Have the rules on the placement of mobile cameras changed?

[Kozy]

I could swear that it used ot be a rule that a mobile camera unit could only operate in designated areas clearly marked by speed camera warning signs.

Last weekend I passed on in a village, thankfully not exceeding the limit, but there are no speed camera warning signs within a good few miles of this location.

What's the law on this, are they now allowed to appear where ever they please? It wouldn't suprise me to be honest...

[chard]

Ive seen them where they shouldnt be. My understanding is it some form of survey, you cant be prosecuted from an unauthorised site.
I wouldnt like to test the theory however and would welcome any corrections.

[aquatix]

DfT rules state:

Signing: Camera warning and speed limit reminder signs must be placed in advance of fixed or mobile speed enforcement taking place. Ideally these should be placed within 1 km of fixed camera housings and at the beginning of a targeted route for mobile enforcement sites. Signs must only be placed in areas where camera housings are present or along routes where mobile enforcement will be targeted.


This is absolute rubbish though as the mobile scamera vans I have seen have not displayed advanced signage (unless they placed it behind a bush or under a parked car).

[aquatix]

and for clarity, here are the signage regulations which are most certainly not being followed in some mobile sites:

http://www.slowitdown.co.uk/docs/cases/case_6_sect...

[chard]

Can they prosecute if the signs and rules are not observed??

[Puddenchucker]

The 'rules' for speed camera signing and placement are guidelines, nothing more.

The only signs that have to be present and correct are the actual speedlimit signs.

[pitmansboots]

aquatix said:

DfT rules state:

Signing: Camera warning and speed limit reminder signs must be placed in advance of fixed or mobile speed enforcement taking place. Ideally these should be placed within 1 km of fixed camera housings and at the beginning of a targeted route for mobile enforcement sites. Signs must only be placed in areas where camera housings are present or along routes where mobile enforcement will be targeted.


This is absolute rubbish though as the mobile scamera vans I have seen have not displayed advanced signage (unless they placed it behind a bush or under a parked car).

DfT rules used to state up to 31 Mar 2007; they also said quite clearly in the Preface and on page 22 of the 2006 version that nothing in the rules precludes or prevents a prosecution for speeding; funny how that part of the rules was always missed by those who attempted to use them in their defence.

The rules were for the application of Safety Camera Partnerships to claim their expenses, NOT a series of get out clauses.

[aquatix]

Well my local scamera pratnership are in breach of statute law whether it constitutes a 'get out clause' or not - they are failing to meet signage requirements.


Aide Memoire on Speed Limit and Safety Camera Signing: http://www.dft.gov.uk/162259/164386/228104/aidemem...

DfT Traffic Signs Manual (2008) Chapter 3: http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/roads/tss/tsmanual/tsmch...

DfT circular THE TRAFFIC SIGNS REGULATIONS AND GENERAL DIRECTIONS (TSRGD) 2002: http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/roads/tss/tslegislation/...

[Puddenchucker]

aquatix said:

Well my local scamera pratnership are in breach of statute law whether it constitutes a 'get out clause' or not - they are failing to meet signage requirements.

Which signage requirements are they failing to meet or comply with?

[aquatix]

Puddenchucker said:

Which signage requirements are they failing to meet or comply with?

The ones laid before Parliament by the Secretary of State in TSRGD 2002 (and subsequent amendments) as set out in the Handbook of Rules and Guidance for the National Safety Camera Programme for England and Wales 2006/07, which reflects the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions (TSRGD) 2002.

Namely the mobile camera enforcement sign requirements included in Schedule 4 (also in Rule 3 of the Handbook). "For mobile enforcement, co-located camera and speed limit repeater signs, or a sign to diagram 880 where appropriate, must be placed in advance of the point of entry to the site or route (including or excluding side roads at the discretion of the partnership) in the direction being enforced. Camera signs must also be placed thereafter at intervals of around 1 km throughout the site."

