The consensus is overwhelming…

The consensus is overwhelming…

Well, it seems the consensus is overwhelming…

As of a few moments ago, 96.65% of BTST Members believe that the “war on the Motorist” did NOT end during the term of the last government.

In fact over 50% of us think it’s got worse!

BTST Member Poll Results
(the poll is here)

I have to say these results echo my personal view, but I didn’t want to bias the survey by saying that beforehand : -)

So what should we do about this?

You can post your answer/suggestions below…

All the best,



  1. J Hemsley

    Send the result to all motoring organisations and get them to conduct a national poll.

  2. Peter Martin

    I don’t think there is anything we can do, whatever we do we can’t win. Maybe we could all go thieving to pay our fines, no chance of getting caught as all the filth are on the streets to catch motorist

  3. John Frewen-Lord

    It worked in Canada when speed cameras were introduced. Newspapers printed coupons, which entitled you to representation in court – the newspaper employed a team of crack traffic lawyers. If you won, you still paid the $100 to the newspaper. If you lost, you still ONLY paid the $100, the newspaper picking up all the costs over that. Nothing to lose by contesting the case. The courts were overwhelmed with drivers contesting every speeding case there was (more serious cases, such as drunk driving, didn’t qualify), and photo radar (as it was called) was dropped. Might work here.

  4. Jim simpson

    All motorists should make the police prove they broke the law! Stop admitting to it, and challenge. They work on an 80/20 model. Change that to a 20/80 model, swamp them with paperwork and clog the courts… action is the only way to effect change!!!

  5. Adam Fernie

    I think we are an easy touch for making money
    and they should be targeting criminals who get away with a slap on the hand

  6. andrew chrysafi

    Have laws against where and how the police can use a mobile camera.
    i just got a £100 fine and 3 points for doing 48mph in a 30mph zone. whats wrong with that you might think,the thing is firstly the police man was hiding behind a road sign and catching motorists slowing down from a 60mph zone going into a 30mph zone. my reaction as i saw the camera was to braked hard and i skidded to about 20mph which i think is more dangerous. motorists are being forced to look out for police and not real dangers.
    PS all static cameras should have the mph stated on them and visible as you approach.

  7. jim simpson

    Swamp them with paperwork and clog up the courts. They work on an 80/20 model, reverse it to a 20/80 model. Challenge them, don’t admit to anything. make them prove you are guilty, they usually cant. Pictures can be challenged. if you don’t admit to being the person in the photo, they have nowhere to go…….

    Innocent until PROVEN guilty.

  8. Ray

    It is my understanding that the majority of drivers feel the present arrangements through legislation are that fines imposed through speeding are to be used for ‘traffic improvements’ by those who impose them. (Mainly local authorities). Fines through speeding contribute to the finances of insurance companies, and the government. Use of the term ‘cash cow’ could not be better used! How motorists fight this (other than buying your products) I’m not sure.

  9. Adrian

    Send the result to the government so they can disagree and give you some “true facts” to prove they are right.

  10. Jo pullan

    I have tried the challenge approach and unless it is done on a national scale it will not work because of digitilization and judges being bias- the only way to do it is beat them at their own game- a national campaign on drivers to NOT speed for a year- it will make all of them redundant !

  11. Nick B

    How about a website that actually profiles any Traffic Officer who performs above and beyond? A Photo and contact details could be provided so we could personally thank them for their outstanding work.

  12. David Barnett

    Fixed penalties without independent trial should be abolished. They damage the rule of law, because the judge of the facts and circumstances benefits from the fines.

    Politically, we should campaign for all fines to go into a fund which is inaccessible to any branch of government. The fund could be used for charitable purposes. For example, compensating victims of hit-and-run drivers. Or the fund could be given out in lottery prizes – imagine every registered vehicle owner being entitled to 1 annual lottery ticket.

    This new system would gradually restore faith in the legitimacy of the fine system because it would remove the sense of its being a stealth tax. Law enforcement would be restored to the common sense administration of my youth.

  13. Tony Reeves

    I agree with Hemsley – A national poll is what’s needed: try approaching sumofus or 38 degrees. Get a million motorists agreeing (probably quite easy to achieve)that Cameron broke his word on this topic, and you’ll get a lot of exposure.

  14. Dom

    The war has definitely not ended and things are not getting better. Let’s look at the facts for a moment.

