There are requirements for the signage and how far apart it has to be so they can’t generally slow you from 70-30 without an intermediary reduction and the 30 sign will have to be at least a minimum distance after the 50 one
fair enough. I guess I’m screwed then. Fingers crossed I don’t lose my job over this though
Unless your job is dependent on driving I can't see them managing (or trying) to fire you, it's not exactly bringing them into disrepute or something*.
I would expect to be mercilessly ribbed by colleagues for the foreseeable though.
*unless you were naked and had a car full of farm animals and ball gags at the time. Obviously keep quiet if you did.
when you say 50yards between 50 and 30 sign was it less than 75m?
if you do want to fight it you may be able to argue the signs were too close together. This doc seems to indicate 75m is the minimum required;
<span style="font-size: 0.8rem;"> https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/782724/traffic-signs-manual-chapter-03.pdf</span>
There are frequently other reasons why people argue and get off including there were too many signs! Best wait and see. I once thought I was in deep trouble and nothing ever came through the letter box.
I don't know the rules en Ecosse, but a speed limit must be enforceable and in E&W that needs a court order. You may have come across an H&S control measure rather than an enforceable restriction.
Speed cameras have angles beyond which they aren't accurate and may only be usable on a single carriageway direction. That may depend on bends that straighten angles and allow both carriageways to be covered.
In short don't take the risk, but you may be ok. Lots of "may" 🤔
it wasn’t a 50. It was a 30. Basically it had a 50 sign, then 50 yards later a 30 sign. I admit I didn’t clock that the 2nd one was a different speed to the first. I mean why have 2 different signs right after each other, I had assumed the road was a 50. Which was an error on my behalf but a genuine mistake.
As someone who also drives for work, does big mileages and also have dropped a couple of clangers in my time (Bus lanes seem to be my Achilles heel at the mo). No crashes, clean licence etc.
For the sake of your mental health, try to learn from it and forget about the possible letter through the post.
I do have some sympathy here and a lot of contempt for the people doing the road works. We had something similar on the M65 for over 3 months, 50 limit, properly signed and visible, hard shoulder coned off over 5 miles. All work was being carried out at night a snail's pace, replacing barriers etc. I tried to stick to the 50 as I generally do obey speed limits, it became pretty unsafe after a week or so as people completely ignored the limits. We occaisionally had a speed van appear on one of the bridges, caught a fair few I would imagine. If the limit was that important it should have had average speed cameras on it. Given all work was at night and it went on for months combined with most drivers appearing to be idiots it was guaranteed to cause trouble.
when you say 50yards between 50 and 30 sign was it less than 75m?
if you do want to fight it you may be able to argue the signs were too close together. This doc seems to indicate 75m is the minimum required
Just measured them..the 50 and 30 signs were 176 meters apart. 75 meters seems not much at all. The camera van was about another 100- 200 yards further past the 30 sign. In total the restriction is there for around half a mile total
there was an unintelligible sign on the verge which whilst you can’t read when driving, says there is a temporary barrier in place, and in fairness there is a solitary cone and about 5 breeze blocks about a quarter of a mile further down the road just before the restriction ends (I’d post a pic if I knew how to)
Unless your job is dependent on driving I can’t see them managing (or trying) to fire you, it’s not exactly bringing them into disrepute or something*.
no my job doesn’t have anything to do with driving, but it’s still a criminal record if I was caught by the camera which ain’t going to be good, and would severely limit my future employment options if I ever chose to leave
For the sake of your mental health, try to learn from it and forget about the possible letter through the post.
im pretty stressed and upset about it tbh. Never had a single point on my license, never had a criminal record. I’m not saying I don’t deserve a fine, I was clearly speeding regardless whether I think the limit should be in place, however the potential repercussions of this strike me as unduly harsh given a: it wasn’t remotely dangerous, and b: whilst it doesn’t make it right, pretty much 99% of drivers who go through that stretch aren’t going at 30mph
It would be far more dangerous to drive at 40 in a built up area 30 zone…
re "criminal record" - most questionnaires with that are often phrased as "do you have a criminal record (excluding motoring offences)?". That wouldn't keep me awake.
Depends on the form, some include motoring offences and specifically mention it on the form. As far as I’m aware it’s just an honesty test or wouldn’t be checked anyway.
I’d try file under not the end of the world (easier said than done).
Given you seem to be allowed to run the country (England obvs) with a conviction or two.
I've been done twice for speeding (once in England, once in Scotland). In the intervening 30 years or so, I've never ticked anything to say I have a criminal record.
