Free Traffic Legal Advice

Quote from: Lynch004 on February 04, 2026, 01:13:25 am

Which going by your logic, why have they bothered putting the signs up along the other 155 miles of my route? 

Who is "they"? I suspect over that 155 mile route you have passed through several police force areas and councils. I think this horse has been flogged enough, let it RIP.

My comment was meant in jest, hence the tone and the use of an emoji. Sorry if this was lost in translation.

Anyhow, thank you for your advice and time in responding

Quote from: Lynch004 on February 04, 2026, 01:04:22 am

But why stop encouraging people to slow down on this particular stretch of road? Surely, the signage should still be there?

Signs cost money, so why put them up if you don't have too?

Which going by your logic, why have they bothered putting the signs up along the other 155 miles of my route? 

There was a popular misconception many years ago, that there was a requirement for speed cameras to be conspicuous in order for the speeding offence to be prosecuted. This was largely due to Tony Blair saying that that was going to be the case. Surprisingly enough, it was a big fat lie.

What the rules actually were, before they were rescinded many years ago, at first glance at least, that in order for the safety camera partnerships to be able to retain the income from the fixed penalties (and return any surplus they hadn't managed to fiddle to the exchequer), 85% of enforcement sites had to meet the conspicuity requirements. This had no bearing whatsoever on the admissibility of the evidence, it was just a rule regarding keeping the money. Except that the rules were enforced by the safety camera partnerships themselves - if they became aware that they were not complying with the rules, they had the power to report themselves to themselves and then decide whether or not they still ought to keep the money.

Nothing like a bit of self regulation 

The Journey I take M5, M50, A40 has a couple of Camera Vans on its route, The locations of which I am familiar with. So for me to receive the NIP without any expectance really did surprise me, the camera was definitely discreet,
Also, the 20+ miles of the M50 has no Speed Camera signs displayed.

As I have mentioned, I am not excusing the fact I was speeding, obviously I would ideally like to avoid the fine and points but hey ho. I just question why the Constabularies bother with the signage in the first place if it is not required. The whole 165 miles of my journey has Speed camera warnings/in operation signs apart from the said section of the M50. 

Is there no video on their website ? Most councils have photos and video. The photos are, of course, frames from the video which is the sole evidence.

If you want full and proper advice from the experts, please read this and update your thread accordingly:-
https://www.ftla.uk/civil-penalty-charge-notices-(councils-tfl-and-so-on)/read-this-first-before-posting-your-case!-this-section-is-for-council-tfl-dartme/

As regards getting reps rejected, do be aware that councils reject >95% of reps because they know that most people then just cough-up. Don't just assume the council rejection means the signage is adequate; in the council world, all signage is perfect. Experience of this forum is that it isn't in a great many cases !

Thank you for your time replying.

All evidence is from a head on view, video/stills just show a car driving. I think you have answered my main concern, that being using the CCTV request after failed reps.

Morning,

From my limited/primitive "Man search" I probably should address this email to @hypprocates.

Basically, my better half received a Bus Lane PCN for a 34J being in a Bus lane, on Arundel Gate (Northeast Bound).
She appealed this before I became aware of the incident. The appeal was on the basis of the following:
Poor Signage
No adequate means to/or warning to turn around
Not being from the area
First offence
The offence is for a Bus lane contravention, yet it is actually for allegedly passing through a bus gate.

These representations were duly dismissed by Sheffield City Council.

So....

I have viewed the Evidence, which shows nothing more than a vehicle driving along a road, from a head on view and it does not show any of the signage it has allegedly passed.

So my question is what is the best form of defence, the request of CCTV for driving through the alledged signage.
happy to post copies of paperwork, just thought I would clarify first.
Thanks
Lynch