DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: The Flame Pit
*****************************************************
#Post#: 14682--------------------------------------------------
Dodgy Signage!! A20 Sidcup
DIR By: guest46
Date: January 31, 2024, 10:38 am
---------------------------------------------------------
HTML https://www.newsshopper.co.uk/news/24078266.a20-eastbound-sidcup-leads-dozens-speeding-fines/
Apparently loads of driver caught and paid up. Customer for this
site methinks (next time)
#Post#: 17182--------------------------------------------------
Re: Dodgy Signage!! A20 Sidcup
DIR By: guest968
Date: March 12, 2024, 12:01 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
This has been widely reported.
Yes, there was a rogue sign (placed there apparently by an
unauthorised member of the public in what the police are
investigating as an attempt to pervert the course of justice),
but the problem for all the drivers claiming that it caused them
to speed is that such a claim is nonsense.
That stretch of road has average speed measuring cameras. The
fake sign was close to the second camera, and if you do the
maths it's impossible for any driver's average speed to have
exceeded the threshold for prosecution if they accelerated to 50
when they passed the sign if they'd been driving at the correct
speed before it.
Any driver who got a speeding ticket had to have already been
speeding past all the 40mph signs before the 50mph ones.
It may be that even though that section of the A20 was correctly
signed when a temporary speed limit was put in place, the
presence of the sign invalidated the entire traffic order until
it was removed, but that's the only grounds for appeal anybody
has - saying "I wouldn't have been speeding if that sign hadn't
been there" is demonstrably untrue.
#Post#: 17282--------------------------------------------------
Re: Dodgy Signage!! A20 Sidcup
DIR By: slapdash
Date: March 15, 2024, 4:59 am
---------------------------------------------------------
It would likely have caught me (bang to rights but frustrating).
I'd have been speeding at +10% +1 in the expectation of being
under the threshold. At the 50 sign I would have done the same
putting me over the threshold between 2 cameras.
It wouldn't have made me speed. I would have been. But it would
have made me get caught.
#Post#: 17485--------------------------------------------------
Re: Dodgy Signage!! A20 Sidcup
DIR By: guest968
Date: March 17, 2024, 2:04 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Obviously, slapdash, the way for you to avoid such problems is
to stop regarding speed limits as some sort of semi-official
guidance, and start obeying the law.
#Post#: 17488--------------------------------------------------
Re: Dodgy Signage!! A20 Sidcup
DIR By: slapdash
Date: March 17, 2024, 2:38 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
There is, of course, that option.
Apparently only around 10% of licences have points so
collectively we must be fairly law abiding.
I found it quite surprising that 62,000 NIP had allegedly been
produced on that stretch in a 2 month period. That's quite a
chunk when only a bit over 1 mln are produced nationally over a
full year.
#Post#: 17500--------------------------------------------------
Re: Dodgy Signage!! A20 Sidcup
DIR By: slapdash
Date: March 17, 2024, 5:28 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
I don't believe the enforcement has anything to do with TfL,
they may have the wrong target in their sights.
If I were on the receiving end of one, and I was on 9pts, I
would probably try NG. Slim chance of success though.
#Post#: 17514--------------------------------------------------
Re: Dodgy Signage!! A20 Sidcup
DIR By: ivanleo
Date: March 17, 2024, 7:18 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: slapdash link ---
>
> I don't believe the enforcement has anything to do with TfL
>
--- End Quote ---
Indeed, TFL has nothing to do with enforcement, though they are
of course responsible for providing adequate signage.
#Post#: 17529--------------------------------------------------
Re: Dodgy Signage!! A20 Sidcup
DIR By: slapdash
Date: March 18, 2024, 1:06 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Perhaps an argument that it was inadequate - at least from the
fake sign - due to lack of maintenance could be attempted.
#Post#: 17537--------------------------------------------------
Re: Dodgy Signage!! A20 Sidcup
DIR By: ivanleo
Date: March 18, 2024, 3:24 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: slapdash link ---
>
> Perhaps an argument that it was inadequate - at least from the
fake sign - due to lack of maintenance could be attempted.
>
--- End Quote ---
I doubt it, as it's been calculated that those who were caught
must have been exceeding the limit prior to the fake sign in any
event.
#Post#: 17634--------------------------------------------------
Re: Dodgy Signage!! A20 Sidcup
DIR By: guest968
Date: March 18, 2024, 7:43 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
OK guys - I give up, you all win.
This is clearly a site with a very definite political bias and
there are people here removing, or having removed, any posts
which do not conform to their beliefs.
I shan't trouble you any more.
*****************************************************
Page 1 of 2
DIR Next Page