    1. The Tories have not carried on with Labour’s fuel escalator but nor have they righted the wrongs of the past? We still have very expensive fuel even despite the collapse of the oil price.
    2. Speed cameras are proliferating, especially those on motorways whilst real patrols (which reduce bad driving generally) have all but disappeared. Cameras generate revenue whilst Police patrols create better driving attitudes but cost money; it’s easy to see where the motivations come from then.
    3. The cost of road fund licence has gone up with no corresponding investment in the road network. On the contrary, David Cameron is championing a new train service at an estimated cost of £50Bn which will do nothing to address the ever-worsening congestion on the roads.
    4. If the rumours about diesel cars are anywhere close to being true then all of us who quietly took Gordon Brown’s advice are about to get stiffed on a biblical scale.

    Cars are a fact of life. Unless you work in London, Birmingham or Manchester public transport is useless. My 46 mile commute would be 2 trains and a 5 mile taxi ride each way at a cost of £23 against £5 in the car. Impractical on a good day. So since the vast majority of us have to drive to work it makes no financial sense to impede the motorist at every opportunity. All that achieves is bad feeling which will do Mr Camerson no good at all come 2020. I only voted for him this time because he was the “Least Worst” option and even that was an effort, I almost didn’t bother voting. All the others are far worse IMO when it comes to motoring which was my main motivation to vote.

  15. Dave

    If you do the crime you pay the fine!! no matter how nit picking the crime may be and how sneaky the enforcement tactics.
    If you gat a fine for a breach and you believe it was really insignificant, you have a choice pay up or fight. most local authority fines have a sting in the tail in that you get it half price if you pay within 14 days, If you fight it the discount is withdrawn.
    I got a fine for a minor offence so paid up then started asking freedom of information questions related to the offence and must have cost the council £500 in time responding to me requests so I did not win but they lost big style!!! :-)
    If everybody did that they would be too busy answering questions to post out the tickets in the first place!

  16. George

    I like the idea of all sticking to Highway code and see what they come up with nxt.
    Like banks, which keep inventing new stupid products to make their managers pension scheme paid.
    Drive legal!

  17. jonathan selcoe

    i watched a lot of the polictical coverage for the election,and not one question to any politician was brought up about spped and motoring in general
    come on surel we can do better
    than that!!!!!!!!

  18. Martin Lewis

    A bit late to do anything now. This should have been raised as an issue before the election. Now they have been elected why change anything? If enough people shouted before the election then there was the (remote) possibility that a different view would be taken but not now.

  19. Tad

    I think we motorists are treated as cash cows and generally badly treated. But regardless what the question aked in a survey, most people will say the worst in order to demand more or better. so there’s nothing new shown here.

  20. Dave 22

    Some of the local cameras here are painted to blend in to the background , we have brick coloured ones and grey cameras . Difficult to spot them camera detector in use all the time .

  21. Peter Orpin

    What happened to the price restraint pledge of yore for the oil companies promised by government? The price of Brent crude was around $50, it has now risen to 56$. Pump prices have increased with amazing speed. Not by just the rise of the barrel price but by £18 a barrel to you and I. Their refining and distribution costs are fixed so they know their margin The fact the government benefit by increased revenue from the fuel tax as well as V.A.T.So therefore it is very beneficial for them not to constrain fuel cost rises.

  22. Paul

    I live near Bristol where things seem to have got worse for the motorist (including parking enforcement).
    Most of the centre is now limited to 20mph.
    some bicycle riders, with no plates or comeback, can overtake cars on downhill slopes and freely exceed 20mph.

    I think things have got worse since Police Commissioners have had a big influence on things. By the government devolving responsibility things have become more fragmented.

    We might have a better chance with the Government if there was a national roads policing policy rather than it being left to individual chief constables and police commissioners to decide policy in an uncoordinated way in separate areas. It looks like the government have let anti-motorist interest groups take over.
    There seems to be no national policy or impact assessment on this issue.

  23. Mal T

    SADLY….I agree with Peter Martin….There is NOTHING we can do….At a Bar-B-Que last year…One guy came up with the “idea” if we introduced 8 cars at EACH junction on the M25 and filled the width of the carriageway with vehicles doing 65 MPH…But any lower speed limits are ALSO adhered to…As soon as they put lane closed on the overhead gantry (and they would)…..Ring your office and you would”Ping” all the members with your product on the M25 to GRADUALLY come to a halt.
    As soon as the police start to show up, we ALL come off at the next junction…..We ALL contribute to ANY member drivers who get “pulled”, with your legal team representing them in court….Just imagine the MEDIA cover on bringing London to a grinding halt !

