RAC Foundation: “Speed Cameras – the Evidence”
The RAC Foundation has today announced that eight hundred more people could be killed or seriously injured each year on Britain’s roads if all the fixed and mobile speed cameras operational before the road safety grant was cut this summer were to be decommissioned.
The apparent scale of benefits offered by speed cameras are detailed in a new report by Professor Richard Allsop of University College London for the RAC Foundation. The report claims that speed cameras have offered continuing road safety benefits since their widespread introduction between 2001 and 2005.
These benefits, Professor Allsop concludes, are not just to be found at camera sites but across the wider road network.
He also points out that a large majority of the public have consistently backed the use of cameras and also seeks to dispel the “myth” that penalties generated by cameras are a significant source of revenue, showing that in 2007 just £4 out of every £60 raised in penalties was net income to the Treasury and there was no surplus for local authorities or the police.
Commenting on the report, Professor Stephen Glaister, director of the RAC Foundation, said:
“The current crisis in funding for speed cameras – and road safety in general – leaves road users at real risk. The clear evidence is that if speed cameras were to be decommissioned then around 800 more people are likely to be killed or seriously injured on the roads each year.
“The government has said decisions on speed camera funding must be taken at local level which is why we are sending this evidence direct to all highway authorities. Councillors are perfectly within their rights to use scarce resources on things other than cameras but they need to know what the consequences could be.
“Professor Allsop’s work suggests scrapping cameras would be a big mistake because the cash to install them has already been spent; they save life and demonstrate value for money; and despite the headlines, most people accept the need for them.
“Speed cameras should never be the only weapon in the road safety armoury, but nor should then be absent from the battle.
“Some politicians say there are more cost effective ways to save life on the highway. It is the responsibility of these people to demonstrate what these are.”
The RAC Foundation is sending a copy of the report to every highway authority in the country as they consider how best to spend their reduced road safety budgets.
The RAC Foundation
The Royal Automobile Club Foundation for Motoring Ltd is a charity which explores the economic, mobility, safety and environmental issues relating to roads and responsible road users. Independent and authoritative research, carried out for the public benefit, is central to the Foundation’s activities.
In 2009 the Foundation undertook or commissioned more than a dozen pieces of research, relating to such matters as the legality of wheel clamping on private property, the way road accidents are investigated and the future administration of the road network.
The Foundation also published the Car in British Society which revealed just how ingrained car ownership and use is in this country.
More details of the work carried out by the Foundation can be found in the research section of its website.
New Report Draws Parallels between Pedestrians and Wildebeest
Wildebeest waiting nervously at a river’s edge for the first to cross in a bid to outsmart patrolling crocodiles. Shoals of fish swimming in compact formation, sticking together in an attempt to reduce the chance of being eaten. Penguins waiting at the edge of an ice flow for a plucky individual to dive into the water first before the rest follow in a bid to avoid waiting seals.
Ring any bells?
Apparently it should. A recent report headed by biologist Dr Jolyon Faria of Princeton University has revealed that the herding behaviour common in the natural world is mirrored by pedestrians when crossing the road.
Dr Faria found that pedestrians were up to 2.5 times more likely cross a busy road if someone else stepped out in front of the traffic first. Men were also more likely to follow others into the road than females. In some cases individuals started to cross before diving back to the kerb after realising the danger they were in.
It is hoped that the research might help to make people think twice before stepping out into the road. Around 13,000 pedestrians are injured each year crossing the road in the UK.
Click here to read more on the Telegraph.
Official asks councils to show common sense over parking tickets
Caroline Sheppard, chief adjudicator of the Traffic Penalty Tribunal, has suggested that motorists who are given parking tickets for petty breaches of the rules should be let off if they appeal against the penalties.
The Telegraph has today reported that the Chief Adjudicator of the Traffic Penalty Tribunal, Caroline Sheppard, has criticised local authorities’ “zero tolerance” approach to minor parking infringements.
Mrs Sheppard has apparently complained that motorists were being punished for leaving one wheel over the white line of a car park bay, or failing to display their pay-and-display ticket correctly.
In such cases, drivers whose penalties were upheld on appeal to town halls have subsequently had them overturned by the tribunal. In many cases councils were found to be failing in their statutory duty to give proper consideration to representations made by motorists contesting penalties, or to evidence offered in mitigation, and as such failed properly to exercise their discretion. Motorists have therefore been urged to appeal against penalties if they think they have been dealt with unfairly or illegally.
Mrs Sheppard’s comments follow concern that motorists’ letters of explanation to town halls were often dismissed with a standard response letter of one or two lines, in which many councils had taken the view that it was fairer to reject all representations, rather than ‘let off’ people who made representations.
The Adjudicator also expressed disappointment that the tribunal was still being asked to determine appeals against penalties issued on streets where road signs were misleading and confusing.
About the Traffic Penalty Tribunal
The Traffic Penalty Tribunal decides appeals against parking penalties issued by Civil Enforcement Authorities in England (outside London) and Wales and against bus lane penalties issued by Civil Enforcement Authorities in England (outside London).
The Traffic Penalty Tribunal is the final stage of appeal for motorists or vehicle owners against a penalty issued by a council in England (outside London) and Wales. As such, before an appeal can be made it is essential to have been through all the preliminary stages of challenge directly with the penalty-issuing authority.
Nonetheless everyone has the right to appeal to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal against a penalty charge notices they consider has been issued to them incorrectly. The appeal must be made on formal grounds – or reasons – for example on the basis that the contravention did not occur, or there was a procedural impropriety by the council.
The Tribunal received 12,423 submissions last year, an increase of 11 per cent on the previous year’s figure.
Of cases decided by the tribunal, 34 per cent were won by the motorist because the council did not contest the case and a further 28 per cent were decided in favour of the motorist after the adjudicator considered and rejected the council’s arguments, meaning that 62 per cent of all appeals were successful.
Keepmedriving
If you are considering an appeal against a parking ticket, you can contact keepmedriving for free, no obligation preliminary advice.
As part of Richard Nelson LLP, keepmedriving has access to a wide resource of legal and technical expertise and can assist with you with any issue which should arise.
Controversial 20mph speed limits in residential streets may not bring any significant improvement in road safety, a report commissioned by the Department for Transport has found. However, are fears reflected in media reportage unfounded?
In 2007 Portsmouth became the first city in the UK to introduce a scheme whereby all residential streets would be subject to a 20mph speed limit. 20mph zones swiftly followed in Newcastle upon Tyne, Oxford, Edinburgh and Bristol, with towns and cities across Britain planning to introduce the Government backed limits, claiming that they will cut the toll of deaths on the road.
However, analysis by consultants Atkins, on behalf of the Department for Transport, found that the average number of people killed or seriously injured annually in Portsmouth rose from 18.7 to 19.9 after the scheme was launched in 2007.
This finding has resulted in concern across the media and similar blogging sites that the controversial 20mph speed limits now being introduced throughout Britain may not bring any significant improvement in road safety. Yet are their fears unfounded? I suggest they might be, for three reasons.
First, whilst previous studies found that 20mph zones deployed alongside traffic-calming and enforcement measures produce reductions in average speed, the limit in Portsmouth is not enforced by speed humps or cameras and instead relies on self-regulation. It would therefore be no surprise if mere signs did not result in dramatic changes (although it is notable that Swindon, for example, reported a sharp drop in the number of accidents over the past year after speed cameras were switched off).
Secondly, and on a related point, according to Atkins, the average speed of motorists as measured at 223 locations across the city did in fact drop by 1.3pmh from 19.8mph to 18.5mph as a result of the scheme. Taking into account people with less serious injuries, overall road casualties fell by 22 per cent after the scheme was introduced. It would hardly be unreasonable to correlate the two results, and conclude that the scheme has resulted in reduced speeds, fewer casualties, and therefore enhanced road safety.
Finally it has been suggested that it would in fact be unwise to draw any conclusions from the report. Atkins could only draw on three years of road safety data to compile its results – therefore anomalously high or low casualty figures either side of the introduction of the scheme could easily distort results. Indeed any reduction in casualties should be considered in light of the fact that, over the same time period, there was a nationwide fall in road casualties of 14 per cent. It is also notable that independent statisticians have criticised the way that the figures had been calculated, citing incorrect usage of statistical terminology and the lack of a control group. This report by an independent contractor is only one of a number of research documents available to help councils, and relates to a single scheme with its own discrete issues.
In view of the above, I would suggest that it would be naive to jump to conclusions.
Have Your Say
Do you live in an area where 20mph speed limits have been introduced? Alternatively do you think your area should be speed limited? We want to hear from you!
Prescott’s Folly M4 Bus Lane to be Suspended
The M4 Bus Lane runs eastbound towards London for 3.5 miles between junctions 3 and 2 of the three lane section of motorway. At present it may be used only by licensed black taxis, motorcycles and buses.
However the lane will temporarily be suspended by way of Experimental Order under the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984, after latest analysis showed that journey times at peak periods would be reduced for car drivers and hauliers without significantly affecting vehicles currently allowed to use the lane. The most recent statistics showed only 14 £60 fixed penalty notices being issued to drivers in 2008.
In 1999 the lane, labeled ‘Prescott’s folly’, attracted a measure of notoriety when the Tony Blair’s motorcade was spotted using it as the rest of the traffic made rather slower progress in the other two lanes.
Work will commence to suspend the lane on 8 November 2010 – including the removal of signs and road markings and introduction of a revised road layout – with the lane expected to be fully open to all road users from 24 December 2010.
The suspension will remain in place until June 2012 when the lane becomes part of the Olympic Route Network for the London 2012 Olympic and Paralympic Games.
The Highways Agency will monitor the suspension over the next 18 months and traffic data gathered will be used to inform the Government’s final decision about the future of the bus lane.
At this stage, however, the intention is to remove the lane permanently.
The Road Safety Act 2006 made provision for a post-court educational intervention for four traffic offences: speeding, careless and inconsiderate driving, ignoring traffic signs and using a special road contrary to scheme or regulation.
For each of these offences the courses would be offered to:
- people who attend court for the above offences and for which the court, having decided that an x number of points and a y amount of fine is imposed, puts the total endorsements on the driver’s licence at between 7 and 11 points; and
- people who attend court for the above offences and for which the court decided that they will be disqualified from driving for at least one year.
On completion of the course, offenders would be offered a reduction in their endorsement points or disqualification period.
In anticipation of the possibility of these new courses, the Department for Transport commissioned research to provide a detailed exploration of the person characteristics of likely course attendees, as well as general views of police and magistrates as to the contribution such a course could make to road safety.
The findings, however, are somewhat pessimistic about whether the course would work, citing the fact that many drivers said they would rather take the points or ban rather than spend time on the courses. The report also went on to note that some more serious driving offenders see their penalties as a result of bad luck or overemphasis by society on motoring offending, rather than due to illegal or dangerous driving on their part. As such, “when there is damage or an injury involved it is often interpreted as the fault of someone or something else”.
A summary is set out below:
- Interviews with offenders indicated that drivers who
- overestimate their own driving skills
- show little remorse
- value engaging in the offences for their own sake, and
- hold a high opinion of their ability to escape punishment
appear to be disproportionately represented among likely course attendees.
- There was also an over-representation of drivers with a criminal record or other previous driving offences in the respondents interviewed.
- Many of the offenders interviewed said they would refuse the offer of a course due to a preference for alternative penalties (in part due to their opinion of themselves as skilled drivers, being able to overcome disadvantages of disqualification, seeing disqualification as worth it to lose points, or simply planning to drive illegally, etc.).
- Ministry of Justice statistics and interviews with a small number of magistrates and police officers suggested that very few offenders going through the courts would meet the eligibility criteria for the proposed course (i.e. 7–11 points on conviction, disqualification of one year or more). As such, it would be difficult to organise courses, especially as multiple attendances would require reasonable proximity to a residential area.
- A feasible and popular option among the police and magistrates interviewed would be to widen the criteria of eligibility and make post-court attendance part of an alternative for all driving offenders who have a set of attitudes which encourage speeding and risky driving.
Quite when the course will be introduced is still unclear and, no doubt, the DfT’s findings will provide ammunition for critics who will inevitably question whether certain offenders should remain on the road.
Have Your Say
Have you experienced post-court educational intervention? What do you think about the proposed course? Have your say in the comment section below.
KeepMeDriving
If you drive for a living, or simply would find family or social life difficult if you were unable to drive, then you should be thinking carefully about ways in which you can ensure that you do not lose your licence.
Clearly the most important step in making sure you do not lose your licence is to drive safely and responsibly. However, sometimes things do not go according to plan and you find that you have been caught speeding or committing some other driving offence.
In this event we would encourage you to contact KeepMeDriving, where our specialist road traffic lawyers will be happy to provide free preliminary advice.
There are a number of ways in which you can contact us:
- Email: help@keepmedriving.co.uk
- Telephone: 084 4804 4804
- Emergency out of hours (for example when someone has been arrested or is at the police station): 07952 861868
- Online: complete and submit the appropriate information/enquiry forms in our Getting Help section
- Snail Mail: write to us at any of our offices
Highways Agency Warns Drivers of Deer Accident Risks
As autumn approaches, the Highways Agency is asking drivers to watch out for deer, particularly at dawn and dusk.
Every year, people are killed or injured in road collisions with wild deer around England. There have been over 2,000 recorded deer-vehicle collisions since January 2009 on the motorway and A-road network alone.
74,000 deer-vehicle collisions each year
It is estimated that there are up to 74,000 deer-vehicle collisions every year in the UK. Most deer are killed, but thousands are left to die of injuries. Periods of highest risk are autumn and spring, and around dawn and dusk. A key to reducing the number and severity of deer-vehicle collisions is to for drivers to be ‘deer aware’. This means you should slow down and watch out when you see deer close to the road.
The DeerAware programme aims to raise public awareness of the danger of wild deer on the roads and reduce the number of collisions. New publicity material is now available, targeting local deer collision ‘hotspots’.
On The Spot Issues Results of Research on the Characteristics of Speed-related Collisions
The Government has always maintained that an understanding of the causes of road collisions is essential in formulating strategies for reducing their incidence. Speed is clearly implicated in a proportion of the collisions that occur on our roads but it is plainly important to understand how large this proportion is, and under what circumstances drivers make speed choices.
On The Spot
The On The Spot (OTS) accident research project began in 2000. It is funded by the Department for Transport and the Highways Agency. Its aims are to establish an in-depth database that can be used to improve the understanding of the causes and consequences of road traffic collisions and thus aid the Government in reaching its road casualty reduction targets.
This project reviews real-world accidents from the OTS investigation study and differentiates between:
(a) those where speed was known to have caused or contributed to the collision, and
(b) those where other factors were cited.
The characteristics of the accidents that involved ‘speed’ and those that did not have been compared with respect to the driver/rider demographics and behaviour, the road environment, types of vehicle and the nature of the collision.
Data from the study were used to investigate the characteristics of speed-related road traffic accidents. This allowed the profiles of speed-related and non-speed-related collisions to be compared and their respective natures to be explored.
It was found that the majority of speed-related collisions involved some loss of control of the vehicle, usually on a bend. Other characteristics that were over-represented for speed-related accidents included unclassified rural roads, young male drivers and risk-taking behaviour.
Main findings
Collisions were examined where vehicles were exceeding the speed limit or travelling at inappropriate speed. The main findings were:
- The majority of speed-related collisions involved some loss of control of the vehicle, usually loss of control on a bend.
- Collisions occurring on unclassified rural roads were over-represented in speed-related accidents. Excess speed was over-represented on 30 mph roads, and inappropriate speed was over-represented on 60 mph rural roads.
- Male drivers under the age of 30 were over-represented in speed-related collisions. This was particularly so for males aged under 21. Read more…
Bentley Recalls Arnage, Azure and Brooklands over fears Flying B could impale pedestrians
From iconic adornment to potential deadly lance: issues with the legendary “Flying B” has prompted a recall of almost 1,500 Bentleys over fears it could impale pedestrians during an collision.
The motif dates back to the late 1920s, when W O Bentley was operating out of Cricklewood in north London. It survived until the 1970s when it was withdrawn for safety reasons, only to return in 2006. Much like the Mercedes and Jaguar motifs, the Bentley “Flying B” is now designed to retract in the event of an accident.
However water seepage which may occur in some models – the Arnage, Azure and Brooklands – has been found to result in the potential for corrosion, which may affect the way the mechanism operates. The fault has prompted the company to recall 1,426 cars built between October 2006 and October 2009 – including 298 in Britain.
Nonetheless according to Bentley there have been no reports of any accidents or injuries, and the recall is taking place only as a precaution.
The Arnage and Azure were subject to a previous recall in 2007 because of problems with retaining bolts which could ultimately have led to a wheel becoming detached.
New Dutch Superbus Unveiled
The prototype of a 155mph “Superbus” is to be unveiled in Germany by Delft University of Technology.
The brainchild of Dutch astronaut professor Wubbo Ockels, the “bus” is capable of carrying 23 passengers and is being billed as a “future vision of sustainable public transport. However although as long as a conventional bus, it looks more like a cross between Ridley Scott’s Alien and a stretch limousine, and technically is more akin to a coach.
Built from lightweight carbon, it will be powered by four electric motors and drive on dedicated lanes (which may even be geothermically heated in order to prevent icing in the winter season) before crossing a barrier and joining the rest of the traffic as it approaches the city centre. At this point radar will kick in, which will help the driver prevent collisions.
The current idea is to offer a dedicated rival to train and bus travel, where passengers could ‘order’ the Superbus via the Internet or telephone, and thereafter enjoy luxury business-class style travel.
The Dutch Government has invested £7.5 million of the £8,4 million earmarked for the scheme to date and it is anticipated that the Superbus will first enter service in the Netherlands.
