private charge notice

[paulrbarnard]

What cost? The technology already exists in most cars already. The savings made by introducing them would be massive though, no prosecution and admin costs, no speed camera costs and the wages of the people who maintain them. And, if speed really does kill as some people are adamant it does, how do you quantify the costs of lives saved? We seem happy to spend millions on that at the moment.

Speed cameras made sense 2 or 3 decades ago maybe, but if your goal is to reduce speeding and save lives then there are better ways to do it.
I'd be quite happy with a limiter on my car, in fact I would gladly pay to have one fitted. I never (intentionally) break the speed limit so it would only be a good thing for me.

I completely agree they are coming. Our car has one already. The issue is that 99.99% of cars on the road don’t. That’s why speed cameras are going to be with us for years yet.
retro fitting a speed limiter would be very expensive. A speed warning, already available today, is a step in the right direction.
I tend not to use the speed limiter unless I’m in an area with long stretches or lots of changes in speed limit but the warning is always on and absolutely fantastic if you do miss seeing the limit sign.

 

[Skydivermel]

I completely agree they are coming. Our car has one already. The issue is that 99.99% of cars on the road don’t. That’s why speed cameras are going to be with us for years yet.
retro fitting a speed limiter would be very expensive. A speed warning, already available today, is a step in the right direction.
I tend not to use the speed limiter unless I’m in an area with long stretches or lots of changes in speed limit but the warning is always on and absolutely fantastic if you do miss seeing the limit sign.

I cant see that for at least the next 10 years. In 2018 £120M was raised from speeding tickets alone. If this revenue is removed they'll have to find another way of raising this money. On the other hand revenue saved by not having so many accidents will surely outweigh the fines.

 

[paulrbarnard]

I cant see that for at least the next 10 years. In 2018 £120M was raised from speeding tickets alone. If this revenue is removed they'll have to find another way of raising this money. On the other hand revenue saved by not having so many accidents will surely outweigh the fines.

The income from speeding tickets is insignificant compared to the £28B raised from fuel duty. An increase of 0.04p per litre (currently at 58ish p) would completely offset it. Despite what people like to call speed cameras they are not a tax on motorists or a cash cow.

 

[danst96]

[/QUOTE]

The “Safety Camera” vans and operators only seem to affect those that are actually speeding and therefore breaking the law. So there is a very simple answer!

Not necessarily, you have drivers doing well within the speed limit jamming on at the sight of them causing near misses or in some worst case scenarios accidents. Safety cameras yeh right

 

[Reginald]

Update to my original question.
In the private parking company's process. I have now passed the point where not knowing who the driver was, is an advantage to me, so I now know, however it is irrelevant.
I have investigated what has happened looked at the signs/street marking and found that the street parking company's signs and the permit they issued is not clear. As I said in an earlier post, there is an area controlled by the company. This covers two parallel streets, Street A and Street B. if you have a permit for Street A, it seems you can't park on Street B and vice versa. The permit the car was displaying gives no indication that it is for Street A only. The parking company's signs do not differentiate which area they cover, i.e. this is the sign for street A and this is the sign for street B.

Only Street A is marked by the council at one end, and there would be no reason for the driver to go to their home passing the sign, so would never see it. Street B is not marked in any way. One of the most important rules for parking companies is that the signs MUST be clear. In this case I genuinely believe they were not and the permit issued did not show for which street the permit was valid.
My plan is to continue following the company process and go to independent review, but if that fails, I will be happy to go to court. I firmly believe that a judge would agree the process was flawed and will reject the case. I would also request that all parking charges since the process was introduced should be reviewed to see which were issued incorrectly and should be repaid. Additional information is the driver was a nurse returning from duty in the evening, but she doesn't want that to be used. The PCN was issued at 6:02 in the evening. She genuinely thought she was parking in the correct place. The parking company has already rejected an appeal based on the driver thought they could park there.
I will inform the company of my intentions before going to independent review and give them a chance to cancel the charge (which is more than they gave the driver). I will have no fear going to court on this one and inform the company of my preferred course of action. I very much doubt the company would take the risk. If the company wins, I will pay the fine for the driver, If the driver wins, the company will have to go into a process of investigation and repay lots of fines/costs/ etc, so a big risk for them. There is no guarantee who would win. I believe it lies in favour of the driver, but it's really about who has the most to lose if they don't. I'm happy to take that risk.