I’ve been done twice for speeding (once in England, once in Scotland). In the intervening 30 years or so, I’ve never ticked anything to say I have a criminal record.
fixed penalty notices aren’t counted as a criminal record so you don’t need to declare. To my point above, you could do 40 in a built up area with a 30 limit, endangering all the little kiddies, and you don’t get a criminal record
where as I was doing about 65 in a 30, albeit on a dual carriageway with both lanes fully open and good visibility. But if I get caught I’ll be going to court, where fixed penalties unfortunately don’t apply.
however the potential repercussions of this strike me as unduly harsh given a: it wasn’t remotely dangerous,
I guess that people who's job it is to determine these things have decided that it's not safe to hit their temporary barriers at 70mph hence the speed limit?
I work in the finance sector, didn’t even occur to me that a driving ban for speeding was something that would limit my employment.
I honestly wouldn’t lose any sleep over it. I was fined £600 and had a 28 day ban for very similar to you.
Strangely it also didn’t affect my insurance either. I didn’t get any points, was literally just a ban for 28 days. My insurance paperwork didn’t ask any questions about any bans apart from drink driving, for speeding it was just asking about points. This was back in about 2005 though.
fixed penalty notices aren’t counted as a criminal record so you don’t need to declare
Ah. Gotcha.
I honestly wouldn’t lose any sleep over it. I was fined £600 and had a 28 day ban for very similar to you.
I too work in finance. The relevance to my job of a speeding ban is very questionable, however I’m obliged to tell them if I have a criminal record. At which point they’ll investigate. Hopefully they’ll just say don’t be a knob in future.
did you even tell your employer? Half of me thinks they’d never find out, but I’d have to balance the likelihood of most probably a wrap on the knuckles v’s if they find out at a later date I’ve not disclosed it I’d be shafted🤔
Was the bonnet of the cameras van pointing towards you?
If it was, and they show a pic taken through the windscreen, dispute it. Windscreens do funny things to laser beams and are not 100% reliable.
One issue you have is the percentage over the speed limit. I think it used to be 33% over would be a day in court and a possibility of a ban
that’s a fair point, and tbh exactly what I did, although I honestly didn’t clock that the second sign was 30mph.
50mph over the speeding AND Driving Without Due Care & Attention.
If they ask you if you want to represent yourself in court I would suggest declining.
😁
as far as consequences go, a ban and a fine I can live with, but apparently I need to declare any criminal convictions to my employer. If I go to court I’ll get a conviction (not a penalty notice) which mean I could potentially lose my job.
That might be enough to secure Exceptional Hardship to avoid or at least / reduce a ban at the expense of a considerably larger fine. Whether that would affect the classification I do not know, and you'd need to do better than "potentially."
im pretty stressed and upset about it tbh.
Honestly, I think you're worrying unduly. A speed enforcement camera on the other side of a dual carriageway... even if it could see you, I'm only guessing but I'd be surprised if it could measure speed travelling in two different directions. When you see them parked on motorway gantries they're always above one carriageway rather than in the middle.
That might be enough to secure Exceptional Hardship to avoid or at least / reduce a ban at the expense of a considerably larger fine.
don’t think it would make a lot of difference what the sentence is, if found guilty it’s a criminal record. Not fussed by an inevitable ban particularly, especially if it’s only a couple of months max, would just need to take that on the chin as one of life’s lessons learned.
Was the bonnet of the cameras van pointing towards you?
yeah it was but they just zap you from the rear of your car instead
my only hope is that they were focusing on the tragic on the side of the road they were parked on (which was a 70) however I suspect it was no coincidence they were parked where they were! Easy pickings..
70 in a 50 zone is pretty silly.
Its not for you to decide if the signs are correct. If in doubt, drive slower, not faster.
70 in a 50 zone is pretty silly
yes, and more so when I discovered I was actually in a 30.
im not going to pretend I don’t feel like an idiot.
I never told my employer about my ban, I’m in England so it may be different.
I work on government work within the financial sector, we have to go through additional security clearances and it has never been questioned.
(I’m in investment banking, we bid for government work, not just UK but US as well)
I don’t think you’ll lose your job. I’m in the senior leadership team (non exec director); we don’t receive any notifications from courts regarding our staff. If I was employing someone with a speeding fine showing up in their background checks I wouldn’t let that sway me if it wasn’t a competency they needed. We do run DBS / basic disclosure checks.
