Well At Least Sir Kier Is Topping One...
News0 min ago
Mobile speed cameras
24 Answers
I have just been done for speeding, I was overtaking a vehicle doing approx 20 mph on a straight piece of road, whilst overtaking safely I obviously went over the speed limit and as I did this a mobile speed camera up the road zapped me. Now after I passed the slower vehicle I slowed down to a normal speed. Are speed cameras supposed to take an average speed and are you allowed to exceed the speed limit for a short distance to overtake slower vehicles.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by scoob101. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Squarebear obviously doesn't drive but alas he has the same vote as the rest of us.
In "speed kills land", it seems that there is no allowance for common sense and if you are over, you are over. They'll have you for it unfortunately.
Bad luck mate, its for this same reason that I no longer pull away at red traffic lights to let emergency vehicles through. A colleague of mine got done for going through a red light in those circumstances.
I just hope that if I need an emergency vehicle one day, it doesn't get held up for the same reason but its a chance I'm prepared to take.
In "speed kills land", it seems that there is no allowance for common sense and if you are over, you are over. They'll have you for it unfortunately.
Bad luck mate, its for this same reason that I no longer pull away at red traffic lights to let emergency vehicles through. A colleague of mine got done for going through a red light in those circumstances.
I just hope that if I need an emergency vehicle one day, it doesn't get held up for the same reason but its a chance I'm prepared to take.
A lot of people on this site know I was involved in a road traffic accident several years ago - where a motorcyclist went through my car windscreen head first and died instantly. His body was further mangled by his motorcycling friends that couldn't stop and ran in to him.
His speedo was stopped at 117 mph - so yes, I know about speeding.
They also know I was a funeral director all my life - so yes, I know about death.
I have a law degree and practical knowledge of the law too.
I don't know how I survived long enough to get my pension. :)
His speedo was stopped at 117 mph - so yes, I know about speeding.
They also know I was a funeral director all my life - so yes, I know about death.
I have a law degree and practical knowledge of the law too.
I don't know how I survived long enough to get my pension. :)
It never ceases to amaze me that such a straightforward, factual question as this one can quickly degenerate into a slanging match!
I provided what I think is the correct answer to this. We were not asked for matters of opinion, just for facts. Nonetheless the debate quickly widened to one incorporating the application of Road Traffic law in general. From there it was all downhill as personal feelings (largely surrounding justification for breaking the motoring laws) rapidly took hold.
However, since we�ve now reached that stage, I have to say that in some of the work that I do I too, like Fay, come across instances where "common sense" (aka irresponsible) driving leads to tragic consequences (though, fortunately so far, not quite so gruesome as the situation she described). This is part of the �real world� about which compostella tells us so much.
Yes, in that world people do take risks. Unfortunately sometimes the risks they take pose potential for harm to others who are not so bold. One person exercising his right to use "common sense" can often lead to another being carted off to hospital or the mortuary.
That�s why we have motoring laws, that�s why they should be obeyed, that�s why those that do not do so get fines and points and that's why they should not moan about it when they do..
I provided what I think is the correct answer to this. We were not asked for matters of opinion, just for facts. Nonetheless the debate quickly widened to one incorporating the application of Road Traffic law in general. From there it was all downhill as personal feelings (largely surrounding justification for breaking the motoring laws) rapidly took hold.
However, since we�ve now reached that stage, I have to say that in some of the work that I do I too, like Fay, come across instances where "common sense" (aka irresponsible) driving leads to tragic consequences (though, fortunately so far, not quite so gruesome as the situation she described). This is part of the �real world� about which compostella tells us so much.
Yes, in that world people do take risks. Unfortunately sometimes the risks they take pose potential for harm to others who are not so bold. One person exercising his right to use "common sense" can often lead to another being carted off to hospital or the mortuary.
That�s why we have motoring laws, that�s why they should be obeyed, that�s why those that do not do so get fines and points and that's why they should not moan about it when they do..
Whilst I very rarely stick to the speed limit, I cannot argue with Squarebears answere here.
