URI:
   DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
  HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       *****************************************************
   DIR Return to: Speeding and other criminal offences
       *****************************************************
       #Post#: 63168--------------------------------------------------
       Exceeding temporary 50 mph limit on motorway - average speed
       camera recorded 59 mph
   DIR By: ohmygod
       Date: March 19, 2025, 2:58 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Hi. Appreciate some advice on my predicament.
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       I was clocked doing 59 mph between the M1 J35a-35 Southbound
       where a 50 mph speed limit was being enforced using average
       speed cameras due to roadworks on the smart motorway. The
       offence was back in October 2024 and it's progressed all the way
       to SJPN because if I'm convicted I'll be due a 'totting up'
       driving ban.
       I've got 9 points from three previous SP50 convictions in the
       last three years. (none were excessive speeding, two were due my
       unfamiliarity with variable speed limits on smart motorways).
       I've pleaded guilty on the SJPN because I only saw the letter on
       the deadline and didn't have time to look into whether I had a
       valid defence.
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       However looking into it the charge and facts I'm wondering
       whether I have a mitigation or defence?
       In this section of motorway the 50 mph speed limit came into
       force with temporary fixed plate signage which I must have
       missed (unlike me since I'm already on 9 points I have been very
       careful to always react to the speed limits), I've carried on
       assuming 70 mph speed limit applies  and then when I've seen the
       next 50 mph repeater with camera sign I've slowed down. However
       because I've already entered the speed camera timing zone by the
       next camera my average speed is still above the limit.
       Checking on Google Maps the repeater sign is postioned approx
       500m after the 50 mph terminal signs. Do I have an argument that
       I did not receive sufficient signage to know that the national
       speed limit no longer applied. My understanding is for 50 mph
       limit on the motorway a repeater should be placed 350m after the
       speed limit change)? If the repeater was placed in the
       recommended distance I would have reacted earlier to the 50 mph
       change.
       #Post#: 63171--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Exceeding temporary 50 mph limit on motorway - average speed
       camera recorded 59 mph
   DIR By: Southpaw82
       Date: March 19, 2025, 3:29 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       “I didn’t have sufficient warning of the limit because I missed
       the big terminal signs on both sides of the carriageway” isn’t
       the most compelling argument.
       You could run it since you’re facing a totting ban in any case
       but be aware if you lose you’ll face increased court costs
       (circa £650) and lose the 1/3 discount off the fine.
       #Post#: 63174--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Exceeding temporary 50 mph limit on motorway - average speed
       camera recorded 59 mph
   DIR By: ohmygod
       Date: March 19, 2025, 3:54 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Agree it's not the most compelling defence but to give some more
       detail - It was driving after dark in an unlit section of the
       motorway so visibility is not the same as during the day. it's
       not beyond the realm of possibility for a person to miss the
       initial terminal signs driving at 70 mph especially as the signs
       are not overhead but by the side of the road.
       The 350m figure for a repeater is from the DfTs own Traffic
       Signs manual.
       #Post#: 63176--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Exceeding temporary 50 mph limit on motorway - average speed
       camera recorded 59 mph
   DIR By: 666
       Date: March 19, 2025, 4:03 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       --- Quote from: ohmygod link ---
       >
       >
       >
       > The 350m figure for a repeater is from the DfTs own Traffic
       Signs manual.
       >
       --- End Quote ---
       But guidance, not law.
       #Post#: 63183--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Exceeding temporary 50 mph limit on motorway - average speed
       camera recorded 59 mph
   DIR By: RichardW
       Date: March 19, 2025, 4:41 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       And it's an average speed camera, so probably over 1/2 mile and
       the first repeater is therefore a moot point - there would be
       more opportunities to realise the limit was in force and reduce
       speed - to well below the limit if required to bring the average
       out at under the enforcement point.  Do you have the makings of
       an Exceptional Hardship argument?
       #Post#: 63186--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Exceeding temporary 50 mph limit on motorway - average speed
       camera recorded 59 mph
   DIR By: ohmygod
       Date: March 19, 2025, 4:58 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       --- Quote from: RichardW link ---
       >
       > And it's an average speed camera, so probably over 1/2 mile
       and the first repeater is therefore a moot point - there would
       be more opportunities to realise the limit was in force and
       reduce speed - to well below the limit if required to bring the
       average out at under the enforcement point.  Do you have the
       makings of an Exceptional Hardship argument?
       >
       --- End Quote ---
       The violation report I received states the distance between
       cameras as 0.677 miles. I think if the repeater was in the 350m
       distance and I reacted to it my average speed would havebeen
       lower than 10% + 2.
       I've made the hardship argument in my SJPN plea - basically my
       car is through employer and is the only one in my household.
       I'll lose it with the 12 points ban my other half suffers health
       issues and will be severely impacted by not having a transport
       to attend her medical appointments. (We both work over 300 miles
       from our permenant residence)
       #Post#: 63187--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Exceeding temporary 50 mph limit on motorway - average speed
       camera recorded 59 mph
   DIR By: ohmygod
       Date: March 19, 2025, 4:59 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       --- Quote from: 666 link ---
       >
       > [quote author=ohmygod link=topic=5600.msg63174#msg63174
       date=1742374489]
       >
       >
       > The 350m figure for a repeater is from the DfTs own Traffic
       Signs manual.
       >
       --- End Quote ---
       But guidance, not law.
       [/quote]
       What weight does non-conformance to official guidance to the law
       carry in court?
       As it's a motorway in the absence of signage I should proceed at
       the national speed limit? Shouldn't the guidance be relevant in
       such a speed limit application? There's a duty for drivers to be
       sufficiently reminded that the national speed limit does not
       apply?
       #Post#: 63205--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Exceeding temporary 50 mph limit on motorway - average speed
       camera recorded 59 mph
   DIR By: Southpaw82
       Date: March 19, 2025, 6:34 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Your argument seems to be that if you had been reminded of the
       lower limit some 150 yards sooner, your average speed would have
       been below 57 mph. Are you sure? In any case, any speed above 50
       is speeding, so you would still be guilty.
       The limit must be adequately conveyed. You would need to
       convince the court that the big terminal signs (that you missed)
       and a repeater 500 m later isn’t adequate. Good luck with that -
       but if it’s the only shot you have you could try it. You are
       aware of the risks if you try it and lose.
       #Post#: 63206--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Exceeding temporary 50 mph limit on motorway - average speed
       camera recorded 59 mph
   DIR By: JustLoveCars
       Date: March 19, 2025, 6:37 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       The TSM is clear that the distances are recommendations only -
       so it does not give an absolute defence for the repeater not
       being at the recommended distances.
       Looking at the stretch on GSV the first repeater IMHO could be a
       little earlier (It's around 470m).  Prior to the terminal signs
       there are 'Average Speed Check' signs on both sides of the
       carriageway.  Effectively missing 4 signs - the argument that
       you believed the NSL was in effect would be a challenge.  (There
       appears to be other indications such as cones and closed lanes)
       Of note, the distance from first camera to the repeater is only
       around 280m and a further 800m to the second camera.  So if you
       were travelling at 70mph up until the repeater and then 50mph
       for the rest, your average speed would be somewhere around 55mph
       (taking into account some braking time from 70 to 50).  So a
       clocked 59mph is notably in excess of that.
       I think the chances of running an EH plea could be better than a
       defence to the allegation itself.  Of course, avoiding an EH
       plea would be ideal.
       The SJ will refer the matter to court anyway.  How the points
       were accumulated is irrelevant to an EH plea anyway.
       #Post#: 63214--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Exceeding temporary 50 mph limit on motorway - average speed
       camera recorded 59 mph
   DIR By: NewJudge
       Date: March 19, 2025, 7:53 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       --- Quote ---
       > I've made the hardship argument in my SJPN plea...
       --- End Quote ---
       EH arguments cannot be made in writing but, as above, you will
       be required to attend court anyway as the SJ will not ban you in
       you absence. If you make an EH plea you will be required to give
       evidence on oath. Here’s the Magistrates’ guidelines which they
       consider when hearing an EH plea:
       When considering whether there are grounds to reduce or avoid a
       totting up disqualification the court should have regard to the
       following:
       It is for the offender to prove to the civil standard of proof
       that such grounds exist. Other than very exceptionally, this
       will require evidence from the offender, and where such evidence
       is given, it must be sworn.
       Where it is asserted that hardship would be caused, the court
       must be satisfied that it is not merely inconvenience, or
       hardship, but exceptional hardship for which the court must have
       evidence.
       Almost every disqualification entails hardship for the person
       disqualified and their immediate family. This is part of the
       deterrent objective of the provisions combined with the
       preventative effect of the order not to drive.
       If a motorist continues to offend after becoming aware of the
       risk to their licence of further penalty points, the court can
       take this circumstance into account.
       Courts should be cautious before accepting assertions of
       exceptional hardship without evidence that alternatives
       (including alternative means of transport) for avoiding
       exceptional hardship are not viable.
       Loss of employment will be an inevitable consequence of a
       driving ban for many people. Evidence that loss of employment
       would follow from disqualification is not in itself sufficient
       to demonstrate exceptional hardship; whether or not it does will
       depend on the circumstances of the offender and the consequences
       of that loss of employment on the offender and/or others.
       *****************************************************
       Page 1 of 3
   DIR Next Page