Specifically what failings. Come on Echo, buck your ideas up!

er... signs 50 m in the wrong location, signs were yellow circle not red, signs were faded , no signs, and the issued summonses giving the wrong location (wrong road name)

Tee Hee Well worth waiting for the full story.

Speed = kill people. Simple as you cretins

No idiot, People kill people. Put a speed camera outside a school and you won't hear people complain about it, but they don't tend to earn enough there, so many of them get sited where a lot of people would argue that the speed limit seems highly inappropriate, and as such people tend to speed up a bit. Easy targets.

They call them safety cameras designed to reduce speed in the areas where they are sited, but then get upset if you use a device that actually tells you where these "safety" cameras are, even though it generally means you subsequently reduce speed in that area. Far better to speed, get caught and pay a fine in their books.

Cynical, me, never.

"Far better to speed, get caught and pay a fine in their books."

Well yes - if you have broken the law that all seems fine. Place a camera on every lamppost for all I care. I don't intend to pay such fines (or taxes as some prefer to call them).

faded signs what ever next, if you dont know the limit of the road you assume its 30

no excuses just technicalities

spend all your time looking at the speedo because you are paranoid about getting a speeding fine

how is that safe?????

Anth wrote:
spend all your time looking at the speedo because you are paranoid about getting a speeding fine

how is that safe?????

i manage it, its not hard just an excuse

Anth wrote:
spend all your time looking at the speedo because you are paranoid about getting a speeding fine how is that safe?????

No, an experienced driver will know how his/her car behaves and will not need to keep looking at the speedometer all the time.

No tickets, fines or accidents in over 25 years. How safe is that?

so if HMM can't see a road sign he assumes the speed is 30; does he ever get anywhere? of course the "safety cameras" are just a revenue earner, placed where the road appears to be safe and legal for travelling at 40 to catch out the poor sap who creeps up to 35; adrian smith will sound a whole lot less smug when he gets caught

On initial thoughts speed cameras seem a good idea but then you think of the way it really works...

People drive 50 through the 30 zone until they hit the camera where they slam the brakes on then speed up again once they have gotten past.

Do they really think that placing a camera in the area will mean everyone drives slowly through the whole place? They drive the right speed past the camera only.

If anything that seems more dangerous as people are more concerned about the location of the camera and slammin foot on brakes than actually driving and keeping an eye on the roads.

It is just a nice money earner. I bet if the penalty was points on your license only with no fine they would soon take down these cameras or stop putting up more because they won't get extra cash for the pockets to spend on tripe like PCSO's and models of Southampton.

julian wrote:
so if HMM can't see a road sign he assumes the speed is 30; does he ever get anywhere? of course the "safety cameras" are just a revenue earner, placed where the road appears to be safe and legal for travelling at 40 to catch out the poor sap who creeps up to 35; adrian smith will sound a whole lot less smug when he gets caught

No, if you actually knew me I would take it on the chin and pay the fine - if I had broken the law. Next inane comment please..

The staff of the Safety Camera Partnership would seem to think they can just sit on their backsides, in their camera vans, with their laser guns demanding money with penalties from hard working drivers trying to go about their business as lawfully as they reasonably can.

Now they have been told that the very least they should do is to get off their backsides and at least check that the speed limit has the correct signs.

It would anyway seem that the way these speed cameras are being used is just to collect money to pay the wages of the Safety Camera Partnership, who are contributing nothing to road safety, as shown by recent figures from the Department for Transport, and it would seem they are just parasites on the community they are supposed to be serving.

dont see what the problem is, drive at or under the limit and you will be fine

They should hide the cameras and double the fines for the criminals. That'll sort out the real drivers!

hmm wrote:
faded signs what ever next, if you dont know the limit of the road you assume its 30 no excuses just technicalities

You don't even need signs to how fast a road should be. The lines on the road, the distance between lampposts, houses etc etc are all indicators of how fast you should be going.