At the end of the day, when I've had points for speeding (only got three at the moment!) it's been my fault.
As squarebear has pointed out, if you got busted for speeding whilst overtaking, you were clearly exceeding the speed limit.
New Judge, can't agree more - prime example being the poor poster who forgot to let their insurer know that they changed thier number plate!
If the other vehicle is doing 20mph, then 30 should be ample to pass them, and there is no need to be doing more than this - if you are, then you have to assume that the extra speed is required because the overtaking is dangerous and you need to complete it quickly.
Compostella, whilst I can see where you're coming from (at least I think so), I don't agree with all the speed cameras dotted about, especially when they are clearly there for the money, but speed does kill when the driver is driving outside their level of experience.
Having deal with plenty of fatality claims, I can honestly say that they have all been due to excess speed in the wrong conditions, or due to the car being in the hands of an inexperienced driver.
At the end of the day, when I've had points for speeding (only got three at the moment!) it's been my fault.
As squarebear has pointed out, if you got busted for speeding whilst overtaking, you were clearly exceeding the speed limit.
New Judge, can't agree more - prime example being the poor poster who forgot to let their insurer know that they changed thier number plate!
If the other vehicle is doing 20mph, then 30 should be ample to pass them, and there is no need to be doing more than this - if you are, then you have to assume that the extra speed is required because the overtaking is dangerous and you need to complete it quickly.
Compostella, whilst I can see where you're coming from (at least I think so), I don't agree with all the speed cameras dotted about, especially when they are clearly there for the money, but speed does kill when the driver is driving outside their level of experience.
Having deal with plenty of fatality claims, I can honestly say that they have all been due to excess speed in the wrong conditions, or due to the car being in the hands of an inexperienced driver.
Quite so.
And no doubt every last one of the drivers who caused the incidents (they're not accidents) maintained that they were driving well within their capabilities, well within their experience and at a speed well suited to the prevailing conditions(despite it being above that set down by Parliament as the legal limit) .
And I also bet It was all the fault of the poor sod who was injured or killed (and who also happened to be driving within the speed limit, or lower if conditions were less than perfect).
And no doubt every last one of the drivers who caused the incidents (they're not accidents) maintained that they were driving well within their capabilities, well within their experience and at a speed well suited to the prevailing conditions(despite it being above that set down by Parliament as the legal limit) .
And I also bet It was all the fault of the poor sod who was injured or killed (and who also happened to be driving within the speed limit, or lower if conditions were less than perfect).
Thanks to you all, everyone is entitled to their opinion ( apart from you David the W word was not called for ). I was under the opinion that the quicker you overtake a slower vehicle the better. May I also point out that I overtook on a long straight road in a rural area, I also class myself as an experienced, safe and very competent driver who has been driving for 24 years and does a minimum of 35 000 miles a year. If all you do gooders who think that speed cameras are there for anything other than revenue you are kidding yourselves. Where I was flashed is approx 2 miles from where I have lived all my life and my friends, neighbours or myself can not recall an accident let alone an injury or fatality on this stretch of road ever. So much for putting these so called safety cameras in accident blackspots
To be fair Scoob, I live in a rural area too, and the people (generally poxy tourists and mountain bikers) all like to do well below the speed limit on the roads (national speed limit) to take in the views. That's wonderful when I want to get somewhere.
In the few places that you're able to overtake safely, I boot it well over the limit to get past, and am obliged to stick to the limit there as the roads are simply not safe to go faster, so I agree totally with you there. Suppose it was the way your original question was worded - I have that problem!
The camera issue is the same by me - the road is on the edge of a fairly deep valley - on almost every corner, the barriers are a different colour where people have gone through (including a transit van I passed the other night funnily enough!), yet there are no cameras there.
However, there is a camera on the M4 where it is 50mph, and in all my time of travelling that route daily, there had been no accidents (or congestion) until it was installed.
I would point out that I do agree that the cameras should be posted outside every school - although would people concentrate more on their speed than the pedestrians.....
