Speeding Fine

[A0]

Speed limits aren't imposed as a laugh to catch out poor unsuspecting motorists but to reduce accidents in known blackspots. I support average speed cameras as they maintain traffic flow rather than the stop / start of wretched speed bumps. In Cornwall average speed cameras are to be installed on the notoriously dangerous A38 between the Tamar Bridge and Trerulefoot (en route to Liskeard) which has claimed many victims over the years.

If you believe the bit in bold to be genuinely the case, then please DM me your bank details as I've got a Nigerian cousin who has inherited £2m which he needs to disburse.

A better question is why the government don't invest in re-engineering such roads to actually make them safer. Just because a road was fit for purpose 60 years ago, doesn't mean it is now and re-engineering and improvements should be the *first* step, not the final thing to be done.

 

[Ken H]

If you believe the bit in bold to be genuinely the case, then please DM me your bank details as I've got a Nigerian cousin who has inherited £2m which he needs to disburse.

A better question is why the government don't invest in re-engineering such roads to actually make them safer. Just because a road was fit for purpose 60 years ago, doesn't mean it is now and re-engineering and improvements should be the *first* step, not the final thing to be done.

Speed camera is cheaper than road improvements.

 

[jfollows]

I think that 20 years ago speed limits were designed to reduce accidents in known blackspots, I would come across 50mph limits and take care because there was a reason for their introduction. Now they've been taken over by the "something must be done" brigade, and they no longer make sense. Our 30mph limit out of Wilmslow has been extended far beyond the point at which it makes sense to me, and as a result nobody takes any notice of it and nobody tries to enforce it. I only need to look at the A515 between Buxton and Ashbourne which merits a blanket 50mph restriction, with national speed limit signs on every wiggly side road, and the A515 is mainly very straight because it used to be a Roman road. Speed limits are a blunt tool used, and now enforced by cameras, in ways which don't make sense to me. That said, there's little argument if you're caught, it's an absolute offence and the evidence generally goes against you. So I drive to the posted speed limits.

 

[Meerkat]

Speed limits aren't imposed as a laugh to catch out poor unsuspecting motorists but to reduce accidents in known blackspots. I support average speed cameras as they maintain traffic flow rather than the stop / start of wretched speed bumps. In Cornwall average speed cameras are to be installed on the notoriously dangerous A38 between the Tamar Bridge and Trerulefoot (en route to Liskeard) which has claimed many victims over the years.

Not any more. Surrey seems to have taken the undemocratic approach of changing the national speed limits, with country dual carriageways being 50 and A-roads through the countryside being 40, partly influenced by the shouty MAMIL lobby who demand cars go slower then ride in a dangerous manner themselves.
It basically brings speed limits into disrepute - if drivers don't believe they are there for good reason they start ignoring them generally.

Average speed cameras are a nightmare, causing serious bunching as drivers are afraid to overtake on single carriageways, and on dual carriageways lorries take about half an hour to overtake. You do find out how much difference 'racing line' makes though.....

 

[Ashley Hill]

Average speed cameras are a nightmare,

I’ve found that since I was caught accidentally speeding I am now very conscious of my speed. Where average speed cameras exist I now spend much of the journey looking at my speedo.

 

[bramling]

If you believe the bit in bold to be genuinely the case, then please DM me your bank details as I've got a Nigerian cousin who has inherited £2m which he needs to disburse.

A generation ago I might just have given the state the benefit of the doubt on this and taken a punt on your offer.

Nowadays entirely agree with you. The state in its current form appears to show zero respect for my earnings, savings, assets, well-being or anything else for that matter. As this country has always worked on an unwritten contract of mutual respect, the consequence of this is my respect for the state’s institutions has ebbed away to pretty much zero now.

The consequences of that are quite serious if others feel the same way, as I know many do.

A better question is why the government don't invest in re-engineering such roads to actually make them safer. Just because a road was fit for purpose 60 years ago, doesn't mean it is now and re-engineering and improvements should be the *first* step, not the final thing to be done.

Agreed. It’s weak government once again. Easy to pander to the “something must be done” brigade; the types of hypocritical parasites who will fight like mad for traffic calming on “their road” (in other words outside their house), but still drive like retards everywhere else. Probably the self-same virtue-signalling types who during Covid wanted restrictions for *everyone else*.

 

[ChrisC]

I think that 20 years ago speed limits were designed to reduce accidents in known blackspots, I would come across 50mph limits and take care because there was a reason for their introduction. Now they've been taken over by the "something must be done" brigade, and they no longer make sense. Our 30mph limit out of Wilmslow has been extended far beyond the point at which it makes sense to me, and as a result nobody takes any notice of it and nobody tries to enforce it. I only need to look at the A515 between Buxton and Ashbourne which merits a blanket 50mph restriction, with national speed limit signs on every wiggly side road, and the A515 is mainly very straight because it used to be a Roman road. Speed limits are a blunt tool used, and now enforced by cameras, in ways which don't make sense to me. That said, there's little argument if you're caught, it's an absolute offence and the evidence generally goes against you. So I drive to the posted speed limits.