Fred wrote:

hmm wrote:
faded signs what ever next, if you dont know the limit of the road you assume its 30 no excuses just technicalities

You don't even need signs to how fast a road should be. The lines on the road, the distance between lampposts, houses etc etc are all indicators of how fast you should be going.

exactly, thats why using pathetic get out clause excuses are idiotic

hmm wrote:
dont see what the problem is, drive at or under the limit and you will be fine

Hmm, I suppose you would like to bring back the red flag, flogging and hanging. Many of the speed limits have been set artificially low for the conditions, well below what is sensible to any reasonable and perfectly safe driver.

If you are going to argue “the law is the law”, well the law has just ruled that these speed limits were illegal and were not enforceable, so the drivers concerned were not breaking the law. So what have you got to complain about.

For 30 years I observed my own speed limits, based on my experience and commonsense. What irritates me nowadays is being forced to comply with an over-low limit that could have been set by an apprentice on the Council. I've never had a speeding fine but it's going to come one of these days if I go back to my own intuition.

Geoff wrote:

hmm wrote: dont see what the problem is, drive at or under the limit and you will be fine

Hmm, I suppose you would like to bring back the red flag, flogging and hanging. Many of the speed limits have been set artificially low for the conditions, well below what is sensible to any reasonable and perfectly safe driver. If you are going to argue “the law is the law”, well the law has just ruled that these speed limits were illegal and were not enforceable, so the drivers concerned were not breaking the law. So what have you got to complain about.

Geoff,

Name me three places in SO14-SO16 where the limit is "artificially low".

an over-low limit that could have been set by an apprentice on the Council

I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong but aren't the speed limits set by the Highways Agency and not the local council.

Either way I'm sure the setting of a speed limit would not be entrusted to an apprentice of any description.

Fred wrote:

hmm wrote: faded signs what ever next, if you dont know the limit of the road you assume its 30 no excuses just technicalities

You don't even need signs to how fast a road should be. The lines on the road, the distance between lampposts, houses etc etc are all indicators of how fast you should be going.

Actually Fred, not only were the signs in the wrong place, un lit where they should have been, but the white lines were painted for a 50-70 mph road on a 40 limit.

There is a systematic failure of road design and enforcement because they bought a toy to catch motorists

Name me three places in SO14-SO16 where the limit is "artificially low".
Lets start with Bitterne Road dual lane but a 30.

Fred wrote:

hmm wrote: faded signs what ever next, if you dont know the limit of the road you assume its 30 no excuses just technicalities

You don't even need signs to how fast a road should be. The lines on the road, the distance between lampposts, houses etc etc are all indicators of how fast you should be going.

Not true actually.

Not when they decide to slap in a speed camera on a road and reduce the limit from 40 down to 30 as they have done in Hythe.

The limit has changed for a small strip of road and is pointless. All it has done is take money off people as the road for YEARS has been known as a 40 then was suddenly turned to 30 catching out MANY people

James May for PM wrote:
Name me three places in SO14-SO16 where the limit is "artificially low". Lets start with Bitterne Road dual lane but a 30.

Isn't that the road fronted by houses on both sides and a narrow footpath.

Dual it may be, but are you suggesting that like many dual-carriageways, it should allow for 50Mph+?

Robert wrote:
For 30 years I observed my own speed limits, based on my experience and commonsense. What irritates me nowadays is being forced to comply with an over-low limit that could have been set by an apprentice on the Council. I've never had a speeding fine but it's going to come one of these days if I go back to my own intuition.

I your 'intuition' is the break the law then yes you'll get fined.

mangobean wrote:

an over-low limit that could have been set by an apprentice on the Council

I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong but aren't the speed limits set by the Highways Agency and not the local council.

Either way I'm sure the setting of a speed limit would not be entrusted to an apprentice of any description.

The majority of speed limits are set by the council, but they will take advice from other relevant agencies (police, etc) where necessary.

Adrian Smith wrote:

James May for PM wrote: Name me three places in SO14-SO16 where the limit is "artificially low". Lets start with Bitterne Road dual lane but a 30.

Isn't that the road fronted by houses on both sides and a narrow footpath. Dual it may be, but are you suggesting that like many dual-carriageways, it should allow for 50Mph+?

Yes I am!! 30 there is ridiculous!!

