Unfair Notice Of Intended Prosecution

[Ellipsis]

Asking for a friend, who was driving up the motorway at 1:48 AM in the early hours of Saturday morning, at 70mph. As you might imagine, the motorway was empty and she was in the inside lane.  A Gatso speed camera appeared showing 40 mph across all four lanes, and an electronic picture showing queues ahead.  Seeing far ahead, she saw no queue as yet.  She took off her accelerator and did not slam her brakes, as there were cars behind her, also on the inside lane.  

A flash appeared and she thought "What the ...???" She checked her speedo and it was just over 50mph (because she had taken off the accelerator).  Literally half a mile later, another electronic sign showed end of restriction (the "0" symbol).  She had not seen any cars ahead in that time - there was no queue. 

(As I said, "Seeing far ahead, she saw no queue as yet."  In fact there was nobody ahead at all, because if there had been, my friend would have seen their flash, and braked herself"! As no doubt the drivers behind did, thanks to her misfortune.)

Today she received a "Notice of Intended Prosecution" showing that she was caught doing 52mph in a 40mph zone at 1:48 AM on Saturday.  This seems ridiculous. What should she do?

[naomi24]

No, NJ, I didn't mean that.  I meant, as I said, the bit headed 'Mitigating Circumstances.  That should iron it out.  😀

 

TTT, you can read that too.

[New Judge]

“Let me put it like this…..”

You can put It any way you wish. But the fact is there was a reduced speed limit, lawfully applied and more than adequately conveyed. That’s the starting point for any defence or mitigation your friend may attempt to argue.

“No, NJ, I didn't mean that.  I meant, as I said, the bit headed 'Mitigating Circumstances.”

That is the bit headed “mitigating circumstances”, naomi. I just didn’t bother including the list. The police never have and never will get involved in mitigation or a defence. The only thing they will sometimes do  is consider combining two allegations where it seems, although a driver was caught speeding by a camera twice, it might be considered a single continuous offence. The difference between our points of view is your friend’s phrase “"...we don't care what excuses you send us - you're fined “. The police certainly will not consider excuses, but they have no power to impose fines. If a driver believes he has a reasonable excuse he can always ask a court to consider it.

[Old_Geezer]

Four pages on this ?!

Life is unfair sometimes; tell me about it (actually don't, four pages are plenty).

[douglas9401]

It's what happens when experts gather though.

[Hymie]

I regularly see the first variable speed gantry sign limiting the 70mph motorway to 40mph – there are a number, at locations when blocked by a high-sided vehicle, are only visible at well less than 100m – resulting in having to brake hard for no other reason than a viable speed limit (there being no queue or other hazard that would necessitate the 40mph).

 

The authorities knowing this cannot be interested in road safety, only making money from the scheme.

[New Judge]

"I regularly see the first variable speed gantry sign limiting the 70mph motorway to 40mph – there are a number, at locations when blocked by a high-sided vehicle, are only visible at well less than 100m –"

Then you are either travelling too closely to the vehicle in front or otherwise not ensuring you are travelling so that you can see the gantries more readily. The gantries are always liable to give you instructions to change your speed or lane. If you cannot see them from an appropriate distance you are not driving as a competenet and careful driver should.

Anyway, this incident occurred at 1:30 in the morning on a motorway with viruttally no traffic. Quotes:

"As you might imagine, the motorway was empty and she was in the inside lane." 

"Yes, "empty " as I [in]. very few cars around, and none ahead ..."

 

[Hymie]

NJ said//Then you are either travelling too closely to the vehicle in front or otherwise not ensuring you are travelling so that you can see the gantries more readily//

 

No, at one of the locations where this occurs the motorway bends to the left on an incline before the gantry.  Travelling with a large tall lorry slightly ahead of me (in a lane to my left) the gantry signs are obscured for a considerable distance travelled.

 

I drive less than 10k miles a year, but I would estimate that on 2 or 3 times a year I brake hard on a motorway where the gantry sign reduces the 70 limit to 40.  When doing this I have had vehicles behind me change lanes to avoid rear-ending me.

[jourdain2]

Where the heck has common sense gone in this country!

[New Judge]

"No, at one of the locations where this occurs the motorway bends to the left on an incline before the gantry. Travelling with a large tall lorry slightly ahead of me (in a lane to my left) the gantry signs are obscured for a considerable distance travelled."

What, the entire gantry across all the lanes is obscured? The signs on the offside (right) of the gantry would be visible surely. And if you know it's there why don't you make sure you are in a position to see it anyway? Where is this location? I'll take a look on GSV.

"...but I would estimate that on 2 or 3 times a year I brake hard on a motorway where the gantry sign reduces the 70 limit to 40." 