Being honest I was properly speeding. When I was younger I had flash cars and was a bit of an idiot. I was doing over 100mph and deserved the ban I got. And it did wake me up. I still drive fast cars, but I no longer speed. It drives my missus crazy as doing 70 in my car feels like walking pace!
Comply with the speed limit that is clearly signed, as you've admitted, and you'll save us all a load of of effort and stop endangering lives. (says the man who's just finished delivering his third online speed awareness course of the day...) Simples.
Given I’ve had a clean license for 30 years and fully appreciate I’ve been a tit, i’m not sure the what the ‘you shouldn’t speed’ posts are trying to achieve
i clearly shouldn’t have been going that fast, my driving record (other than today) clearly shows I’m a usually a safe driver.
I cocked up, and I don’t intend to make a habit of it
Whilst these threads always bring out those who are unable to break the speed limit because they can't reach it on their high horses,
my driving record (other than today) clearly shows I’m a usually a safe driver.
I cocked up
Is that actually true? This is the first time you've ever intentionally broken a posted speed limit? Or just the first time you think you might've been caught? How often do you drive that particular road given that you know it's "been there for weeks," whilst ignoring the (50) and never even noticing the (30) limit sign?
Apologies if I've misread this and I'm way off the mark but I'm not convinced that you're being entirely honest with us, or indeed with yourself. Everyone is a safe driver until their luck runs out one day.
If you're going to drive / ride quickly, keep your eyes open.
Is that actually true? This is the first time you’ve ever intentionally broken a posted speed limit? Or just the first time you think you might’ve been caught?
well ok I’m as safe as pretty much every other driver on the road, I dont think anyone, even the sanctimonious among us can every truely say they haven’t exceeded the limit
I’ll maintain I’m a safe driver though. Never had a crash
just to clarify, I’ll stick my hands up to fact I didn’t slow down when I thought it was a 50, I wrongly just kept going the same speed as the car next to me. I genuinely didn’t realise I was in a 30 zone however. No excuse, and my fault, but that was an honest mistake
well ok I’m as safe as pretty much every other driver on the road, I dont think anyone, even the sanctimonious among us can every truely say they haven’t exceeded the limit
I except there's a few who would claim it.
It's a weird one really. The only way you can never break the limit - before the rise of cruise control anyway - is to drive under it or spend as much time looking at the dash as the road. I've been driving long enough that I reckon I could hit 30mph reasonably accurately and consistently without looking at the clock (I've practised doing it), but there will be a margin of error of a mph or two.
Speedos historically overread and some by quite a margin, less so in modern cars (I cross-reference with GPS) so if you're doing say an indicated 25 in a 30 to be on the safe side you're probably tending towards maybe 22 whilst Mister 10%+2 behind you wants to be doing 35 and that's quite a differential.
I'd posit that anyone who claims never to have broken the speed limit is either being economical with the truth or is going to be the victim of a road rage meathead at some point. No-one is that good a driver.
I’m as safe as pretty much every other driver on the road
That's one for @deets. How many people yesterday told you they thought they were an above average driver?
It was a question I got asked when I sat a SAC. Good - above average - average - below average - poor. I said "above average." He replied that that meant I was overconfident. I said well no, it's just that "average" is a bloody low bar. (Something which was ably demonstrated during the course if we assume that the rest of the room was anything like representative.)
I wrongly just kept going the same speed as the car next to me. I genuinely didn’t realise I was in a 30 zone however. No excuse, and my fault, but that was an honest mistake
I’ll wager, if there was lots of cars doing the same speed, the van on the wrong carriage way, pointing the wrong way then you’re unlikely to hear anything.
Does anyone know if the average speed camera systems cross reference the speed limit for your specific vehicle? If I'm on the A9 single carriageway sections in my van, I'm restricted to 50 ( as are HGVs uniquely afaik) rather than 60 if I were in a car. Plenty of vans blat past me - do they know something I don't?
Plenty of vans blat past me – do they know something I don’t?
I'd imagine that the system would need a real-time link to DVLA for that to happen. A real person with a hand-held device or a camera could make a judgement, evidence the speed and check later
There's no reason in this world why the technology couldn't exist though, particularly on a newer system
You will get points and a fine not a ban. My first speeding in over 30 years was 72 in a 40. Guess who failed to see the very small change in speed signs on a motorway. Once you’ve missed the first sign, you just see the hard shoulder and think “motorway”. On the other access motorway road they painted 50 on the carriageways! Six points and a bike-sized fine. The police officer was very nice and asked if I was OK.