Surely the very fact that this would be considered a "cost" is an admission that these speeding fines are nothing more than a revenue stream anyway. It wouldn't be "costing" anything if the money collected was not treated as income in the first place

speeed boy wrote:
Speed = kill people. Simple as you cretins

't ain't that simple at all. If that were so, why are there less fatal road accidents in, say, Germany, than here? German drivers literally fall about laughing when they hear about our speed limits, yet their accident rate and fatality rate is considerably lower than our own. The big problem in this country is, because we are told what to do at every turn, people have become unable to make judgements for themselves. Witness, for example, parts of the Netherlands, where there are no road signs and markings whatsoever. That, in theory, should result in chaos, but it doesn't: it simply puts the onus on the driver to be more sensible and think for him/her self. A fair amount of accidents in this country, for example, result from people seeing a green light and assuming that means it's safe to go, when in fact if they had to look for themselves, they'd see the goods vehicle that couldn't stop in time. Same goes for speeding. People do not think about what an appropriate speed is, they rely on speed limits to tell them

I like how you brand the rest of the world, who may not share your opinion, as "cretins", though. Well done

Every mototway is artificially low. They are the safest roads in the land but the vast majority of people are going faster than 70.

Geoff wrote:

hmm wrote:
dont see what the problem is, drive at or under the limit and you will
be fine

Hmm, I suppose you would like to bring back the red
flag, flogging and hanging. Many of the speed limits have been set
artificially low for the conditions, well below what is sensible to any
reasonable and perfectly safe driver.
If you are going to argue “the law is the law”, well the law has just
ruled that these speed limits were illegal and were not enforceable, so
the drivers concerned were not breaking the law. So what have you got
to complain about.

Indeed. The national speed limit of 60/70 was introduced as a temporary measure in the 60s after some genius in an AC Cobra battered up the road at about 150mph. This was back in the days of drum brakes all round, cross-ply tyres and cars that were not designed to handle well at speed. They're well out-dated now, even your average basic Fiesta can cope with going much faster. The limit is a farce. For the record, though, I would like to see that limit increase, but limits in urban and built-up areas come down even further. Let people do 100mph on a deserted motorway, if they want, there's no harm in it. Slow 'em down where it matters, as well

James May for PM wrote:
Name me three places in SO14-SO16 where the limit is "artificially low".
Lets start with Bitterne Road dual lane but a 30.

I disagree. That speed limit is in place more for the peace and quiet of residents than for safety, and rightly so

George and others make sense.

I have driven in Germany and the autobahns can be intimidating but generally safe.

This country has a mish mash of road systems, mostly built over existing dirt tracks across the centuries.

Other 'newer' countries have managed to build good quality straight roads mixed with high standards of vehicles and driving skills to match.

We suffer from the legacy of expanding villages and towns whose inner road systems are difficult to rejig.

The motorways system has its faults but have also suffered from poor investment, shoddy work and repairs,


The 70mph limit needs upping to 80mph (most drivers keep to this average anyway) although a sensible lane control system can be used. Variable limits on stretches of M25 and M42 near Birmingham seem to work when needed.

Never mind eh? Us motorists pay billions in road-related taxes and see a fraction being spent on the source of this revenue.

Put 6" screens on the front and back of every vehicle when it goes in for its mot. The screens will be connected to display the exact speed that the vehicles are doing,meaning that everyone can see when they are breaking the speed limits. Perhaps they will then be shamed into slowing down as all the children shout, "look mummy/daddy,that cars going more than 30." simple answer eh!I am going to approach Sandra with this idea, its gonna make me a rich man.LOL

George wrote:

Geoff wrote:

hmm wrote: dont see what the problem is, drive at or under the limit and you will be fine

Hmm, I suppose you would like to bring back the red flag, flogging and hanging. Many of the speed limits have been set artificially low for the conditions, well below what is sensible to any reasonable and perfectly safe driver. If you are going to argue “the law is the law”, well the law has just ruled that these speed limits were illegal and were not enforceable, so the drivers concerned were not breaking the law. So what have you got to complain about.