  24. Jim

    Why can’t we all just drive and park carefully? Don’t get caught speeding etc. Then there will be no more cash from us!!! After a couple of months it will start to have an effect…

  25. Peter

    Hi Adam
    I’m writing to you as I feel a big concern
    For my child’s school children are put in danger ,with regard to speeding motorist being directed into school grounds.
    I was a ADI for more than ten years.
    As I currently do the school run I frequently have to drive into a school car park and wait for my
    I recently witness the police using
    The “speed gun” and catching
    Drivers speeding passed the school then guiding the
    Motorist into the school entrance and grounds
    To take details and issue the speedingTicket etc. Then one afternoon saw the police try to stop
    Somebody who decided to not stop
    When the police tried to direct the
    Driver into the school grounds,
    Where the children were in the school was all leaving the building
    to go home .
    If that motorist had decided to
    Actually turn into the school, in which the officer had told them to do, at the speed he escaped from the scene refusing to stop, it would have been possibly fatal.
    For any child in or leaving the grounds.
    I do not condone speeding at all.
    But I believe this is potentially is putting the school children in danger. So is there anything that
    Could be done to stop the police
    Using the school entrance and grounds as a police lay-by.

    Thus to keep the children safer.
    From speeding motorist.
    I do feel this is totally defeating
    The objective.

    PS the war has obviously not ended on
    Motorist. This is a prime example.

  26. Jeremy

    I wholeheartedly agree that drivers should elect to go to court and defend ourselves. Clogging up the courts will make the authorities think. In my experience it is a scarey process but worth the effort even if you loose as in my case. Alternatively we could form a one issue political party and fight elections…it seems to have worked for SNP!!!!

  27. Bernie

    Bristol is a anti car city now,virtulally the whole city is 20mph.polution is up because of this.gatsos are back on again,even though accidents numbers went down when they were off.all this is because we have a mayor who is cycle mad,he twinned hilly Bristol with flat Amsterdam.we all had a laugh the other day,he got caught speeding in a council car.

  28. Maurice Hobin

    Definitely has got worse.The police near where I live (Sevenoaks) can regularly be seen in their little van with their speed camera operating. Perhaps if motorists started to inundate the government websites with adverse comments and maybe send some good old fashioned letters to their MP and see how they enjoy receiving dozens of adverse emails and letters. Might just jam up their admin. Maybe all Driver Protect members should sign a petition which has been suitably worded by an experienced traffic lawyer and send copies to the PM and the Home Secretary. If the PM is serious about wanting to help and understand the ‘ordinary’ people in the street maybe he should find out what hacks them off, especially motorists who provide masses of revenue to the exchequer.

  29. Red

    Until we all unite we don’t stand s chance. Maybe if all motorist didn’t drive for a couple of days what will happen?

  30. Mike Smith

    Definitely got worse and getting worse at a faster and faster rate – witness the growth of pointless gantry cameras on the motorways. I think there dhould be a Freedom Of Information order regularly requested to monitor how many accidents have actually been avoided (if any) by the cameras. When the evidence is publicised I think it will be obvious that speed cameras do not lower accidents at all; but they do take money from citizens with menaces – if you don;t pay, bailiffs will come around and take your property. I think most speed cameras are a) ineffective b) their enforcement is illegitimate.
    Complying with the speed limits is not a solution; it’s just giving in to strong-arm tactics. Just giving in to an unfair law is similar to paying protection money to the local mafia – the fact that you are forced to pay the money does not make it right. People who think we should all just “obey the speed limits” are missing the point entirely. Speed cameras are enforced under “statute law” not criminal law where someone actually suffers. Statute law is just made up in secret rooms by unelected people and then made “law” without recourse. The growth of speed cameras is out of control because most decent citizen drivers don’t realise that it’s morally wrong to force people to pay money without their consent.

  31. Martyn

    Speed limits are being reduced which, in itself is counter-productive with much data now showing that 20mph limits are causing more accidents as they lull people into a false sense of security.
    The whole premise on which speed limits are enforced is seriously flawed as excessive speed is implicated in only some 5% accidents where serious injury or death result. And yet, this massive effort t is spent on catching speeding motorists. It has little or nothing to do with road safety and everything to do with revenue raising.
    It needs all motorists who receive a Noitce of Intended Prosecution to refuse to cooperate. The courts could not process the weight of prosecutions and the whole procedure would collapse – and good riddance

  32. ian

    We are all just cash cows now and they will milk us dry unless we rebel against it. and as for no road fund disk there again 1000000 have again been ripped off.