I really believe in fairness. This charge in this particular instance is not fair. After this is done, in the name of fairness to other people who might have been issued with a charge under the same circumstances, I would contact the local council to make sure the company marking meet legal requirements and a street sign is put up. I would also request the parking company/council review ALL charges issued in that area to make sure they were issued correctly.

I have no problems with private parking rules but they are enforced by companies/people motivated by money and profits, so you must challenge them and ensure they are doing everything by the book and fair.

My daughter was fined by a private parking company, they issued the ticket in the dark and took several pictures with flash of my daughters car.
Upon investigation in the daylight there was one signe Which measured 250x250mm with the text so small that even in daylight it was not possible to read it without the aid of binoculars as it was 3meteres up on a building the appeal was rejected of course. Just legalised piracy.

 

[John Brown]

I agree that a lot of private car parks are little better than pirates. I believe that NCP, way back, took over bomb sites that they didn't own.
Speeding, on the other hand, is voluntary.

 

[NickWelford]

Serious question: Why would a 30 limit not require constant speedometer watching? What's the solution? No speed limits near schools?

The solution is to suspend vehicle movements on roads containing schools for a period twice a day.

 

[John Brown]

The solution is to suspend vehicle movements on roads containing schools for a period twice a day.

Going to upset a lot of Range Rover driving parents.

 

[Stevekane]

I wish someone would invent a gadget that started to beep if you started to exceed the speed limit, perhaps sat nav technology controlled for changing limits, that way you could concentrate on your driving. Although Ive not been on one, people I know who have gone on the police speed awareness course as an alternative to a fine have all said that the people attending were older seemingly sensible drivers who were speeding through inattention.
Steve.

 

[niemeyjt]

My father's Toyota has cameras to recognise speed limits and other electronic gizmos. I hope the technology improves significantly before it is linked to a speed limiter - I have travelled miles with the "you're speeding" indicator going because the camera either has spotted a sign on a sliproad and assumed it applied to the main road - or failed to spot an increased / end of restriction sign.

 

[paulrbarnard]

I wish someone would invent a gadget that started to beep if you started to exceed the speed limit, perhaps sat nav technology controlled for changing limits, that way you could concentrate on your driving. Although Ive not been on one, people I know who have gone on the police speed awareness course as an alternative to a fine have all said that the people attending were older seemingly sensible drivers who were speeding through inattention.
Steve.

Those exist. Our car has it built in and some newer GPS devices have the function.

 

[paulrbarnard]

My father's Toyota has cameras to recognise speed limits and other electronic gizmos. I hope the technology improves significantly before it is linked to a speed limiter - I have travelled miles with the "you're speeding" indicator going because the camera either has spotted a sign on a sliproad and assumed it applied to the main road - or failed to spot an increased / end of restriction sign.

The one in our Volvo is pretty good. It used both ADAS cameras and map data. It occasionally gets fooled by a twisted sign on a side road but corrects itself after a few hundred meters. This technology will get very much better in a couple of years with the requirements of HAD driving the technology.

 

[Rorschach]

I wish someone would invent a gadget that started to beep if you started to exceed the speed limit, perhaps sat nav technology controlled for changing limits, that way you could concentrate on your driving. Although Ive not been on one, people I know who have gone on the police speed awareness course as an alternative to a fine have all said that the people attending were older seemingly sensible drivers who were speeding through inattention.
Steve.

My sat nav does it. Pretty accurate on the speed limits though I wouldn't trust it 100% if there was a camera coming but it certainly helps when I am travelling on roads I have never been on before.

EDIT: I have also found the speedo on the Sat Nav to be very good and more accurate than the speedo on the dash which reads almost 10% too low. I tend to use the Sat Nav speedo when driving (though go a bit lower on cameras) as it is much easier to glance to the side to see the speed than look down at the dash.

 

[Glitch]

@Sandyn

You might want to have a look at this

Transport Scotland Act 2019 (on Fightback Forum)

 

[artie]

I wish someone would invent a gadget that started to beep if you started to exceed the speed limit, perhaps sat nav technology controlled for changing limits, that way you could concentrate on your driving. Although Ive not been on one, people I know who have gone on the police speed awareness course as an alternative to a fine have all said that the people attending were older seemingly sensible drivers who were speeding through inattention.
Steve.

My sat nav, which , by the way is years old, tells me when I exceed the speed limit by turning my speed indicator red

 

[Blackswanwood]

My sat nav does it. Pretty accurate on the speed limits though I wouldn't trust it 100% if there was a camera coming but it certainly helps when I am travelling on roads I have never been on before.

EDIT: I have also found the speedo on the Sat Nav to be very good and more accurate than the speedo on the dash which reads almost 10% too low. I tend to use the Sat Nav speedo when driving (though go a bit lower on cameras) as it is much easier to glance to the side to see the speed than look down at the dash.

Just wondered how you have determined which one is accurate?

 

[Rorschach]

Just wondered how you have determined which one is accurate?

Locally we have a couple of those "watch your speed" signs that shows your speed as you go past and there are also a couple when you travel across Dartmoor as well. Since I pass them all quite frequently I have spotted the discrepancy between the speed on the signs compared to the speed on my speedo. Because I am a sad git I decided to do the same test using the sat nav, keeping my speed as steady as I could I got my partner (yes they thought it was sad as well) to watch the speed on the sign while I checked the speedo and the sat nav. The speedo was almost 10% too low (depends on speed, more inaccurate the faster you go) and the sat nav was either the same speed as the sign showed or +/- 1 MPH of the sign. This was the same across 4 different speed signs, 1 set for 20mph, 1 for 30mph and 2 for 40mph. So while it is far from scientific I thought it was a pretty good way to test.

 

[mikej460]

There are two identical block of flats. Both blocks have street parking managed by the same company. Each block is managed by a different company. We have already asked the appropriate management company to have the charge dismissed, they said they couldn't. I don't believe that however. You quickly find that no one can do anything to help. Slopey shoulders..... My son is in the tenants association for one of the blocks. He is an owner and therefore will have a contract with the parking company via the management company somewhere in the background, but the contract is just for the parking round his block, but no idea what the limit of that is. There was never a problem with parking until the parking company took over.
The permit he has was issued because his dedicated parking space at the property is being used by NHBC to replace cladding. The parking company should have applied a bit of common sense and cancelled the ticket. It is very sneaky what they have done, which convinces me, they are just after the money. I assume the parking attendants get a bonus for each car the charge?

The area is blocks of flats on a grid, there is total confusion about the road names. I have no idea what the roads are called, I can see why it is a double edged sword

I would write and refuse to pay. I think the issue of who was driving is irrelevant as the fine is in your name. Simply stick to the fact that a space wasn't available etc. as outlined above and refuse to pay, then stick to your guns as they issue reminders. It would cost them too much to take you to court. I did this once when I was fined by a private firm after I visited a service station on the M42 twice in one day (going to work then returning home). The ticket said I had been parked there all day so I explained the two visits, refused to pay and ignored all reminders - it eventually went away.

 

[Glitch]

Locally we have a couple of those "watch your speed" signs that shows your speed as you go past and there are also a couple when you travel across Dartmoor as well. Since I pass them all quite frequently I have spotted the discrepancy between the speed on the signs compared to the speed on my speedo. Because I am a sad git I decided to do the same test using the sat nav, keeping my speed as steady as I could I got my partner (yes they thought it was sad as well) to watch the speed on the sign while I checked the speedo and the sat nav. The speedo was almost 10% too low (depends on speed, more inaccurate the faster you go) and the sat nav was either the same speed as the sign showed or +/- 1 MPH of the sign. This was the same across 4 different speed signs, 1 set for 20mph, 1 for 30mph and 2 for 40mph. So while it is far from scientific I thought it was a pretty good way to test.

Apparently a car speedo must not read slower than true speed but it can read over by up to 10% plus 6.25mph

Most speed cameras are set to prescribed speed limit +10% +2mph
That’s 79mph in a 70mph limit. Plus your speedometer may be reading over by quite a bit. Your Speedo might read 79mph but your true speed could be 65! (If my maths is right)

It’s still illegal to exceed the limit even by 1mph so a true speed of 71 could get you a ticket.

 

[Rorschach]

Apparently a car speedo must not read slower than true speed but it can read over by up to 10% plus 6.25mph

Most speed cameras are set to prescribed speed limit +10% +2mph
That’s 79mph in a 70mph limit. Plus your speedometer may be reading over by quite a bit. Your Speedo might read 79mph but your true speed could be 65! (If my maths is right)

It’s still illegal to exceed the limit even by 1mph so a true speed of 71 could get you a ticket.

What you have said is very similar to what I have heard in the past from a variety of sources.

When my Speedo reads 70 (it's a dial type so hard to be exact) my Sat Nav is usually saying 63-64, to get the Sat Nav to read 70 the speedo has to be close to touching 80. Considering I normally drive on the motorway at around 65 (speedo) my "real" speed is probably only just 60.