Indeed. The national speed limit of 60/70 was introduced as a temporary measure in the 60s after some genius in an AC Cobra battered up the road at about 150mph. This was back in the days of drum brakes all round, cross-ply tyres and cars that were not designed to handle well at speed. They're well out-dated now, even your average basic Fiesta can cope with going much faster. The limit is a farce. For the record, though, I would like to see that limit increase, but limits in urban and built-up areas come down even further. Let people do 100mph on a deserted motorway, if they want, there's no harm in it. Slow 'em down where it matters, as well

While the technology has improved the average driver has got worse, older, younger and we have more overseas drivers than ever before.

The current limits are fine and should be enforced.

Driver instructor wrote:

George wrote:

Geoff wrote:

hmm wrote: dont
see what the problem is, drive at or under the limit and you will be
fine

Hmm, I suppose you would like to bring back the red flag,
flogging and hanging. Many of the speed limits have been set
artificially low for the conditions, well below what is sensible to any
reasonable and perfectly safe driver. If you are going to argue “the
law is the law”, well the law has just ruled that these speed limits
were illegal and were not enforceable, so the drivers concerned were
not breaking the law. So what have you got to complain about.

Indeed. The national speed limit of 60/70 was introduced as a temporary
measure in the 60s after some genius in an AC Cobra battered up the
road at about 150mph. This was back in the days of drum brakes all
round, cross-ply tyres and cars that were not designed to handle well
at speed. They're well out-dated now, even your average basic Fiesta
can cope with going much faster. The limit is a farce. For the record,
though, I would like to see that limit increase, but limits in urban
and built-up areas come down even further. Let people do 100mph on a
deserted motorway, if they want, there's no harm in it. Slow 'em down
where it matters, as well

While the technology has improved
the average driver has got worse, older, younger and we have more
overseas drivers than ever before.
The current limits are fine and should be enforced.

Hmmm. Seems odd that a driving instructor should be resigned to continuing poor driving standards. Surely better training is key, no? By keeping the 70mph limit, we are effectively saying "UK drivers are no good, and we're happy for that to remain true"

George wrote:

speeed boy wrote: Speed = kill people. Simple as you cretins

't ain't that simple at all. If that were so, why are there less fatal road accidents in, say, Germany, than here? German drivers literally fall about laughing when they hear about our speed limits, yet their accident rate and fatality rate is considerably lower than our own. The big problem in this country is, because we are told what to do at every turn, people have become unable to make judgements for themselves. Witness, for example, parts of the Netherlands, where there are no road signs and markings whatsoever. That, in theory, should result in chaos, but it doesn't: it simply puts the onus on the driver to be more sensible and think for him/her self. A fair amount of accidents in this country, for example, result from people seeing a green light and assuming that means it's safe to go, when in fact if they had to look for themselves, they'd see the goods vehicle that couldn't stop in time. Same goes for speeding. People do not think about what an appropriate speed is, they rely on speed limits to tell them I like how you brand the rest of the world, who may not share your opinion, as "cretins", though. Well done

probably a lower death rate in europe, because they are not plagued with spotty, baseball cap wearing yobs racing their chavved up Seat Ibiza's & Vauxhall Corsa's around everywhere.

Yes, you break the law you go to prison. And with that in mind, yes there should be stricter punishments for breaking the speed limit.

I would be all for hidden speed cameras and against this legal crap if it wasn't for the fact that a majority of our speed limits are ludicrous. The number of deaths on our roads keeps falling, but still we need to hash out National Speed Limits and give Portsmouth a 'blanket' 20mph zone.

<quote>People drive 50 through the 30 zone until they hit the camera where they slam the brakes on then speed up again once they have gotten past.</quote>
A very good argument for not advertising the locations of the cameras!

Excellent news..Now I can get back £500 in fines and costs from there robbing parasites.

Reference to your front page speeding story.
This is not the first time Hampshire Police, and The Speed Camera Partnership have got it so very badly wrong. You and many motorists in Southampton are still waiting for the outcome of an appeal into the fiasco at Redbridge Road, back in 2004. The Hampshire Police and the Apeed Camera Partnership were found in the High Court to have prosecuted motorists under the wrong Traffic Acts, it was also found in the Magistrates Court that the signing on Redbridge Road, was flawed. When are Hampshire Police/The Speed Camera Partnership going to lodge their appeal in the High Court, are they waiting for the Statutes of Limitation Act to take effect, in order that their gross incompetance can be covered up yet again.

Ted. Southampton.

The fixed scameras in Fareham do little to slow traffic where needed, the one on Highlands Road MIGHT help protect the drunks falling out of the (not) working mens club, but does sod all for the safety of the children attending ANY of the local schools.

The mobile scamera van parking partly on the pavement at the top of Titchfield hill West side (off its pad as the buffeting by trucks makes the operators sea-sick when correctly parked) makes little difference to the traffics speed, though it makes pedestrians life harder.

I've even had a hair-dryer (LTi 20-20 speed gun) pointed at me on Gudge Heath lane, so far though always under the posted limit, but as one officer put it, Kent have suspended using them for some reason, perhaps too many 'slim-fast' tickets? Thats 'slim-fast', a quick shake to add 3-5 mph to actual speed, from legal no ticket to NIP in the post! Atleast a properly calibrated auto scamera in a box on a post can't do that?

Oh and one final thought, the scamera maintainers van has been timed along Highlands road, only when the scameras loaded does it pass at less than 30 mph, clear of the scamera 45-50 mph was estimated by one TRAINED Police observer, but what Police officer would dare to report such a revenue earner???
One rule for the scamera partnership, another for everyone else.

King Mush wrote:
George and others make sense.

I have driven in Germany and the autobahns can be intimidating but generally safe.

This country has a mish mash of road systems, mostly built over existing dirt tracks across the centuries.

Other 'newer' countries have managed to build good quality straight roads mixed with high standards of vehicles and driving skills to match.

We suffer from the legacy of expanding villages and towns whose inner road systems are difficult to rejig.

The motorways system has its faults but have also suffered from poor investment, shoddy work and repairs,


The 70mph limit needs upping to 80mph (most drivers keep to this average anyway) although a sensible lane control system can be used. Variable limits on stretches of M25 and M42 near Birmingham seem to work when needed.

Never mind eh? Us motorists pay billions in road-related taxes and see a fraction being spent on the source of this revenue.

you really do talk a lot of tosh mushie, newer countries!

There are too many inconsistancies in speed limits.
i.e.

Colden Common from the roundabout down, houses either side, narrow pavement - 40MPH; yet we have Bitterne road at 30MPH. Do bitterne residents deserve less noise than colden common residents?

Garnier rd winchester is a narrow twisty road with calming measures - The limit is 60MPH for half it's length then 30MPH.

I could give loads more examples.

We need a radical review of speed limits so we all know the limit based on the road type and have then strict enforcement by real traffic officers.

And to all those who are up my arse when I am doing 30 in a 30 zone - You are bullies and I will continue to do the right thing despite your pressure.

why will cost the council millions to refund...this money has been paid so it is not really costing them anything...if facr they have had interest on that money while its been with them

speeed boy wrote:
Speed = kill people. Simple as you cretins

Speed does not kill. Inappropriate, dangeous, careless, drunk,reckless etc etc driving causes accidents..
Perhaps you would like to justify your comment and provide proof.
Give proven examples where speed was the main factor, against proven examples of dangerous driving.

"you really do talk a lot of tosh mushie, newer countries!"

P r a t

You know I mean certain countries that built roads much later than us Anglo Saxons! Think USA and wide open spaces as well.

Think major US cities and built on grids


Think a bit more you naive numpty


PS I apologise to my fanatic fans who linger on my every syllable for being rather too busy of late


I am just off for a lovely weekend and will be back with a vengeance.

I hope that certain posters will be able to cope and I trust their cold turkey/withdrawal systems can cope.

PS I wish God's speed to my England rugby team as they raise the spirit of Agincourt tonight!

My ancestor Henry V enjoyed a few beers and local wenches at Ye Olde Red Lion on his way to hammer the Frogs back in 1415.

Some say I might be one of his illegitimate spin-offs?

I'm often called the B word in here, so who knows.....

quote

Is the Truvelo camera on the mile end road as you leave Portsmouth correctly positioned?

It is a forward facing camera that flashes in your face and is dangerous in the dark. Having just left the traffic lights and moving through the gears on the M275, one is carefully monitoring traffic merging from the right on the three lane stretch of road. You then have traffic merging from the yellow Shell garage on the left where this yellow peril is positioned hidden by a tree by a tree. A sign just ahead reads 50mph, it is not a built up area and I was clocked doing 47mph. Any comments from fellow drivers? Are we clocked by a safety camera or a revenue camera? Kevin Chichester

Anth wrote:
spend all your time looking at the speedo because you are paranoid about getting a speeding fine how is that safe?????

you can tell the speed you are travelling at by the sound of your car engine. you do not neew to spend all your time looking at the speedo

concerned wrote:

Anth wrote: spend all your time looking at the speedo because you are paranoid about getting a speeding fine how is that safe?????

you can tell the speed you are travelling at by the sound of your car engine. you do not neew to spend all your time looking at the speedo

That depends on what gear you are in, and how would listening help the deaf or hard of hearing?

for the unititiated here, can somebody explain the referrence to "slimfast"? i was nicked one sunday afternoon in july in colden common by a hand held device, i know **** well i wasn't speeding, i drive the road almost every day to work, but can i prove it? i've coughed up the fine and taken the points because i can't afford the risks/costs. increased fines asocciated with fighting the police over it. much iritated of hedge end.

Quote:

The judge's finding proves the speed limit was illegal on that stretch of road," said Mr Culshaw, of Blake Lapthorn Tarlo Lyons solicitors, based in Segensworth.
With expert witness Richard Bentley, Mr Culshaw proved that a lack of proper signage meant the limit was not legally enforceable.

I was recently caught by a van mounted camera on Mountbatten Way entering the 40mph zone approaching the Southern Road junction.

Fact is the sign was completely covered by foilage on my left and and not invisible to the driver. If it's all down to the signage could I get the prosecution overturned?

Did anyone else get caught on this stretch of road?

"you can tell the speed you are travelling at by the sound of your car engine. you do not neew to spend all your time looking at the speedo"

Oh yeah? So what if you're driving a Rolls Royce?

Or what if you got Led Zeppelin blasting out of your speakers?

Or chatting on mobile phone whilst eating a Kit Kat and smoking a fag???

To go back to the main point of the A27, another part of it which is a tad dodgy is Bridge Road. It's a 40mph limit from Bursledon roundabout to the railway bridge, then slows to 30mph when the road widens into a dual lane!! The pavements are plenty wide enough, & the houses are set away from the road. I wonder which crettin thought this was a good idea? Maybe it has to do with the extra revenue the police van parked there most days brings in. The people who set these limits do not care about road safety, plain & simple. All they care about is how much money they make at the end of the financial year, & it's us motorists which are hit in the pocket every **** time.

George wrote:

Geoff wrote:

hmm wrote: dont see what the problem is, drive at or under the limit and you will be fine

Hmm, I suppose you would like to bring back the red flag, flogging and hanging. Many of the speed limits have been set artificially low for the conditions, well below what is sensible to any reasonable and perfectly safe driver. If you are going to argue “the law is the law”, well the law has just ruled that these speed limits were illegal and were not enforceable, so the drivers concerned were not breaking the law. So what have you got to complain about.

Indeed. The national speed limit of 60/70 was introduced as a temporary measure in the 60s after some genius in an AC Cobra battered up the road at about 150mph. This was back in the days of drum brakes all round, cross-ply tyres and cars that were not designed to handle well at speed. They're well out-dated now, even your average basic Fiesta can cope with going much faster. The limit is a farce. For the record, though, I would like to see that limit increase, but limits in urban and built-up areas come down even further. Let people do 100mph on a deserted motorway, if they want, there's no harm in it. Slow 'em down where it matters, as well

George, you are so right. Quite remarkably, the limits in the US are now better than ours: 75 on the freeway (still not high enough, I agree), but outside schools there are flashing lights that the schools switch on and off at the start and end of the day and when flashing the limit is 15 - break that, or dare overtake a stopped school bus and they throw the book at you - that is sensible legislation. Over here, there is no concern about road safety at all; it is a money making scam about which politicians should be ashamed.

Woo hoo, does this mean the only points i have will be removed?