  33. dicky trump

    do not admit guilt to any motoring offence let the police do what they are paid to do i e stop and prevent crime and the cameras can sort us motorists out cant wait to cross examine a speed camera

  34. Gerry Foran

    I have to agree with J Hemsley, Send the result to all motoring organisations and get them to conduct a national poll.I am sick and tired of being ripped off by this Government

  35. archie clare

    Poor Peter Martin, you must have got roughed up a lot when you were a kid,IF you don`t fight back you will get stepped on and beaten, THERE ARE 32 MILLION MOTORISTS we NEED to get a campaign going to involve the majority in saying ENOUGH IS ENOUGH we are fed up with being EASY TARGETS by a government that`s happy, delighted even to make easy money from what has traditionally been easy targets.I am happy to get involved in such a campaign and would be willing to print flyers, leaflets or whatever and if others that have access to laser printers would do the same we could cheaply get the publics attention. email supplied just let me at `em` brothers of the road.give them some stick!

  36. Aitken

    Traffic regulations can ONLY be for road safety purposes.
    Start a petition on the Government website demanding that any and all traffic regulations and their enforcement must be demonstrated to be effective in adding to road safety. This would mean that speeding would not be a crime in its own right, it must be shown beyond reasonable doubt that it was dangerous. Any other appliction of the law can only be for revenue purposes.
    It should also be made a criminal offence for anyone to use or to cause to be useed a law for anything other than its intended purpose which would not include direct or indirect revenue gathering. (Speed awareness courses are an example of indirect revenue gathering)
    This would extend further than motoring laws of course and so it should but should certainly stop the prosecution of someone driving perfectly safely albeit above the speed limit while retaining the speeding charge to help remove the lunatics from the road.

  37. Aitken

    Traffic regulations can ONLY be for road safety purposes.
    Start a petition on the Government website demanding that any and all traffic regulations and their enforcement must be demonstrated to be effective in adding to road safety. This would mean that speeding would not be a crime in its own right, it must be shown beyond reasonable doubt that it was dangerous. Any other application of the law can only be for revenue purposes.
    It should also be made a criminal offence for anyone to use or to cause to be used a law for anything other than its intended purpose which would not include direct or indirect revenue gathering. Speed awareness courses are an example of indirect revenue gathering.
    This would extend further than motoring laws of course and so it should but should certainly stop the prosecution of someone driving perfectly safely albeit above the speed limit while retaining the speeding charge to help remove the lunatics from the road.

  38. Richard BLACKMAN

    Things have got worse. More managed motorway meaning no more live police patrols just plastic plod and gantries with multiple speed cameras.
    Check the number of drivers on the phone and texting on the M1.
    I tried to get my counsellor Brian to put a SID on Watford Rd near Chiswell Green and he ignored me. What the f chance we got? Revenue is King

  39. Dave Lucas

    defendants are lawfully entitled to see evidence against them within the 28 days given to pay up. However speed camera partnerships are not set up to be able to deliver the required evidence within this time. They are therefore knowingly violating the human rights act. This needs to be publicised as much as possible, and this corrupt industry taken down.

  40. Jim

    I see lots of vehicles speeding in unsuitable areas where speed limits could be further reduced. More solar powered motion activated warning signs would be good with some cameras further on to catch the pig ignorant. I think most people do not speed intentionally.

  41. chris

    think the new cameras on gantries are actually causing heavy breaking and loads of near misses from people looking at the changing speed limits

  42. ossie Forbes

    These camera cars and traffic wardens.they have nothing to do but snipe drivers.easy money for them.we should all protest against the tickets and fines.give them tonnes of paper work to sort out.that will make them earn their living.

  43. Francis Beardsell

    Now, I’m certainly no expert (not even an amateur), although correct me if I’m wrong, all these “safety cameras” are in place because there’s been more than a certain number of accidents over a certain period (I think, 3 serious accidents in 5 years – things may have changed/my thoughts could be entirely wrong). If this IS the case though, force the safety partnerships to prove that this is the case by publishing the statistics. After all, if they can publish the calibration certificates, then why not these accident figures?