@daverhp - it seems there has been a recent change to the A9 ASCs as lots of van drivers have now been receiving fines.
It was a question I got asked when I sat a SAC. Good – above average – average – below average – poor. I said “above average.” He replied that that meant I was overconfident. I said well no, it’s just that “average” is a bloody low bar.
Overconfident of you to choose that setting to explore that idea. 🙂
The whole purpose of SACs is to disabuse a bunch of drivers of the notion that they're great and there's nothing really wrong with their behaviour.
Could have been worse op, I mean, this is just some cruel parotty of justice.
You will get points and a fine not a ban. My first speeding in over 30 years was 72 in a 40. Guess who failed to see the very small change in speed signs on a motorway. Once you’ve missed the first sign, you just see the hard shoulder and think “motorway”. On the other access motorway road they painted 50 on the carriageways! Six points and a bike-sized fine. The police officer was very nice and asked if I was OK.
Pretty much this. My young cousin drove his first long range journey from Portsmouth (where he bought his new car) back to Cumbria. Being a young, not very worldly lad, he didn't really understand average speed cameras and so, unbeknownst to him, had managed to accrue enough points for an outright ban (and then some!) in a single sitting.
It went to court and he received 11 points and a £4k fine.
You will get points and a fine not a ban. My first speeding in over 30 years was 72 in a 40.
Yes, but 72 in a 40 is not double the speed limit and eligible for a ban. 70 in a 30 is.
Overconfident of you to choose that setting to explore that idea. 🙂
TBH, I found the whole process to be condescending from beginning to end. One guy was alright, the other was an arse.
The whole purpose of SACs is to disabuse a bunch of drivers of the notion that they’re great and there’s nothing really wrong with their behaviour.
There's probably some truth in that.
At the start they went round asking everyone individually why they were here or why they were speeding or some such. The amount of excuses - some lame, some quite scary - was incredible. I said I screwed up, sorry. I think I was the only one to admit any sort of blame.
At the start they went round asking everyone individually why they were here or why they were speeding or some such.
Seems like the wrong approach - singling people out in front of others just breeds defensiveness and shuts down learning. Shows how the quality of the SAC is down to the people running it. Mine (a while back now) was the polar opposite, and while there were a few there who clearly got nothing out of it, I certainly did and so did others.
I've done one SAC after visiting Bath, missing a 20 mph sign and instinctively thought I was in a 30 mph area. Poor observation, no excuse.
The course was better than I expected. Not condescending or judgemental at all. A lot of good stuff on hazard perception and eye opening stats about the massive differences in impact injuries between 20 and 30 etc. The presenter was a civilian contractor, but was an ex traffic cop, so had credibility.
A few people didn't engage, scowling and arms folded or trying to make clever points (politely but convincingly rebuffed). Those that did learned some stuff and possibly even went away a little less likely to speed. Not saying I'm cheap or easy, but free coffee and biscuits all day might have swung it for me.
Yes, but 72 in a 40 is not double the speed limit and eligible for a ban. 70 in a 30 is
Not quite true. Double the speed limit doesn’t automatically put you in a different banding of offence. Basically there are 3 bands of offence based soley on speed.. the band c (the highest) offence is 21 mph over the limit. So over 50 is in a 30 is exactly the same banding as 80.you can expect a ban and a hefty fine for both. There are additional bandings if there are additional circumstances involved however, ie speeding past a school at 50 whilst towing a caravan, driving dangerously etc, is viewed less leniently than doing 50 in an area of road works with no road workers
@tired, assumed you had to go to court. Did you receive a criminal conviction resulting in a criminal record
Double the speed limit doesn’t automatically put you in a different banding of offence.
Is that right? Either it's changed since I last had cause to look or it's different in Scotland (or of course, I'm simply misremembering)
Basically there are 3 bands of offence based soley on speed..
So 91 in a 70 is treated the same as 41 in a 20? That's crazy.
So 91 in a 70 is treated the same as 41 in a 20? That’s crazy.
Unless that 70 was a motorway. Then it's potentially much more heavily punished.
It cost me €80 and 3 pts (ireland) to discover they can get you when facing the other way. I didn't think they could until the letter dropped in the post. I saw the the van in the distance on the otherside of the road pointing the camera away from me and into the oncoming traffic. Apparently I was going 113kmph in a 100kmph as I passed him 😳. You may be ok if it's a dual carrageway and the camera had a poor sight line etc, mine was a wide open single carriageway.
Apparently I was going 113kmph
Serves you right for using that foreign muck, would've gotten away with in poles and schillings