In the few places that you're able to overtake safely, I boot it well over the limit to get past, and am obliged to stick to the limit there as the roads are simply not safe to go faster, so I agree totally with you there. Suppose it was the way your original question was worded - I have that problem!
The camera issue is the same by me - the road is on the edge of a fairly deep valley - on almost every corner, the barriers are a different colour where people have gone through (including a transit van I passed the other night funnily enough!), yet there are no cameras there.
However, there is a camera on the M4 where it is 50mph, and in all my time of travelling that route daily, there had been no accidents (or congestion) until it was installed.
I would point out that I do agree that the cameras should be posted outside every school - although would people concentrate more on their speed than the pedestrians.....
But, scoob, how can you consider yourself an �experienced, safe and very competent driver� when you believe that exceeding the speed limit is acceptable? If you exceeded the speed limit during a driving test (which is, after all, a test of competence to drive) you would certainly be failed. This would especially be so in the circumstances you described.
Yes, you should complete an overtaking manoeuvre as quickly as possible (Highway Code para 163 refers). But it does not suggest that you should exceed the speed limit to do so. Overtaking is one of the most hazardous manoeuvres a driver makes and to exceed the speed limit whilst doing so simply compounds the offence. If an accident occurred (or indeed if he was simply being followed by the police at the time) the driver would almost certainly be charged with careless driving.
Speed limits are applicable in all locations, not just within the vicinity of cameras. The argument about them only being there to generate revenue is not valid. They are there to try to encourage drivers to drive within the speed limits and a simple way to avoid contributing to the revenue they collect is to do just that.
Yes, you should complete an overtaking manoeuvre as quickly as possible (Highway Code para 163 refers). But it does not suggest that you should exceed the speed limit to do so. Overtaking is one of the most hazardous manoeuvres a driver makes and to exceed the speed limit whilst doing so simply compounds the offence. If an accident occurred (or indeed if he was simply being followed by the police at the time) the driver would almost certainly be charged with careless driving.
Speed limits are applicable in all locations, not just within the vicinity of cameras. The argument about them only being there to generate revenue is not valid. They are there to try to encourage drivers to drive within the speed limits and a simple way to avoid contributing to the revenue they collect is to do just that.
Dave
Thanks for the comment - I wonder if Compostella would feel the same..........blah blah blah
I was begining to think that nobody would say it, well done you and your original posts.
Fay, blimey, you're a barrel of laughs.
New Judge, I agree with you entirely, people ask questions and then someone has to chip in with a patronising opinion that wasn't asked for. Squarebears post was a thinly veiled dig at Scoob implying that these situations are black and white.
Thanks for the comment - I wonder if Compostella would feel the same..........blah blah blah
I was begining to think that nobody would say it, well done you and your original posts.
Fay, blimey, you're a barrel of laughs.
New Judge, I agree with you entirely, people ask questions and then someone has to chip in with a patronising opinion that wasn't asked for. Squarebears post was a thinly veiled dig at Scoob implying that these situations are black and white.
panic button, are u able to read ???? where have I tried to blame someone else, if u put your specs on and read the original question u will see I was asking a simple question to what I thought was educated people but obviously I will not class u in that category. By the way is this the answer bank or the have a go bank, as the majority of peolpe who have posted an answer have had nothing to say but have a go......... very impressed with this site.....
well what do you expect all you are looking for is for other folk to jusitify what you do!!! you know what you did was wrong!! who the **** are you to take the moral highground with me?!!! your like every body else when you do wrong, always looking for aomeone else to blame or an excuse. compostella what i said was not meant as a joke, whats wrong does the truth hurt??
David, you have just confirmed that you are an arguementative ********, my original question was only asking what the law was on this matter and if it was ok to exceed the speed limit for a short period to overtake slow vehicles. I received my answer off new judge at the first reply I received, I am not trying to blame any one else, I did exceed the speed limit or do you also have trouble reading, look at the original question, read slowly and understand what it is saying, do I not say I exceeded the speed limit for a short period??????? And where in any comment I have made am I blaming anyone else so stop being a tool and if you dont have anything informative to say DONT SAY ANYTHING........
