursday 6th December 12:50
fb902350 said:
I dont think the prob was that he didn't see that camera, but there were no signs saying it was a 30. I too would have assumed a dual carriageway was 70.
I'd go back and look for signs again.
If you missed them then fair cop,
There wouldn't be any repeater signs if it was a 30 limit with a system of street lighting not more than 183m apart..I'd go back and look for signs again.
If you missed them then fair cop,
Built up areas
fb902350 said:
I dont think the prob was that he didn't see that camera, but there were no signs saying it was a 30. I too would have assumed a dual carriageway was 70.
I'd go back and look for digns again.
If you missed them then fair cop,
It's a dual carriageway in the town centre, hardly going to be a 70.. And the side road he was in would've been a 30 - if the limit changed, there'd be a new speed limit sign on the road he just joined.I'd go back and look for digns again.
If you missed them then fair cop,
Edited by Funk on Thursday 6th December 13:50
I know what you mean, but around where i live you can quite easily find speed changes that aren't signed.
He also didn't say he was coming from a 30.
Though 30's are usually pretty obvious with street lighting etc, i know plenty of dual carriageways in town centres that are 40+50, yet hardly any at 30.
EFA: just looked at the map, that does look like a 30 to me!!!
He also didn't say he was coming from a 30.
Though 30's are usually pretty obvious with street lighting etc, i know plenty of dual carriageways in town centres that are 40+50, yet hardly any at 30.
EFA: just looked at the map, that does look like a 30 to me!!!
Edited by fb902350 on Thursday 6th December 14:00
I suggest that the OP starts a thread at http://forums.pepipoo.com as there may well be something amiss with the signage, documentation, calibration etc. Some may call this "exploiting process", "spurious", "trying to avoid a conviction when you know you're guilty" or some such rubbish. I call it the law. There is nothing whatsoever legally or morally wrong with fighting a technical prosecution with a technical defence, and the OP shouldn't let anyone tell him otherwise. IMHO anyone who doesn't want the points would be mad not to at least explore the options.
The scammers and their masters don't like it of course (they like to think that they're above the law), but they started it, and this pointless and time-wasting "war of technicalities" is just one of the many undesirable results of the scamera saturation policy. It will only ever change when they start prosecuting people for genuinely bad driving instead of technical, numerical, machine-detected breaches.
The scammers and their masters don't like it of course (they like to think that they're above the law), but they started it, and this pointless and time-wasting "war of technicalities" is just one of the many undesirable results of the scamera saturation policy. It will only ever change when they start prosecuting people for genuinely bad driving instead of technical, numerical, machine-detected breaches.
its a 30, you can see the camera from about 4 hours away. there are no limit signs as others have said the lights are close together etc.
common chav 'raceway' as well. had months of fun racing people off the lights towards it. best result was 30sih (ahem maybe just over the national limit) before heavy breaking & the RR who was pulling away from me not slowing.
however you may be lucky as when i lived down that way that camera was famous for going off for cars coming the other way.
common chav 'raceway' as well. had months of fun racing people off the lights towards it. best result was 30sih (ahem maybe just over the national limit) before heavy breaking & the RR who was pulling away from me not slowing.
however you may be lucky as when i lived down that way that camera was famous for going off for cars coming the other way.
GPSHead said:
I suggest that the OP starts a thread at http://forums.pepipoo.com as there may well be something amiss with the signage, documentation, calibration etc. Some may call this "exploiting process", "spurious", "trying to avoid a conviction when you know you're guilty" or some such rubbish. I call it the law. There is nothing whatsoever legally or morally wrong with fighting a technical prosecution with a technical defence, and the OP shouldn't let anyone tell him otherwise. IMHO anyone who doesn't want the points would be mad not to at least explore the options.
The scammers and their masters don't like it of course (they like to think that they're above the law), but they started it, and this pointless and time-wasting "war of technicalities" is just one of the many undesirable results of the scamera saturation policy. It will only ever change when they start prosecuting people for genuinely bad driving instead of technical, numerical, machine-detected breaches.
The scammers and their masters don't like it of course (they like to think that they're above the law), but they started it, and this pointless and time-wasting "war of technicalities" is just one of the many undesirable results of the scamera saturation policy. It will only ever change when they start prosecuting people for genuinely bad driving instead of technical, numerical, machine-detected breaches.
...exactly the way I feel. Innocent until proven otherwise, not just rolling over and taking the penalty.wrinx
Much as I detest speed cams, most of the ones in West Sussex are well out in the open and have reflective plates. The one on Broadwater Road is only a bus's length from the turning so to get above the limit in such a short distance and not see this thing on the verge beside you is quite a feat! In practical terms the road is a 40, officially it's a 30.
I don't know of any digital cams in the area, they are all film AFAIK so you might be lucky. Looks as if the one at Ferring is getting its own CCTV due to 'vandalism'.
I don't know of any digital cams in the area, they are all film AFAIK so you might be lucky. Looks as if the one at Ferring is getting its own CCTV due to 'vandalism'.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff