|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
Motorists Pranked And Flashed By Speed Cam Road Sign
Article by: rob brady
Date: 21 May 2011
Practical jokers switched a 30mph sign with a 40mph one in a speed camera zone resulting in many unsuspecting motorists being flashed.
The sign was positioned in Wyke on one of the main routes into Bradford. The road's speed limit was officially changed to 30mph from a 40mph zone at the end of last year.
It's possible that the same pranksters were those responsible for placing a white sheet over a Bradford speed camera a few years ago, when, unbeknown to motorists, the sheet had a hole in it enabling the camera to flash those speeding past it.
The Yorkshire Post quoted the council’s principal engineer for Bradford South: “It’s a crassly irresponsible thing to do. It inconveniences the public and potentially puts them in breach of the speed limit and receiving a ticket.”
| Comments
|
 Posted by Darren on Sat May 21, 2011 3:11 pm |
 |
I'd like to hope that, now the prank has come to light, the SCP will cancel any tickets that were issued. But I'll wager they won't.
Instead it will be left up to a motorist to take the case to court and risk losing.
Darren Griffin |
|
| Posted by MaFt on Sat May 21, 2011 6:50 pm |
|
| Quote: | | Mr Badrock added: “Anyone who receives a fixed penalty notice related to the camera monitoring traffic travelling north on Woodside Road, between High Fernley Road and Carr House Lane, who believes the unauthorised sign was a factor should contact the partnership.” |
Surely a better way would be to simply contact all the people they sent a ticket to??!! Instead of hoping people will read the Yorkshire Post. Actually though, if they do that then they might not get as much money... 
MaFt
|
|
| Posted by jonbaker12345 on Sat May 21, 2011 9:14 pm |
|
MaFt is clearly correct with his comment.
If the Safety partnership know there is a problem with the camera site over a specific period of time, then surely in the interests of justice they should automatically void all tickets issued in that period of time?
I'm sure that anyone who was given a speeding ticket during the period of time that the signs were switched would be able to argue their case at court quite adequately.
I wonder why the signs were not corrected as soon as the authorities were alerted to the problem?
|
|
| Posted by Darren on Sat May 21, 2011 9:22 pm |
|
Ah I hadn't realised they were on record as taking the moral low ground in this already.
There was a previous cases where the paperwork for a camera in Devon had the wrong address. That invalidated the camera but they chose not to contact all the motorists who had paid fines. Only those who heard of the issue and contacted the SCP were reimbursed.
In another, they claimed that drivers had admitted guilt by paying a fine and so were not eligible for a refund even though the relevant paperwork for the camera was incomplete.
On the flip side, in the case of a camera in road works on the M56, where it was discovered that permission for the speed reduction had not been obtained, the SCP contacted every driver, re-imbursed the fines and removed the endorsement.
So it's a mess. Best we can do is broadcast it to as many people as possible.
Darren Griffin |
|
|
|
 |
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