Just about every single carriageway main road in Nottinghamshire now has a maximum speed of 50mph. Over the last 20 years 50mph limits have slowly been introduced on most A roads and now they seem to be putting 50mph limits on many B roads. Most of the very straight A614 Nottingham to Doncaster road has a 50mph limit and average speed cameras.

 

[Ken H]

I’ve found that since I was caught accidentally speeding I am now very conscious of my speed. Where average speed cameras exist I now spend much of the journey looking at my speedo.

No cruise control?

 

[yorkie]

I’ve found that since I was caught accidentally speeding I am now very conscious of my speed. Where average speed cameras exist I now spend much of the journey looking at my speedo.

The speed limit is a maximum speed; there is no need to go at exactly that speed, so you could ease off a bit and not have to worry so much about exceeding the limit?

 

[Joe Paxton]

[...] Surrey seems to have taken the undemocratic approach of changing the national speed limits, [...]

One could argue that it's more democratic, as nowadays local authorities (with elected councillors) are responsible for setting the speed limits in their areas...

 

[bramling]

One could argue that it's more democratic, as nowadays local authorities (with elected councillors) are responsible for setting the speed limits in their areas...

Democratic to who, though? I’d argue it’s rather undemocratic for people who don’t have the opportunity to vote in that immediate area. Parochial politics never really works well as it doesn’t consider the bigger picture.

 

[infobleep]

Democratic to who, though? I’d argue it’s rather undemocratic for people who don’t have the opportunity to vote in that immediate area. Parochial politics never really works well as it doesn’t consider the bigger picture.

That could be applied to so many more things. I work in London but don't get to vote in any elections there.

Out of interest, can anyone attend a speed awareness course or are they only open to those caught speeding?

As I don't drive, I would not need to attend one myself.

 

[jfollows]

That could be applied to so many more things. I work in London but don't get to vote in any elections there.

Out of interest, can anyone attend a speed awareness course or are they only open to those caught speeding?

As I don't drive, I would not need to attend one myself.

I believe the process for enrolment is pretty much totally driven by the police speed camera units reporting you for prosecution but giving you a route to book a speed awareness course if you're eligible. The process also drives some kind of confirmation once you've attended (and "participated") back to the police to prevent them proceeding to prosecute you. I'm not aware of a route to attend otherwise, however the companies that provide the courses may be willing to do something similar to other groups - I did once vaguely consider an interest in attending myself until I decided not to be silly, and a few years later I had a real reason for attending (57 in a 50).

 

[Ashley Hill]

The speed limit is a maximum speed; there is no need to go at exactly that speed, so you could ease off a bit and not have to worry so much about exceeding the limit?

Doing 15 in a 20 is a lot different to doing 65 in a 70,but your speed will creep up if you’re distracted and that’s how I got caught.

 

[jfollows]

The "problem" is that speed limits enforced by cameras are absolute and don't take other circumstances into account, that's the way they are. In the past speed limits were enforced by consent, by people, and usually allowed for circumstances, so you were less likely to be convicted of speeding at 3am on a road than you would have been at 3pm, for example. When I was young, Prestbury had no speed limit signs, but people didn't drive through the village at 60mph. Now, thanks in part to the reduction in the amount of money we are willing to pay for our police, cameras have replaced people to the most part and although the actual offence has never changed, the way it's enforced and the consequences of this have. Of course, there's a leeway as tabulated at the start of this thread to allow - a little - for peoples' speed "creeping" over the limit.

Essentially speed cameras have made a massive change to the way we approach driving, hopefully they don't actually change the way we drive too much but they probably do - the silliness with slowing down only for camera gantries for example - and they've probably saved many lives but at the expense of curtailing some of the freedom and safe enjoyment which we used to have. The problem is that we're not entitled to decide for ourselves what a "safe" excess over the posted limit is - we should always drive to the conditions that prevail, and I guess my minor peeve with cameras is that they can't allow for "conditions" in anything other than a simplistic way.

But it's where we are today. We have part of our society obsessed with cameras - in our towns, on our trains - which I've always mainly opposed, but it's been futile opposition. Cameras are cheaper than people, so they allow the police to stay in the police stations and complete more paperwork.

 

[Meerkat]

No cruise control?

You need adaptive cruise control or its even more faffing about than just driving

The speed limit is a maximum speed; there is no need to go at exactly that speed, so you could ease off a bit and not have to worry so much about exceeding the limit?

Dunno why they make trains go so fast, just go a bit slower and get there all the same right?

One could argue that it's more democratic, as nowadays local authorities (with elected councillors) are responsible for setting the speed limits in their areas...

