For all those who think that you are not entitled to refunds when a Traffic Order is defective read the press release below ...Meanwhile, just a reminder to all those councils who regularly read this blog ... Regulation 18 Local Authority Traffic Order Procedures ... if your signs are not correct then your traffic order is not in force. All monies derived from unlawfully marked locations will have to be refunded. The Chideock case wipes out the myth that is chanted regularly by Council press officers and Nick Lester of London Councils ... 'that if you paid the ticket you accepted the contravention.'
WRONG ... and more and more motorists are ready to start legal actions for restitution.
Chideock Speed Camera Partnership Update
Chideock Update - 19th June 2009
****PRESS RELEASE****
Technicality in the Traffic Regulation Order Relating
to the A35 in Chideock, West Dorset
This announcement follows the case of Regina v Dawe (see ‘Notes to Editors’ for details) and the Crown Court judgment that the Traffic Regulation Order (TRO) relating to the village of Chideock in West Dorset was defective due to a historical clerical error in the street name in the TRO.
The Dorset Safety Camera Partnership (DSCP) can confirm that it has secured agreement regarding dealing with speeding offences detected by the safety camera monitoring westbound traffic on the A35 in Chideock prior to 2007.
Each case will be reviewed individually and may result in motorists detected travelling over 30mph on the westbound safety camera in Chideock, prior to 2007, having the fixed penalty payment from this offence refunded and the related penalty points removed from their driving licence, if still valid.
Adrian Whiting, Assistant Chief Constable for Dorset Police and the Chair of the Dorset Strategic Road Safety Partnership, comments:
"Chideock is a small rural community with a main road running through the middle of the village and we are reassured that no one has tried to suggest that the speed limit should be anything other than 30mph.
"During the period this safety camera has been in operation it will have reduced drivers’ speeds through the village by acting as a deterrent, which will have helped to safeguard the safety of the people who live in Chideock and other road users. The public should be reassured by the fact that a new TRO is in place and the DSCP has recommenced enforcement there."
The DSCP will be writing to all drivers affected, to inform them of the situation and outline the process to follow if they wish to have their fixed penalty refunded and the related penalty points removed from their driving licence if still valid. Details of the process to follow if drivers think their offence is affected are available on the DSCP website – http://www.dorsetsafetycameras.org.uk/
The Dorset Safety Camera Partnership remains focused on working together to reduce the number of people who are killed or seriously injured on Dorset’s roads as a consequence of both excess and inappropriate speed.
Media Enquiries - please contact Nikki Haine or Matt McKenna on 01425 472330 or email
emily@mckennatownsendpr.com
NOTES TO EDITORS
Background information on the issues relating to the A35 westbound in Chideock and the Crown Court case of Regina v Dawe:
1. In 1997 a Traffic Regulation Order (TRO) relating to the village of Chideock, West Dorset was arranged. The order defined a length of the A35 westbound as subject to a 30mph speed limit. This was necessary as that stretch of road does not have a system of street lighting.
2. The text of the order referred to the A35 junction with "Seatown Road". This was a mistake as the road was then, and still is, correctly named "Duck Street".
3. At approximately 23:15hrs on the 27th October 2005 Mr Dawe was detected speeding by a fixed safety camera, travelling west in the village of Chideock. He was travelling at 41mph in a lorry, passing the houses where the safety camera is located and approaching the village Pubs. He has never disputed this speed, nor suggested it was sensible to drive that fast in the built-up area of the village.
4. He appealed his conviction on the grounds that the 30mph speed limit signs were not of the proper form. On the 26th October 2007 the Crown Court sitting at Dorchester found that the TRO was defective due to the road name issue, and thus the 30mph speed limit could not be enforced at that point on the A35 westbound. Accordingly the Court did not need to assess Mr Dawe’s actual grounds for appeal, and no finding on them was made.
5. Following the Crown Court judgement the organisations which make up the Dorset Safety Camera Partnership have been working with the appropriate Government departments to determine whether this judgement applies to other cases and agree an appropriate process for dealing with these offences.
The Dorset Safety Camera Partnership
The Dorset Safety Camera Partnership, which was set up in August 2002, constitutes a partnership between Dorset County Council, Borough of Poole Council, Bournemouth Borough Council, Dorset Police, NHS South West, Highways Agency, Her Majesty’s Courts Service and the Crown Prosecution Service.
The Partnership, through a combination of measures including education, engineering and enforcement, is working together to reduce the number of people who are killed or seriously injured on Dorset’s roads, as a consequence of both excess and inappropriate speed. It is responsible for the operation and maintenance of fixed site, mobile and red-light junction cameras throughout Dorset.
4 comments:
I have received a letter offering a refund for a penalty secured by this camera. It was the first speeding ticket I received in 30 years of driving and I was furious at the time. The road is a 40mph limit for some ten miles before Chideock and the change to the 30 limit is at the base of a steep hill. The speed limit sign was obscured by a parked horse trailer when I was caught at 8.50am on a sunday morning en route to Cornwall. Like the majority, I hate this money making scam and reject the local police chief's claim that no one disputed they were over the limit. Of course not, because we all know it's a waste of time - the system and authority will always proclaim themselves in the right as there is no independent appeals process.
I was caught in 2003 on Christmas Day - I was doing 38mph because I thought it was a 40mph zone. Also my only speeding ticket. I hope they have sorted the signage out now. I complained at the time as well.
I have received the letter too, I was caught in 2003, it was my first speeding fine. I was pissed off at the time, as I was coming off the dual carriageway on then hill above Chideock and slowing down, and didn't see the 30 mph sign, I just saw a village ahead and was slowing down because it was ahead.
I have also received the letter offering a refund. I was "caught" on this road doing 37mph on what I believed to be a 40mph road.
I was furious at the time and checked the speed with an on-line road map as I live in Essex and was only in Dorset as a one off for work.
Now 5 years later I have received this letter with no hint of an apology, an offer of a refund which will be paid within SIX MONTHS and just as the points on my licence are due to be expunged.
I am extremely unhappy about this as during these 5 years I have had to pay increased insurance premiums. I have NEVER had any points on my licence.
Post a Comment