  44. Lorna

    I personally think that members of btst need to look at 38 degrees and see if they can help the common good for the motorist !
    It is worrying but they are so good and are making a huge difference to blocking government so called reforms and policies perhaps joining with another organisation for the greater good of the motorist and other issues would be more effective?

  45. chris taylor

    speed rules are there for a faire and reasonabel reason we have speedomiters however, parking issues and the way councils have monopily on this and what it appease to be alowing and we may as well throe the law and rules away. it appears evidence is not needed regardless of any mittigateings and no adjudication and invent a liability debt and send in the debt collectors regard less

  46. John Langford

    You have not seen anything yet, the deeper we get into Europe the worse it will get. They want to divide and conquer us. All this giving power to cities like Manchester will cost the motorist dear because these council will need more and more money to run at a money wasting loss, the easy target is fine the motorist.

  47. Pete

    Lets all get together and remove our number plates! Civil disobedience can work wonders but it needs an umbrella organisation to supervise it. Sadly the RAC and the AA no longer stick up for the motorist any more. Wasn’t the AA was set up originally to combat irrational speed limits!
    I was lucky enough to drive for several years in the heady days when there was only one 30mph urban speed limit, and felt much safer than I do now as drivers drove according to the road conditions not squinting at their speedos all the time, trying get as close to some arbitrary speed limit as they can, instead of looking at the road ahead.
    German autobahns are some of the safest roads in the world which gives the lie to the “Speed Kills” mantra, inappropriate speed is dangerous.
    Here we are criminals if we exceed 70mph, in Spain and France 75 mph ( soon to be 8o on some Spanish roads) in Sweden 50.
    Totally illogical!

  48. stuart ward

    To the people saying fight.
    My brother was a traffic sergeant some years ago, the cameras in the west mids had a 15mph over speed limit trigger which was fair enough.
    When Labour came to power the home office was directed to tell Local Authorities to reduce the trigger threshold to 5mph.
    My brother conducted some research on the effect of that. He reckoned that the number of offences would rise to such a level as to potentially make the system unworkable because….
    1. the payments were done through a 3rd party organisation which was sized with the expected number of offences. They would be unable to cope with the number of offences and the contract would have to be renegotiated.
    2. A further consideration would be the number of offences that would overflow in to the courts. He estimated that 98% of offences processed at magistrates would be speeding offences meaning all other criminal/ motoring minor offences would be dropped or back logged to an unmanageable extent as the courts would be saturated.
    Whether this would still true today and in all areas is unknown but it adds some knowledge to the current debate.

  49. Dave

    In britian we are all submisive. Why can,t we follow the French and go on a national strike one day a week till the cameras are removed as they are a danger to motorists as you cannot drive safe when all you think about is what speed am I doing and not looking at the road ahead. Keeping to the limit causes extreme road rage with some drivers.

  50. JOHN

    More legal defense expertise needed.1] effect of bright blinding light in an offense can be dealt with by pleading unforeseen mechanical failure viz. QUANTUM MECHANICAL light interference on windscreen. GRAB THAT NOW!!

  51. Dave

    The police are supposed to have justification to install speed cameras, part of the justification has to be a record of KSI accidents at the location. It is perhaps time we all started to challenge these cameras and request the info under the freedom of information act!

  52. Colin

    I don’t believe the police target the rich it’s more likely the other way round why Harris someone who can afford to give you hassle don’t you think maybe someone with clout may live on the more expensive estate and are annoyed at the ordinary motorist I actually think that this chap might be a victim of his own fortune lol, I’d be looking who lives on the estate like a councillor, someone working for the courts or even retired police, it would make more sense to me.

  53. Andy

    It’s not just the police targeting motorists, the Highways Agency is up to dirty tricks as well. On the M1 from J8 to J13 they are posting Congestion signs and 60 MPH limits when the traffic situation does not justify it. What a great way to get drivers to drive at a safe speed for the conditions but in so doing break the speed limit and incur a fine!! Underhand and unfair!!

  54. apb

    It could also be that put simply, there are less car owners in an less affluent area and therefore less drivers breaking the law?

  55. Stan

    I would have thought that the speed bumps were supplied to prevent excessive speed, and have been successful, then the local council run out of money to put bumps in the the ‘New Warndon Villages’, so they got the “moneymaking scum” to attend…

    Speed cameras have made me a safer driver. I look MUCH further up the road than I used to. I don’t think that was the intention of their deployment though…

  56. Paul Foulkes

    ref police targets:-

    Same deal here more affluent get cameras, less well off get speed humps.


  57. JOHN

    Buy the reflective paint for the number plates and smile.Request the council to setup 20mph speed limits on all estate roads and laugh, always select 3/4th gear and cry laughing

  58. mohammed manir

    This is an on going money making schemes the police, the local council and the goverment are using to milk the people.
    We have a half a mile long dual carriage way with 40 miles speed limit every sunday afternoon there is police vans/cars with speed traps for 1 to 2 hours and book average of about 20-30 drives and then call it a day.
    If that is not a money making scam I don’t know what is.


  59. Douglas Walker

    Not the same as Police going for the rich but proof if any were needed that it is all about money because in Buckingham coming from the South one passes a large School with probably more than a thousand pupils and where is the nearest so called safety camera ? Half way down a hill several hundred yards past the school !!

  60. Aitken

    Police/camera partnerships targeting revenue is not exactly news.
    When the Government removed the fine revenue from the local camera partnerships/police the revenue gathering changed to “speed awareness courses”. To assist that the criterion for being offered the option of one of these “courses”, and so avoid points on your licence, was significantly widened. This then had 2 effects. 1. more “offers” of these courses and 2. that police forces and “camera” partnerships now had a financial incentive to offer the courses that are run under the auspices of ACPO Ltd., yes Ltd – ACPO is a limited company and has no official standing whatsoever.
    ACPO Ltd not for profit? Don’t be so sure, a transparent inspection of their financial arrangements might reveal some interesting information.
    Despite the corruption of the moving traffic regulations in pursuit of revenue, I would NOT like to see speed regulations disappear completely. They are a handy way of removing dangerous drivers from our roads but abuse of them for other than clear road safety purposes should be severely punished and the punishment aimed at individuals not organisations. That is the only effective way to tackle corruption. Will it happen? Of course not, think turkeys and Christmas.
    I watched a TV programme about 30 years of Watchdog bringing large companies and rogue traders to account. All good stuff, mostly, but what about the biggest rip-offs? HMG in general and the rip-off of motorists in particular?
    A previous contribution has it right – we are too compliant. We need motorists, professional and private, to act collectively and rise up against injustice but attempts to do so in the past have foundered on the divide and conquer principle, we’re divided and they conquer.
    So what now? More jaw jaw or action – I tried but it’s difficult when the whole Legal System – note Not Justice System – is set against you.
    Want to do more – “Adam” has my e-mail address and I have contacts in a small community trying to bring some justice to the scene but it takes money and quite a lot of it but acting together means that the cost is shared. The more involved the cheaper for each person.

  61. JOHN

    Re: My quantum mech. light interference defense. They can reply “the windscreen was dirty which means event could be foreseen”. Your reply: just going down the road would be enough time to build a slight dirt film on the screen. Or any clean glass will have the same effect due to its structure.

  62. alexander reid

    Dont admit anything untill you see hard evidence,ie photograph of the car and who is driving,admitting to being the driver can result in a perjury case against you, Ask for the calibration records of the camera , just keep the case going by every means possible to make them respond in writing as much as you can, even if you eventually accede it will have cost them more than the fine is worth.

  63. Ian

    Can anyone help me with this issue?. A retired policeman has been given a mobile speed camera and frequently stalks our village ‘clocking’ peoples speed and reporting them if their speed is over the limit (even 32 in a 30). This man is retired, he is NOT a policeman, can he legally do this?. Several taxi drivers and delivery drivers as well as private people have been prosecuted.

  64. David

    As a retired police officer of 31 years service in the midlands and westcountry speeding has always been the main cause of accidents and death . Not saying that speed camera’s are the total answer but they do in my opinion slow down those motorist who wish to speed . Re the rich area in Worcester I am sure it is not only the rich get caught . They might own more powerful cars and more likely to get caught than those who live in old style council estates . That is all questionable as who says which set of drivers are going to speed ?

  65. Paul Jacobs

    Whilst I would like to believe that the Police are actually targeting a certain sector of the population, the example in Worcester does not seem to prove this.

    The local authority is responsible for speed limits and road humps etc, not the Police, and they are undoubtedly on the council estate because of the speed of local people in and around the council estate. The more affluent area will have law abiding citizens, who will not be joyriding and speeding in general, but who, like motorists on many other roads need reminding to remain within the limit, from time to time.

    So, whilst this story sounds good from the viewpoint of the oppressed motorist being unfairly treated, I cannot, from the details supplied even contemplate there is any truth in it.

  66. Richard Cummings

    As far as the man from New Warndon Village it is not the police he needs to be up in arms about its the Local Council as they are the ones that put in the speed humps and if it is that well of an area they have probably complained to the Council before they were installed that they would have damaged all their fancy sports cars going over them. So which is it?

  67. Aitken

    Speeding is defined as driving at a speed greater than the imposed limit. In records analysed up to about 2008 the percentage of accidents in which “speeding” was a factor, note not necessarily the cause, is 5% overall and 2% if you exclude drivers under 25. It ranks 8th or 9th out of the top 10 “causes” of crashes overall. I doubt much has changed since.
    Hardly the main cause of accidents alleged by David.
    It is true that the percentage rises dramatically if you consider only accidents involving fatality bringing its ranking to 5th out of the top 10, but that is hardly surprising.

    Before the introduction of Speed cameras in the mid 90s road fatalities (the only reasonably reliable statistic) were reducing at a year on year rate of about 7%. In the years following the introduction and proliferation of speed cameras the year on year reduction dropped to about 2.8%. I.e more people were being killed than would have been anticipated.
    It is difficult to establish speed cameras as the cause of that disastrous decline in the UK road safety performance but at time when road design, the introduction of Advanced Breaking Systems on cars, major improvements in car body design (crumple zones) and major improvements in the ability of the rescue and medical services to preserve life and improve outcomes one would have expected the performance to improve not deteriorate. It’s rather like the smoking debate. It is really only through proper statistical analysis that we arrived at the cause of so many diseases being the smoking of tobacco.

    I would be surprised if evidence from a private person, even a retired police officer, was used to convict someone of speeding.
    To be convicted of the offence of speeding, corroborating evidence from two sources are required.
    Section 82 Subsection 2 of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984.

    Where a hand-held device is used, the primary evidence is the trained eye of the Police Officer or Camera Operator, this is often called “Prior Perception”, with the device providing the secondary or corroborating evidence.
    To avoid the information from the device tainting the Operator/officer’s evidence, the officer must first, using his eyes alone, correctly conclude that a vehicle is exceeding the speed limit (Prior Perception) then, and only then, may he or she use the “camera” in the prescribed manner to obtain the secondary or corroborating speed reading.

    One might think that the “enthusiastic” operator or officer would just click away with the camera and when (s)he gets a positive reading, be that false or true, add the “Prior Perception” afterwards. But of course that would not be following the law and, if produced as evidence in a trial, would be perjury. Does that happen? You decide for yourself – I know that it does.

  68. David James

    Adam. Can you investigate the need for 40mph average speed cameras for FIVE miles on the A20 into DOVER. The road is snail crawling unnecessarily, no road works, congestion, nothing other than to make money. The authorities say it’s to slow traffic down before a build up of traffic into the port, but that only happens mostly in bad weather when ferries to France are delayed. They should make the road “smart” like the M25 if that’s the REAL reason for the cameras.

    180 offences were committed in the 1st week they were installed. A poor learner got a fine and points before she even got her licence for doing 49mph to lose the truck up her chuff. 40mph is too slow on a normally 70mph road. Defo a cash cow.

  69. Allan Grant

    There IS no war on motorists, and anyone who believes there is is delusional. I would really like for someone to spell out just what constitutes this so-called ‘war’. But I doubt anyone will, because it is non existent of course, and just a bunch of propaganda claptrap concocted by the anti-camera brigade, who of course do the dirty-work for the corporate elite – ie the motor and petroleum industries etc. I mean the last thing they would want is a relatively safe road/street environment where the vast majority of people (and parents re their kids) feel safe to cycle and walk!

    The war on the motorist – ie deterring speedfreak nutters and reducing absurdly high speed limits. You’re on a loser guys in this ‘war’!

  70. Tony

    Those of you that are of the opinion “don’t do the crime if you don’t want to do the time” need to think outside the box. Of course The moterist is a cash cow. A law in any country is only as good as the public perception. The public in general believe that the speed limits need seriously looking at. In built up areas they probably need reducing espicially at peak times but on major road systems such as motorways that need raising or become more flexible. E.g. the M3 at 3am where is the problem doing 90/100mph. In a modern world it is easy to replace fixed speed limit signs with electronic ones and change the speed to suit the time if day and conditions but they don’t want to because it would reduce their revenue. I remember when the Tories were in opposition they were spouting about raising motorway speed limits. Funny how that died when they go power!!!