"Ministers have made a commitment that enforcement within the National Safety Camera Programme will be highly visible and drivers will be made fully aware of the presence of safety cameras. The camera and speed limit signs must be clearly visible to drivers and not obscured by other street furniture or hanging branches etc. Ministers want drivers to be fully aware of the speed limit at all times, but especially where camera enforcement takes place."


As I said before, in several mobile locations that I am aware of the Partnerships are failing to comply with requirements and not displaying any warning signs at all.

[Puddenchucker]

aquatix said:

Puddenchucker said:

Which signage requirements are they failing to meet or comply with?

The ones laid before Parliament by the Secretary of State in TSRGD 2002 (and subsequent amendments) as set out in the Handbook of Rules and Guidance for the National Safety Camera Programme for England and Wales 2006/07, which reflects the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions (TSRGD) 2002.

Namely the mobile camera enforcement sign requirements included in Schedule 4 (also in Rule 3 of the Handbook). "For mobile enforcement, co-located camera and speed limit repeater signs, or a sign to diagram 880 where appropriate, must be placed in advance of the point of entry to the site or route (including or excluding side roads at the discretion of the partnership) in the direction being enforced. Camera signs must also be placed thereafter at intervals of around 1 km throughout the site."

"Ministers have made a commitment that enforcement within the National Safety Camera Programme will be highly visible and drivers will be made fully aware of the presence of safety cameras. The camera and speed limit signs must be clearly visible to drivers and not obscured by other street furniture or hanging branches etc. Ministers want drivers to be fully aware of the speed limit at all times, but especially where camera enforcement takes place."


As I said before, in several mobile locations that I am aware of the Partnerships are failing to comply with requirements and not displaying any warning signs at all.

They are not legal requirements, just guidleines for Speed Camera enforcement.

The important bit of these guidelines is the note between items 49 & 50 on this link:
http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/TravelAndTransport/Tra...

DFT said:

This camera signing, visibility and conspicuity guidance has no bearing on the enforcement of offences. Non-compliance with this guidance does not provide any mitigation of, or defence for, an alleged offence committed under current UK law.

[Jasandjules]

I do not believe there is any requirement for them to warn you they are enforcing limits. After all, if they did that, less people would get nicked and the cash flow would stop.

However, in order to make it look like they are not in it for the cash, they have some guidance (i.e. not rules/law) which says they should put out warning signs.

[pitmansboots]

aquatix said:

Puddenchucker said:

Which signage requirements are they failing to meet or comply with?

The ones laid before Parliament by the Secretary of State in TSRGD 2002 (and subsequent amendments) as set out in the Handbook of Rules and Guidance for the National Safety Camera Programme for England and Wales 2006/07, which reflects the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions (TSRGD) 2002.

Namely the mobile camera enforcement sign requirements included in Schedule 4 (also in Rule 3 of the Handbook). "For mobile enforcement, co-located camera and speed limit repeater signs, or a sign to diagram 880 where appropriate, must be placed in advance of the point of entry to the site or route (including or excluding side roads at the discretion of the partnership) in the direction being enforced. Camera signs must also be placed thereafter at intervals of around 1 km throughout the site."

"Ministers have made a commitment that enforcement within the National Safety Camera Programme will be highly visible and drivers will be made fully aware of the presence of safety cameras. The camera and speed limit signs must be clearly visible to drivers and not obscured by other street furniture or hanging branches etc. Ministers want drivers to be fully aware of the speed limit at all times, but especially where camera enforcement takes place."


As I said before, in several mobile locations that I am aware of the Partnerships are failing to comply with requirements and not displaying any warning signs at all.

Only the speed limit has to be signed if signs are required to indicate it.

How many times does it have to be repeated, the Handbook of Rules and Guidance for the National Safety Camera Programme for England and Wales 2006/07, is no longer in force, it finished 31 Mar 07.

In any case it had a notice in it in 2 places explaining that not followig the rules had any bearing on speeding prosecutions, Doh!