They generally only consult with immediate locals (who want speed limits past their house, but dont think they apply to them) not all the people driving through, so you don't even know its happening until the notification, or the speed signs get changed. MAMIL pressure groups wanting speed limits on roads that are a playground for them, ignoring that they are more people's daily commute/school run etc.
Never seen a business case either - just say its (non defined) 'safer'. Build a road improvement and journey time reductions are priced in. Do they ever calculate the cost of journey time increases for speed limit decreases?

 

[Ediswan]

You need adaptive cruise control or its even more faffing about than just driving

A manually set speed limiter would also work. I used to have that.

 

[PeterC]

A manually set speed limiter would also work. I used to have that.

I always use mine when there is an average speed limit.

The response to a high profile accident always seems to be a demand to reduce the limit. I never understand how knocking 10mph off the limit would have made a 19 year old high on drink and drugs suddenly drive safely.

 

[Meerkat]

I always use mine when there is an average speed limit.

The response to a high profile accident always seems to be a demand to reduce the limit. I never understand how knocking 10mph off the limit would have made a 19 year old high on drink and drugs suddenly drive safely.

The answer to aggressive bad driving is obviously to wind them up more by making the speed limit lower than the road conditions dictate!

 

[ABB125]

I always use mine when there is an average speed limit.

The response to a high profile accident always seems to be a demand to reduce the limit. I never understand how knocking 10mph off the limit would have made a 19 year old high on drink and drugs suddenly drive safely.

"Oh no, a drunk driver crashed into a group of children at 90mph and killed them. Something must be done!"
"I know, let's reduce the speed limit to 40mph, that'll stop it from happening again."

A slightly morbid scenario, I know, but it demonstrates how ineffective a reduced speed limit can be. Would the limit being 40 have made any difference to the fictional accident? No, of course not. So why would it make any difference in future? (Answer: it wouldn't.)

 

[Lucan]

doing the course with others, all who were mostly aged 60+, wasn’t a bad experience and probably better than via Zoom. It isn’t that the over 60s speed the most but I think they prefer an in person course whereas younger people probably prefer online.

I went on a course before Zoom was offered, and found the ages were spread out. Maybe 60yo+ people are less likely to know how to use Zoom, or wish to learn it. My offence was to do 26mph in a 20 limit where it had been 30mph last time I passed, and within memory had been national limit (Ladies Mile across Clifton Downs in Bristol). Checking later, the 20 signs were very thin on the ground so I think 26mph on a straight empty road which I believed had a 30 limit was quite restrained of me.

Very informative course too and not an egg sucking exercise.

Waste of time and money, though better than points on your licence and your insurance going up. Maybe some others learned something, but I didn't. Course leader was a jerk, and I had to correct him when he said that at 20 mph you go a half mile in a minute. What is one supposed to do with that information in a safety context anyway? Then he invited free comment and I tried to make the point that speed signage has generally become sloppy; and at one time signs (or street lamps) had to be closer than 200 m intervals but this was no longer observed. The idiot (my having already riled him) thought I was trying to argue that poor signage was a permit to drive as fast as you like, and threated to throw me off the course. Here is a 30 sign near me for example (in a rural hamlet, not on Ladies Mile), see if you can spot it - and it is usually worse than this, totally smothered, and invisible anyway from a 50 yards further back :

I must say I'm very impressed (seriously) by most of the commenters here. We seem to be a very law abiding lot, very different from 80% of those I see on the road. There is a new 20mph through my village (not the one in the picture) and as soon as I slow for it usually someone behind me seizes the chance to overtake me, hitting the 20 zone at at least 45 mph. I am also overtaken by almost every other car on motorways, even though I am doing 70. Perhaps being railway minded we are more inclined to follow operating rules.

 

[Meerkat]

The way to combat the spread of ridiculous speed limits is ironically to go faster. The police seem to object to a new speed limit that is too much below the current average speed.

 

[zwk500]

I believe the process for enrolment is pretty much totally driven by the police speed camera units reporting you for prosecution but giving you a route to book a speed awareness course if you're eligible. The process also drives some kind of confirmation once you've attended (and "participated") back to the police to prevent them proceeding to prosecute you. I'm not aware of a route to attend otherwise, however the companies that provide the courses may be willing to do something similar to other groups - I did once vaguely consider an interest in attending myself until I decided not to be silly, and a few years later I had a real reason for attending (57 in a 50).

I think some companies get people who drive on company business to attend a course (or something much like it) pre-emptively, as part of their corporate responsibility/business driving insurance policy. Of course that's a slightly different situation as even small companies would probably have the numbers required to justify a session for themselves, and host it privately.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 4 Apr 2023 ==

The way to combat the spread of ridiculous speed limits is ironically to go faster. The police seem to object to a new speed limit that is too much below the current average speed.

