AIUI that used to be true but now there are the usual course/fixed penalties/summons available in properly designated and signed 20 mph zones. See eg
I used "you" to refer to the person whose post I was replying to. I am sorry that was not evident.
I thought I had left all the material you posted, omitting only material from earlier posts and your signature. I am sorry that plus the fact it was a direct response to your post was not enough.
For the price of a couple of high visibility jackets, a clip board and a radar gun, the Police can avoid having to deal with a whole village worth of complaints that they are not doing anything about speeding motorists.
So what next? Give the villagers riot shields and extendable truncheons?
And some are just not feasible to word properly so it make sense to breach them when its safe to do so and you can't get caught.
On 18/01/2015 16:40, Johny B Good wrote: ...
Of course you can be pulled over by the Police for doing only 1mph above the posted limit. However, unless they are running a zero tolerance campaign on speeding, which sometimes happens, you will not normally be prosecuted for speeding as a result, if your only offence was speeding.
That is only a guideline, issued by the ACPO, for the point at which, if speeding is the only offence, prosecution would not normally be appropriate. It is not a guarantee that you won't be stopped or prosecuted.
I don't know where you get that idea from. There is a general relaxation allowing an advisory 20mph limit to be associated with a flashing school crossing signs without the need for a traffic order. However, any 20mph speed limit or 20mph zone imposed by a traffic order is a statutory limit and is fully enforceable under the Road Traffic Regulation Act
1984. There are also several vehicles which are limited by their type to 20mph or even 18mph under that Act.
That tickled me
So you know why that speed limit is set in that place for everywhere?
They, do, however circulate the registration number to all their patrols, so those drivers are on a watch list.
I a 30mph zone we log those doing over 35. It's up to the police do do waht they want with the log.
we had to fund our own Hi-Vis jackets. All the police gave us were a few waistcoats.
Sorry. I was told that repeaters or calming measures were now no longer compulsory but I think I was misled or mistaken as I can't find authority for it. I'm certainly not going to die in a ditch over a mix of legislation and DfT directions which seem designed to maximise opacity.
But I'd like to offer a point about signs painted in the road which might explain what I was told and which might be relevant to you i.d.c.
I agree that traffic calming can be used instead of repeaters - and indeed that traffic calming was intended to be at the heart of 20 mph zones when they started . But DfT issued Special Directions on 17/10/11 which *seem* to make things more complicated. Eg according to Direction 18(1) "allows traffic authorities to use these roundels [ie in the road] - when varied to "20" - on the carriageway as an alternative to upright repeater signs in 20 mph zones. For 20 limits, the marking may also be placed as an alternative to upright repeater signs; however, it should be noted that TSRGD requires a minimum of one upright repeater to diagram 670 to be placed in 20 mph limits - unless the restriction is shorter than 200 metres in length."
In short, I think signs painted in the road may count - in some circs at least. And the person whol told me repeater signs weren't necessary may have had in mind "signs on poles" (which is what we were discussing) rather than "signs painted in the road".
In London the Met have recently started enforcing the limits - eg IIRC only from October in Islington. But it's clearly not a priority.
Guns. We want guns. Local rent-a-granny SO19. Boy are the chavs going to get a shock.
...
Even cheaper to get rid of those annoying complainers then. :-)
Villages complaining about the Police ignoring riots is a major problem in your part of the world?
but, if a car comes round a bend at 60mph in a 30mph limit, how is the pedestrian going to cope. Basically by not even attempting to cross the road. The fact that the pedestrian has avoided an accident by jumping out of the way does not excuse excessive speed.
You think "exceeding the speed limit" would be the most appropriate offence there?
Why do that? Just drape a hi-viz jacket over a gate post far enough away from a corner such that a driver hurling round said corner can't really tell if there is a plod/speedwatch person there.
Move 'em about a bit and/or have a real person there occasionally so the local speed jockeys can't get used to a given location being a dummy.
However, if you educate the pedestrians in crossing the road, they won't get hit by cars travelling at perfectly legal speeds, which is considerably more probable than them even encountering by one doing
60mph in a 30mph limit. In 2013, the average free traffic speed of cars in 30mph limits was, oddly enough, 30mph, with 12% of cars doing 35-39mph, 3% doing 40-44mph, 1% doing 45-49mph and the number doing 50mph or more being too small to register in the figures.charles laid this down on his screen :
Charles, PM me please - my reply to is good.
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.