Here you go: "Compliance with these rules has no bearing on the enforcement of offences detected by the use of safety cameras. Non-compliance with these rules and guidelines by a partnership, or representative of a partnership, does not provide any mitigation of, or defence for, an alleged offence committed under current UK law."
right at the start and repeated on page 23.

Edited by pitmansboots on Wednesday 11th February 08:44

[aquatix]

pitmansboots said:

How many times does it have to be repeated, the Handbook of Rules and Guidance for the National Safety Camera Programme for England and Wales 2006/07, is no longer in force, it finished 31 Mar 07.

Yes, but I was referring to the current Traffic Signs Manual, published 2008 (ISBN 978 0 11 552925 2) starting p.124, here: http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/roads/tss/tsmanual/tsmch...

also the DfT Circular 01/2007 which supersedes the 2006/07 Handbook you refer to - here: http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/roadsafety/speedmanageme...

pitmansboots said:

In any case it had a notice in it in 2 places explaining that not followig the rules had any bearing on speeding prosecutions, Doh!

Doh! Where did I say it did ?? I merely pointed out that the local pratnerships are not following the rules & guidelines on camera signing, visibility & conspicuity.


Anyway, I was not offering a 'get out of jail free card', but answering the OP's original question. The following is relevant (and up to date), quoted from the DfT Circular above:

"As part of the National Safety Camera Programme, signing, visibility and conspicuity rules were mandatory to enable costs to be netted off from fine income... The Department’s intention is that this high-visibility approach should be retained. In view of the importance of consistency on this fundamental point and to avoid confusion, the Department expects that enforcement by any road safety partnership, or representative of a road safety partnership, should follow the guidelines that are in this section.
Non-compliance with the Traffic Regulation Order requirements or speed limit signing requirements may mean that the speed limit is unenforceable."

Edited by aquatix on Wednesday 11th February 11:28

[NobleGuy]

chard said:

Can they prosecute if the signs and rules are not observed??

Yup, like I've mentioned on previous posts (so I'll keep this one short), they can do what they like.

[Scuffers]

I notice that on the A14 they are now using a totally un-marked van,

It was on one of the bridges last week, only noticed it as it's an odd place to park (on the pavement).

[SS2.]

aquatix said:

Anyway, I was not offering a 'get out of jail free card', but answering the OP's original question.

The OP's original question referred to the signage of speed cameras, not speed limits.

kozy said:

I could swear that it used ot be a rule that a mobile camera unit could only operate in designated areas clearly marked by speed camera warning signs.

The emphasised extract from the DfT circular (below) refers to TROs and speed limit signing requirements (ie TSRGD 2002), not speed camera signage. They are not the same thing.

aquatix's quote said:

Non-compliance with the Traffic Regulation Order requirements or speed limit signing requirements may mean that the speed limit is unenforceable."

[pitmansboots]

aquatix said:

...Doh! Where did I say it did ?? I merely pointed out that the local pratnerships are not following the rules & guidelines on camera signing, visibility & conspicuity.

They don't have to so some don't.

[aquatix]

pitmansboots said:

They don't have to so some don't.

Yes, I agree that some don't. As NobleGuy succinctly put it "they can do what they like" - despite their stated policy:

"The fundamental objective underlying the National Safety Camera Programme has been to reduce speeding, collisions and casualties at locations where excessive speed represents a road safety problem, and to achieve this result through camera locations being publicised, signed and visible to road users".


The DfT also clearly distinguishes a difference between the scameraships and police enforcement:
"The guidance does not restrict or fetter the police’s discretion to enforce covertly anywhere, at any time."

There is nothing in the guidance rules that explicitly allows the scameraships to operate covertly.

[SS2.]

aquatix said:

There is nothing in the guidance rules that explicitly allows the scameraships to operate covertly.

Perhaps more importantly, there is nothing in statute which precludes them from doing so..