Average Speed Cameras on Handcross Hill

[Vegas Seagull]

The letter I got said I was clocked doing 47mph.

Bit of a pisser but what can you do? Got no excuse really. Road was dead and I just didn't really think about it.

As I understand it most cameras have a tolerance threshold of 10% of the limit plus 2. That would mean they'd allow 46mph max. GRRRRR

Was in the paper & you're right as I recall 46 was cut off. 82 was the 'record' not a bad 'average'. Most if those going over know they are turning off halfway up tho', so unlike static cameras can speed all they want...

 

[BensGrandad]

Not trying to be holier than thou as I speed the same as anybody but I,like most people, realize that there is no tolerance on ave speed limits through road works irrespective of how many are working or what time of day it is so do not speed through them.

 

[chimneys]

Most if those going over know they are turning off halfway up tho', so unlike static cameras can speed all they want...

Good shout, but thought there were at least 3 sets?

 

[Lady Whistledown]

Was in the paper & you're right as I recall 46 was cut off. 82 was the 'record' not a bad 'average'. Most if those going over know they are turning off halfway up tho', so unlike static cameras can speed all they want...

Turning off where? The only exit now is for the garden centre or the 4x4 sales place.

The work quite regularly goes on at night, up and down the whole stretch, hence the limit is still in place then.

 

[chimneys]

Not trying to be holier than thou as I speed the same as anybody but I,like most people, realize that there is no tolerance on ave speed limits through road works irrespective of how many are working or what time of day it is so do not speed through them.

But there is, and it looks to be c46 mph!

 

[Triggaaar]

I'm sorry officer, I don't know who was driving.

 

[Lady Whistledown]

I'm sorry officer, I don't know who was driving.

That loophole was closed a few years back.

 

[chimneys]

Ive made a few posts on here and just to get my view clear, I fully agree with such speed limits (subject to a sensible tolerance in order not to punish minor indiscretions) in order to protect the workforce and other motorists. My interest is really just about the tolerance.

What I do despise, though, are hypocrites who preach to others as I cant believe there is anyone who has never broken the speed limit in their life!

 

[chimneys]

That loophole was closed a few years back.

Aint that the truth Chris Huhne?!

 

[otk]

The thing is, you are more likely to kill/maim someone at the obviously revered 'cut off' point of 46mph., rather than the stipulated 40mph.

 

[BensGrandad]

But there is, and it looks to be c46 mph!

Is that guaranteed or just a speculative guess based on gossip. Could well be true but I am not prepared to take the chance. The same as I was told the camera works on lanes and if you start in 1 lane and drive part in that lane then change to the other the camera will not get a start and finish for you to calculate the ave speed but again I am not prepared to take that chance I would rather take 30 secs to 1 minute to complete the journey.

 

[spongy]

Sussex Safer Roads Partnership uses a 10%+2 tolerance generally, so you're unlucky, you should be offered a speed awareness course, only if you haven't attended another one in the last 3 years though.

My missus works for them, the speed cameras were initially calibrated to catch people at 49mph + but the limit is now set at their 10%+2 policy. So anyone at 47mph or above will get caught now, and she hasn't stopped whinging because that camera site has upped their work load by over 20%.

 

[Lady Whistledown]

Sussex Safer Roads Partnership uses a 10%+2 tolerance generally, so you're unlucky, you should be offered a speed awareness course, only if you haven't attended another one in the last 3 years though.

Well...he's not UNLUCKY, is he, as the speed limit is 40, and he admits he was doing 47...bad luck is when a piano falls out of the sky on to you as you walk past, not when you get caught exceeding a speed limit that's signposted and marked for miles....just saying.

 

[Triggaaar]

That loophole was closed a few years back.

Really - how may years back? Does the owner just get the points even though they know for a fact they weren't driving?

 

[Triggaaar]

Aint that the truth Chris Huhne?!

He got done because his wife said he lied and forced her to take the points. hardly the same as genuinely not knowing.

The thing is, you are more likely to kill/maim someone at the obviously revered 'cut off' point of 46mph., rather than the stipulated 40mph.

Actually, I am far more likely to fall asleep at 40mph, and kill hoards of people, than I am at 60mph.

 

[happypig]

Really - how may years back? Does the owner just get the points even though they know for a fact they weren't driving?

You, as the owner, are expected to use "due diligence" to identify the driver of the vehicle. If you fail to identify the driver then you can be prosecuted for it and you then have to prove to the court how hard you tried to find out who was driving. Simply saying "I dunno, could have been either of us" isn't enough.

 

[albion534]

Really - how may years back? Does the owner just get the points even though they know for a fact they weren't driving?

if they dont know who was driving their car, they desereve the points

 

[chimneys]

Is that guaranteed or just a speculative guess based on gossip. Could well be true but I am not prepared to take the chance. The same as I was told the camera works on lanes and if you start in 1 lane and drive part in that lane then change to the other the camera will not get a start and finish for you to calculate the ave speed but again I am not prepared to take that chance I would rather take 30 secs to 1 minute to complete the journey.

Of course its not guarenteed!

I can just imagine the brief of the speeding accused: "M'Lord it was stated on North Stand Chat that the tolerance at the Handcross Hill roadworks was 6 mph so I demand you drop the speeding charge against my client!".

And on the lane change, that used to be the case but cameras are much more sophisticated now.

 

[chimneys]

If they dont know who was driving their car, they deserve the points

This!!

 

[Triggaaar]

You, as the owner, are expected to use "due diligence" to identify the driver of the vehicle.

Edna said a loophole has been closed, what you're saying isn't the closing of a loophole, it's just the way you guess it would work.

if they dont know who was driving their car, they desereve the points

So your children are moving house and you've lent them your car. They're driving back and forth all day, and sharing the driving. How the hell would you know which one was driving at that particular moment? The simple fact is, you wouldn't.