Like the 'discussion' my husband and i both drive county wide often, never drive dangerously, but we both had tickets on the A27, i think the commin sense factor in driving is invaluable along with the speed limits for a guide. On motorways 80mph is often the average, if you keep up with traffic where as the people who do 50 or 60mph (in certain conditions i.e clear road) are the biggest hazard making lorries overtake and usually lots of them. Confidence, alertness, a safe car, common sense and to be sensible are the key.

This is my opinion but I totally understand and agree with lots of other comments.

quote

quote

Rv Thomas 11/10/07
JUDGEMENT of District Judge Mr Gillibrand
I am dealing with trial of Mr Thomas, though clearly decision on that case impacts on other cases still outstanding. I am dealing with A27 westbound and position is. no dispute here, that Mr Thomas uas driving on spur road at time he was photographed, although enforcement van was located beyond the end of spur road as shown in photo 3, being located at side of what then becomes Eastern Way. It is accepted by the prosecution that traffic leaving Delme roundabout at Fareham travelling in westerly direction and joining the eastern Way A27 have not been law fully warned of the speed limit, as result of which traffic in the background of photo 3 where spur road becomes Eastern Way, could not be prosecuted for speeding, i.e. in contravention of 40 mph limit because it would be virtually impossible, if not impossible, to distinguish between those motorists who reach that point from spur road and those motorists who reach that point from slip road to Delme roundabout. In addition, although it is not conceded, there is nothing to contradict Mr Bentley's evidence that terminal signs 40 mph shown in photo 2 are in fact located in the wrong place; that is, 53 metres further east than they should be. The issue is whether despite the fact that motorists travelling in westerly direction along spur road have passed a lawful terminal sign as shown in photo 2 should be convicted: firstly, because envelope generally is at fault in the sense that I have identified by traffic joining from Delme slip road, and secondly, and I don't think this is put forward as major argument, that 40 pmh speed limit in photo 2 is in the wrong place. From any common sense point of view any motorist that proceeds past 40 mph speed limit with camera sign below in excess of speed limit, as shown in photo 2, is a fool and asking for points to be placed on their licence. One that is continuing to drive at 70 mph or in excess is, in my judgement, on the verge of dangerous driving and certainly careless driving, Any motorist would have to be aware that they could be asked whether you have driven along the road before, did you know the nature of the road ahead. But it strikes me that those are not the determinative issues here, although I have to say at end of day speed limits are there to ensure the safety of all road users and often motorists forget that there are pedestrians - people who put one leg in front of the other in order to make their journeys, such creatures do still exist - as are those who get themselves to work and other functions by bicycle. Speed limits are there to deal with speed differential an issue I find 99 out of 100 motorists have absolutely no concept of and the blunt nerve endings of motorists I observe on the road often beggar belief and I rather suspect, as an aside, that there are some blunt nerve endings in this case. But I am here lo uphold the law and the law is there to prevent chaos. The law is to establish order and, in relation to the specifics of speed limits, it is quite obvious when you read the regulations and directives that They are to be taken on face value and to be strictly observed. I have been referred to District Judge Farmer's remarks with which I entirely agree, that speed limits have to be certain and apply to all motorists. That is persuasive authority but good common sense. But the point I am getting at is that speed limits have to be carried out to the letter so ihat if there is a regulation that crates an envelope the regulation must apply to every road entering a particular envelope. So that whether one is dealing with cyclist or motorist, the occasional user, the stranger or the individual who drives on daily basis through a particular route each is certain where the; stand and if the; speed in that certain environment they have no escape from prosecution, not only from speeding but what is implicit in that speeding is endangering safety of other road users. The law, as I have indicated , must be supportive of order and must be there to prevent chaos. I lake the view that the law would be brought into disrepute (with photo 3 in mind) if it was to be said that the motorist driving up slip road from Delme roundabout would drive at whatever speed he liked, but those driving up the spur road/with motorway behind thcm)could be penalised. There is a defect in the envelope which, in my judgement, affects the enforceability of the speed limit throughout the envelope. And as a result of that, so far as Mr Thomas the case against him is dismissed,_

My understanding of this ruling in Hampshire is that a 40mph or 30mph sign MUST have below it a camera sign, am I correct, I have noticed in my area a renewal of the signs to this pattern, so would I benefit from this ruling quote.