The way to 'combat the spread' is to understand the logic behind them, so you can target specific limits rather than appearing to be a cross between the Sovereign Citizen/Freeman of the land movements and a boy racer.

Absolute positions generally make people look very unreasonable, and usually don't stand up to scrutiny. Speed limits generally require a justification to be enacted, so you can be reasonably sure that there have been a series of serious accidents or deaths on the stretch of road concerned (many of which completely separate from the speed they may have been going of course - I don't claim the justification is always reasonable, only that there will be something behind it).

 

[dangie]

It doesn’t help when you are driving within or up to the speed limit and some impatient driver fills your rear view mirror. For any new or less experienced or maybe a little nervous driver his can be quite worrying or even intimidating. Fortunately I’ve been driving long enough to ignore them, but for others it may not be so easy.

 

[jfollows]

I think some companies get people who drive on company business to attend a course (or something much like it) pre-emptively, as part of their corporate responsibility/business driving insurance policy. Of course that's a slightly different situation as even small companies would probably have the numbers required to justify a session for themselves, and host it privately.

The two that I did were totally different, they involved practical driving and some practical exercises on a closed road, they were useful because I received some tailored advice which enabled me to improve my driving. Others received advice on things like "I find it hard to keep to 30mph" along the lines given in previous posts here.

 

[dangie]

I was told yesterday that as my speeding incident was in Wales, if I am offered a Speed Awareness Course that will probably take place in Wales also, and not at a venue closer to where I live in Staffordshire. Does anyone have experience of this? Was your incident in a different UK country to the one in which you live?

I know there would probably be a Zoom option, but if possible I’d rather do face to face.

 

[jfollows]

I was told yesterday that as my speeding incident was in Wales, if I am offered a Speed Awareness Course that will probably take place in Wales also, and not at a venue closer to where I live in Staffordshire. Does anyone have experience of this? Was your incident in a different UK country to the one in which you live?

I know there would probably be a Zoom option, but if possible I’d rather do face to face.

Who told you that, were they a person with some authority or not?
I believe (https://offer.ndors.org.uk/#/home)

You can choose to take an available course anywhere in the UK.

https://www.staffordshire.gov.uk/Hi...ng-NDORS/National-Speed-awareness-course.aspx with spelling mistakes ("parametres") gives

Classroom-based course.​

Currently there are 3 locations available to do the course, these courses are subject to availability. The course duration is 2 hours and 45 mins and is delivered by 2 presenters. The current venues available are:

Staffordshire Wildlife Trust Headquarters, The Wolseley Centre, Wolseley Bridge, Stafford ST17 0WT

Wolseley Centre Map

Chasewater Country Park, Pool Road, Brownhills, Staffordshire WS8 7NL

Chasewater Country Park Map

Heath House Training and Conference Centre, Cheadle Road, Uttoxeter, Staffordshire ST14 7BY

Heath House Map

Of course, I'm not an authority on the subject either, so what you're told might be correct, but I don't think it is. I don’t have any practical experience to offer, sorry.

 

[dangie]

Who told you that, were they a person with some authority or not?.

I have to be honest, and this is true, some bloke down the pub

Of course, I'm not an authority on the subject either, so what you're told might be correct, but I don't think it is. I don’t have any practical experience to offer, sorry.

I’ve just read the links you provided. Thank you. One of the venues is only one mile from where I live. I’ll go on the bus. At least I won’t get another speeding ticket.

I always thought the pub was the font of all knowledge….

 

[Meerkat]

Absolute positions generally make people look very unreasonable, and usually don't stand up to scrutiny. Speed limits generally require a justification to be enacted, so you can be reasonably sure that there have been a series of serious accidents or deaths on the stretch of road concerned (many of which completely separate from the speed they may have been going of course - I don't claim the justification is always reasonable, only that there will be something behind it).

The council have an absolute positions - 'its safer' - without seeming to make any assesment of the level of 'safer' nor the cost involved (other than the signage).
See the mad blanket applications of 20mph limits wanted (and got in some places).

 

[ChrisC]

It doesn’t help when you are driving within or up to the speed limit and some impatient driver fills your rear view mirror. For any new or less experienced or maybe a little nervous driver his can be quite worrying or even intimidating. Fortunately I’ve been driving long enough to ignore them, but for others it may not be so easy.

When they drive really close behind you, and you are able to view them clearly through your rear view mirror, it’s sometimes quite fun to be able to see the annoyed look in their faces. I live in a village situated on a main road with a 30mph limit through the village, then there is a short stretch of 50mph road before the next village with a 30mph limit. I always slow right down to 30mph before entering each village and Often see it really annoying some drivers who are following me. I wouldn’t want a speeding fine, but it wouldn’t look good if someone living in the villages was caught speeding, especially as the Parish Councils regularly discuss the issues of traffic speeding through the villages.