Some speed limits illegal?
Discussion
This was in today's Times (printed edition only), implying that some speed limit changes are illegal, and thus unenforcable.
Speed limit rule opens way for mass appeal against sentences
By Laura Peek
Thousands of motorists could appeal against speeding fines after a landmark legal ruling, it was claimed last night.
Legal experts believe that a court victory could lead to drivers claiming compensation and having penalty points removed from their licences.
Claire Evans, 35, of Warley, West Midlands, was found not guilty of speeding after she argued at Redditch Magistrates’ Court that Worcestershire County Council acted unlawfully in introducing a 30mph limit on a Bromsgrove road without consulting the public.
Ms. Evans, caught doing 42mph, said that she did not see any speed limit signs, having joined the road from a side road. The road had had a 30mph limit introduced six months earlier under Section 82 of the Road Traffic Regulations Act 1984.
A judge ruled that the council should have used a longer process under Section 84 of the Act, which calls for full consultation before limits are set. Councils have used Section 82 powers as a cheap and easy way of introducing new limits.
Roger Brown, Ms. Evans barrister, said: “Many thousands of motorists have been wrongly convicted because the speed limits they supposedly broke are not lawful. They will be able to go back to court and get their fines rescinded. Those who have been disqualified from driving will be able to get their licences back. The district judge ruled that the way the council had introduced the limit was unlawful as they had exceeded their powers. Clearly the police should stop prosecuting people for speeding in places which have limits introduced under Section 82.”
Mr. Brown has written to the Association of Chief Police Officers to notify it of the judgement.
Malcolm Heyer, spokesman for the Association of British Drivers, said: “This case proves that many councils have been using legislation incorrectly. It seems they will not legally now be able to enforce these speed limits. Motorists who have been prosecuted will be able to claim compensation.”
A Department for Transport spokesman said that it would examine the judge’s ruling to assess the implications.
Speed limit rule opens way for mass appeal against sentences
By Laura Peek
Thousands of motorists could appeal against speeding fines after a landmark legal ruling, it was claimed last night.
Legal experts believe that a court victory could lead to drivers claiming compensation and having penalty points removed from their licences.
Claire Evans, 35, of Warley, West Midlands, was found not guilty of speeding after she argued at Redditch Magistrates’ Court that Worcestershire County Council acted unlawfully in introducing a 30mph limit on a Bromsgrove road without consulting the public.
Ms. Evans, caught doing 42mph, said that she did not see any speed limit signs, having joined the road from a side road. The road had had a 30mph limit introduced six months earlier under Section 82 of the Road Traffic Regulations Act 1984.
A judge ruled that the council should have used a longer process under Section 84 of the Act, which calls for full consultation before limits are set. Councils have used Section 82 powers as a cheap and easy way of introducing new limits.
Roger Brown, Ms. Evans barrister, said: “Many thousands of motorists have been wrongly convicted because the speed limits they supposedly broke are not lawful. They will be able to go back to court and get their fines rescinded. Those who have been disqualified from driving will be able to get their licences back. The district judge ruled that the way the council had introduced the limit was unlawful as they had exceeded their powers. Clearly the police should stop prosecuting people for speeding in places which have limits introduced under Section 82.”
Mr. Brown has written to the Association of Chief Police Officers to notify it of the judgement.
Malcolm Heyer, spokesman for the Association of British Drivers, said: “This case proves that many councils have been using legislation incorrectly. It seems they will not legally now be able to enforce these speed limits. Motorists who have been prosecuted will be able to claim compensation.”
A Department for Transport spokesman said that it would examine the judge’s ruling to assess the implications.
gh0st said:Agreed, why do the falsely convicted have to go back to court to get the decision overturned, points removed, fines returned and try to claim compensation for increased insurance premiums.
"...will be able to claim compensation???"
WILL??? THEY SHOULD BE GIVING IT OUT WITH A ****ING APOLOGY!!!!!!!
WHAT IS WRONG WITH THESE PEOPLE!
Will any that lost their jobs be able to get compensation for loss of earnings etc?
They've done it on my route to work. Installed some centre of carriageway 'safety areas for pedestrians' and dropped the limit to 40 from 60 (NSL), complete with signs and white markers on the road itself. They've left up an NSL sign on a pole, though, right in the middle of the 40 stretch.. 
gh0st said:Even more serious cases where one has been overturned on incorrect law have to go to appeal and that has to be initiated by the convicted person. It does seem iniquitous, but that's the way it works. With a continuing failure to implement a Magistrates Court database system and my feeling that the DVLA does not record the location of the offence, there is no quick and easy way that all 'offenders' could be notified. the best that can be done is to publicise the fact (usually in the local paper, but often in the nationals - which can reach people who have moved out of the area or who were not locals) and let the wrongly convicted make their own appeals.
"...will be able to claim compensation???"
WILL??? THEY SHOULD BE GIVING IT OUT WITH A ****ING APOLOGY!!!!!!!
WHAT IS WRONG WITH THESE PEOPLE!
As to compensation, this is a matter for the civil courts ... but anyone who has been wrongly convicted on the basis of an error by the 'powers that be' and who has their coviction overturned by the courts should certainly seek redress. The great shame of it though is that any monies paid will come from the innocent and already over-taxed rate-payers and not directly from the pockets of those who made the error
. Streaky
rs1952 said:Draw their attention to the Regulations. See here for some ideas but check out the Regulations in the original and take advice - Streaky
They've left up an NSL sign on a pole, though, right in the middle of the 40 stretch..
Which in itself makes the new speed limit illegal and unenforceable.
However, best of luck in trying to convince a magistrate of that !!!!!
More common than you think. Recall a case in Glasgow where limit was advertised, signs put up, but order never confirmed. Meantime thousands were prosecuted and fined for breaking the limit.
Have also worked previously in local authority implementing speed limits. These require a basic co-ordination between legal and roads departments so that signs remain covered until orders are finalised. I know that such co-ordination does always work. These Road orders also require to state where the signs will be erected - workmen should not just move them somewhere more convenient, like some do.
Weirdest abuse I was involved in was the imposition of a temp speed limit, which councils can do in an emergency and don't need to advertise their intention, only that it's done, involved invoking emergency powers for an annual parade. Surely the whole idea of an annual parade is that it is so predictable, not an emergency !
Still if nobody challenges it.
Have also worked previously in local authority implementing speed limits. These require a basic co-ordination between legal and roads departments so that signs remain covered until orders are finalised. I know that such co-ordination does always work. These Road orders also require to state where the signs will be erected - workmen should not just move them somewhere more convenient, like some do.
Weirdest abuse I was involved in was the imposition of a temp speed limit, which councils can do in an emergency and don't need to advertise their intention, only that it's done, involved invoking emergency powers for an annual parade. Surely the whole idea of an annual parade is that it is so predictable, not an emergency !
Still if nobody challenges it.
james_j said:
So they've accidently (on purpose?) done something illegal which takes money off people and they won't pay it back unless the peolpe concerned find out somehow and they then apply to get it returned. It's almost as if the whole thing was done for revenue in the first place.
Cynic
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff