URI:
   DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
  HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       *****************************************************
   DIR Return to: The Flame Pit
       *****************************************************
       #Post#: 100224--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Kingston Council - is the new 20mph speed limit on Kingston 
       Hill lawful?
       By: l_maktari Date: November 28, 2025, 9:13 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Here's yet another link. - to the proposed siting of cameras,
       signs etc...  (For completeness sake, to add to my collection of
       links).
  HTML https://moderngov.kingston.gov.uk/documents/s105991/Annex%201%20-%20PLAN%2020mph%20Kingston%20Hill.pdf.<br
       />I would like to promise no more links, but I can't.
       #Post#: 100279--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Kingston Council - is the new 20mph speed limit on Kingston 
       Hill lawful?
       By: l_maktari Date: November 29, 2025, 3:10 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Good morning.  So it looks like the TMO quoted in the met police
       defence was revoked on 10th October 2024 when it published their
       kingston upon thames (moving traffic restrictions) order 2024
       no. 15.
  HTML https://drive.google.com/file/d/1VH0h-JkSu_5okGFuF0hcgwco-eFnkXIO/view?usp=drive_link
       However, my biggest issue is with the signs around kingston vale
       and kingston hill.  Following, whilst not agreeing with, their
       plans to impose 20mph around these two roads, why did they
       actively put new 30MPH terminal signs on the entry points into
       Kingston Vale at Derwent Avenue and Robin Hood Lane?  This was
       not there last year, why is it there now?  And why have they put
       the wrong speed limit on as this is confusing?
  HTML https://maps.app.goo.gl/YUnzEoQmYLsuAPPg7
       #Post#: 100281--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Kingston Council - is the new 20mph speed limit on Kingston 
       Hill lawful?
       By: andy_foster Date: November 29, 2025, 3:13 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       [quote author=l_maktari link=topic=8915.msg100224#msg100224
       date=1764342811]
       I would like to promise no more links, but I can't.
       [/quote]
       I can...
       #Post#: 100319--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Kingston Council - is the new 20mph speed limit on Kingston 
       Hill lawful?
       By: NewJudge Date: November 29, 2025, 7:38 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       I think you need to concentrate on your particular problem and
       not concern yourself with the other locations you mention.
       So it seems that the TMO that PC Wilson relies on in his
       evidence was revoked. If you defended the charge on that basis
       you would not be permitted to “ambush” the prosecution with that
       defence. They would be given the opportunity to amend their
       evidence.
       That means you will need to establish what TMO they do rely on
       to bring the charge. It seems that this would be the Order which
       we have not seen, but about which we only have information from
       the media portal.
       If that Order does mean that the 20 limit begins 150 metres
       beyond (i.e. the London side) of Kingston Hill’s junction with
       Warren Road, it would seem to fit the signage.
       Coming from the A3, the first “30” terminal side is near the
       shops in Kingston Vale.  After that, there is nothing until the
       “20” terminal sign just after the “Galsworthy House” bus stop.
       Then there are “20” repeaters with camera signs, one either side
       of Eastcott Close with the second mounted on the same post as
       the camera which presumably was the one which caught you.
       I do not believe a defence of insufficient signage would
       succeed. The terminal sign is perfectly clear (at least it is on
       GSV, dated June 25) as are the repeater/camera signs.
       This leaves you to decide whether or not to challenge the charge
       on the basis of a deficient Traffic Order. We haven’t seen it so
       cannot be absolutely sure what it says. It seems perfectly clear
       to me what the signage conveys. It’s just a question of whether
       the limit is lawful.
       #Post#: 100341--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Kingston Council - is the new 20mph speed limit on Kingston 
       Hill lawful?
       By: l_maktari Date: November 29, 2025, 1:55 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Yes, indeed.  That all makes perfect sense.  I am not sure if
       you are able to access google drive files but this is the link
       that I provided earlier to the full traffic order on the RBK
       website.
  HTML https://drive.google.com/file/d/1VH0h-JkSu_5okGFuF0hcgwco-eFnkXIO/view?usp=drive_link
       The traffic order is a big document but there are only a few
       bits of relevance - the wording of the restrictions and the maps
       which show the locations of the changes implemented in this
       order.  The maps on kingston vale are on pages 55 and 56.  From
       where it comes off the A3, the maps show that the 20mph has been
       added until where it meets Kingston hill when it is unmarked on
       the map (meaning it hasn't changed and remains  30mph), creating
       a very random gap on Kingston hill which is 30mph.  Then the
       Traffic Order states that the speed limit becomes 20mph again
       around Coombe Ridings where there is a 20mph terminal sign which
       I have disputed as being not well located as it is behind a bus
       stop which is frequently used.  As you have pointed out, this is
       likely to be a slim line of defence.
       The map is found on page 66 of the Traffic Order and the rest of
       the hill is shown on page 72 of the document.
       From the bottom of Kingston Vale until the camera by Eastcott
       Close/ Warren Road, the signage is an absolute mess.  If you
       travel from the bottom of Kingston Vale, we enter a new 20mph
       speed limit with no signs to indicate this, neither as terminal
       signs nor any roundels.  If you enter Kingston Vale from a side
       street (Robin Hood Lane or Derwent Avenue), there are new
       terminal signs indicating that the speed limit is 30mph, when it
       should indicate 20mph.  When Kingston Vale becomes Kingston
       Hill, there is no new terminal sign saying that there is now a
       30mph limit.  At the top of the hill, where there are the
       cameras, there is the first correct terminal sign albeit,
       arguably, it is not well positioned.
       Can the Traffic Order not be challenged on the grounds that the
       implementation of the new order is deficient?  The traffic
       authority responsible for both signage and the traffic order
       itself is RBK.
       #Post#: 100348--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Kingston Council - is the new 20mph speed limit on Kingston 
       Hill lawful?
       By: andy_foster Date: November 29, 2025, 3:28 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       To challenge what is ostensibly a lawful Order, based on
       procedural impropriety, Wednesbury unreasonableness, etc.,  you
       would need to seek a Judicial Review in the High Court. The
       magistrates lack the supervisory jurisdiction to quash the
       Order, or disregard it (other than on the grounds of it having
       been revoked or never enacted).
       #Post#: 100350--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Kingston Council - is the new 20mph speed limit on Kingston 
       Hill lawful?
       By: l_maktari Date: November 29, 2025, 3:52 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       I certainly don't have the means or knowledge to do this at the
       high court.  So the only course of action will be to plead for
       clemency.  If this is rejected, could I get even bigger fines
       than the original £100 per alleged contravention?
       #Post#: 100351--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Kingston Council - is the new 20mph speed limit on Kingston 
       Hill lawful?
       By: Hippocrates Date: November 29, 2025, 4:04 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Having been in similar situations in my speeding days on
       motorcycles - big ones - I would say I need my licence for work
       purposes as a starter. But the court is bound by statutory
       penalties of course.
       #Post#: 100353--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Kingston Council - is the new 20mph speed limit on Kingston 
       Hill lawful?
       By: l_maktari Date: November 29, 2025, 4:08 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       do statutory penalties include additional punitive penalties for
       those challenging them at court?  I still don't understand why
       they didn't offer me a speed awareness course, at least for one
       of the penalties.
       #Post#: 100354--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Kingston Council - is the new 20mph speed limit on Kingston 
       Hill lawful?
       By: Southpaw82 Date: November 29, 2025, 4:24 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       [quote author=l_maktari link=topic=8915.msg100350#msg100350
       date=1764453170]  If this is rejected, could I get even bigger
       fines than the original £100 per alleged contravention?
       [/quote]
       You would be sentenced according to the sentencing guidelines -
       almost certainly more than £100, particularly when you add on
       court costs and the victim surcharges.
       *****************************************************
   DIR Previous Page
   DIR Next Page