  71. Chris Jennings

    Fines are now proportionate to income if you dare challenge their validity which is another reason why well off people will pay. A £60 fine could turn into thousands so the innocent plead guilty. That’s British justice!

    The fine should remain the same whether you challenge it or not. It is, of course, a money-making scam. Easier to make silly laws to raise money than raising taxes which people might oppose.

    A few years ago, I heard of a chap in Switzerland who paid around £300,000 for breaking a speed limit. At the time, the newspaper said it was a world record. Clearly the authorities here saw this as a great way to boost their pay packets.

  72. Martin from Reading

    Police targeting wealthy motorists? Absolute paranoid nonsense! …Look at a map showing speed cameras in the Thames Valley: there are quite a few in Labour areas, such as Reading, but get out to rich areas like Ascot, or ‘working-class Tory’ areas like Bracknell and there are very few! Ascot High Street has a 20mph limit, but no cameras or humps; whereas the shopping parade on Wokingham Road in Reading is also 20mph, but has speed cushions and a couple of cameras (although these are in 30 zones either side of the parade).

  73. Clif Walker

    The strange thing is that the Police only seem to target the moving motorists,not the inconsiderate ones who think they have a right to park anywhere they fancy despite what the common sense and the Highway code states.
    A parked car is legally an obstruction.
    So it is strange that they have the man power to go for moving targets but not stationary ones.
    It wouldn’t be that the fines imposed are higher?

  74. Pam Smith

    Speeding drivers are in many areas targeted for revenue we all know that and now many cameras are back in action.
    I know in certain places like small villages with no pavements and a busy main road then drivers should take care also busy streets in towns or housing estates and past schools drivers should take care.There should be pelican/traffic light crossings provided for safe crossing of busy roads. I also think children should be constantly taught road safety & that a vehicle is a lethal weapon that can kill them, why should it always be the drivers fault??
    On the whole though I think speed limits should be changed and Mostly increased.

    Modern cars cruise along very well at 90mph so on a motorway that should be fine or at least 80 or 85mph. Some could be different and show that. ‘A’ roads should be at least 40 or 50mph unless there are special hazards to be considered but then if it is a concern for pedestrians crossing the road then there should be pelican crossings in place, if there is a school along a stretch of road then there should be a restrictions in place to reduce speeds to 25/ 30mph at certain times or again pelican crossings.
    Modern cars do break a lot faster now, well if the driver is paying attention and I think that is the main problem there are too many what I call ‘zombie’ drivers who plod along mostly just watching the vehicle in front of them or the white line.
    I just find that when you have to just plod along at a slowish speed esp on a main road for miles my attention on the road drops, I look at what is around me or fiddle with the radio/cd, feel like I become a Zombie driver or just want doze off!! that is not good!!.

    Good drivers who maybe exceed the speed limit are mostly drivers that are more alert and are checking the road way ahead of the car in front of them and judging what is safe. No good driver speeding or not wants to cause an accident it is the stupid drivers that are not paying enough attention or impatient inexperienced drivers that cause accidents!

    Maybe drivers could be graded?? An extra letter on their number plate, N for nervous so no way exceed the speed limit, A for average stick to the speed limits, A+ or G above average and passed an extra test so alowed to do 5 to 10 mph above depending on location then maybe V drivers that have passed a test showing they are very good responsive drivers on what ever road they are driving along. They should be allowed to drive faster without conviction as long as it is safe to do so. The grading would also inform other drivers of who is in front or behind them and could show just courtesy to them.

    No one should be above the speeding laws but the Law’s should be just and fair to all and NOT just base them on the N or A drivers but allow more realistic speeds in normal conditions for the V drivers.
    Just imagine how the A roads and esp. motorways would be so congested and backed up if everyone just did 70mph or less!!!
    If you read this to here thanks for getting to the end and hope you agree with my thoughts and maybe worth sharing not sure how to do that but good if you can. Thanks

  75. Pamela Smith

    speed limits should be changed on motorways and many A roads. Or motorist could be graded dependant on their tested driving skills and response skills this could be shown on number plates allowing good drivers to drive faster when safe to do so.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.