As I said earlier, you can brake from 70mph to a complete stand in under 100m. Shedding 30mph from that speed could be done in 100m without harsh braking and if you really cannot see a gantry display 100m ahead you are not driving safely."

"When doing this I have had vehicles behind me change lanes to avoid rear-ending me."

Then they, too, were not driving carefully. They were obviously too close. Not your fault, I know, but not the fault of the motorway design either.

[Hymie]

At 70mph a vehicle is travelling at around 35 yards per second; if you see a 40mph gantry sign ahead at a distance of 200 yards and lift your foot off the accelerator hoping to slow to 40mph - if you were to succeed (assuming linear deceleration) you will reach the gantry in 7.5 seconds having decelerated at a rate of ~4mph/s/s.

 

If your vehicle decelerates at 4mph/s/s without applying the brakes, there is something wrong with your vehicle.

[Hymie]

If you only see the 40mph sign at 100 yards the above numbers half/double – with it taking ~3.7 seconds to reach the gantry and braking hard decelerating at ~8mph/s/s.

[New Judge]

I didn't say in my earlier post that you could ease down from 70 o 40 in 100m, or even 200m. I suggested it could be done from the distance a gantry is usually visible - about 300m or more.

But none of his really matters. On a VSL motorway gantries are provided every 500 to 800 metres. Drivers must be aware of this and that any one of them might provide a new limit. If a driver is potentially unsighted by vehicles or geography he should take measures to correct that and that might involve slowing down. You cannot just plough on at 70mph in those circumstances and if you defended a speeding charge on that basis (which is about where we came into his thread) your argument would be soundly rejected. 

[Hymie]

I’m not advocating that you exceed the gantry signed speed limit, just pointing out that when the sign reduces the speed from 70mph to 40mph, you will almost certainly need to apply braking – other road users unaware of the upcoming speed restriction will not know why you are braking (to them, for no apparent reason) – which could lead to a hazardous situation.

[Hymie]

If we assume at 70mph, when you take your foot of the accelerator the vehicle decelerates at a rate of 2mph/s/s (which I would say is not an unreasonable value), then you will have travelled over 400 yards before the vehicle speed is reduced to 40mph.

 

If travelling downhill, this distance could increase dramatically – that is why braking is almost certainly required when encountering a variable speed limit reduction from 70 to 40.

[Old_Geezer]

Encountering a temporary speed limit is one thing (although often there is no visible reason for it and one concludes someone is bored at the control centre and deciding to boost their mood) but the least the Bs could do is ensure the return to normal is signposted rather than let the law-abiding have to risk it when others regularly start shooting past.

[Hymie]

I regularly see ‘smart’ motorway variable speed limits on overhead gantries, with the accompanying message ‘reported obstruction ahead’ – given that those monitoring the smart motorway are unable to determine whether there is an obstruction or not – they are clearly not ‘smart’ in any sense of the word.

[Peter Pedant]

Four pages on this ?!

yeah I was thinking " what on earth have the usual suspects found to discuss?"

[Ellipsis]

Essentially "we" are discussing what a police state we are living in ...

A motorway speed limit showing 40 mph (from 70mph), another speed limit showing 70mph only 0.6 miles later, with nothing happening between the two, at 2AM on Saturday morning, and no means to appeal or even mitigate; i.e. treated as if it was 3:30PM on a busy weekday on a regular 40mph dual carriageway in a city with pelican crossings near a school.

[New Judge]

"I regularly see ‘smart’ motorway variable speed limits on overhead gantries, with the accompanying message ‘reported obstruction ahead’ – given that those monitoring the smart motorway are unable to determine whether there is an obstruction or not – they are clearly not ‘smart’ in any sense of the word."

Most "smart" motorways (including all of those with "All Lanes Running" - i.e. no hard shoulder) are equipped with "Stopped Vehicle Detection". This is a radar equipped system which, as the name suggests, detects stationary vehicles on the motorway. When a stationary vehicle is detected it alerts the motorway conttrol room of the location, but does not provide a visual feed of the incident. It is up to the controller to establish what has happened and take the appropriate action but in the meantime it is likely that a reduced limit will be imposed together with the message you describe.  

It is clearly impractical, if not impossible to visually monitor every yard of every motorway 24/7. The term "smart" in this context does not infer some sort of intelligence. A smart motorway is no more intelligent than a smart phone or a smart TV. Its intelligence comes from the people using it and monitoring its use. Unfortunately, some users of motorways are somewhat lacking in intelligence of their own and, when confrontted wih the display you describe, will plough on regardless because they can't, themselves, actually see any reason not to.

[ToraToraTora]

"Essentially "we" are discussing what a police state we are living in" - ironically an actual plod would never nick you in this situation.