teuchter
je suis teuchter
Likewise black box recorders and speed limiters are completely feasible technologies that could be required in new cars.
Speeding and general dangerous driving in and around Brixton
- Thread starter teuchter
- Start date
Spymaster
Plastic Paddy
There's research to back him up. If you de-restrict roads people don't all suddenly start driving as fast as their cars will allow. There are plenty of stretches of road where there would be practically no chance of getting caught speeding but everyone doesn't drive them at 150 mph. Most people drive at a speed that they feel safe at which, unsurprisingly, often seems to be at or around speed limits (except on motorways iirc). There's a lot more to road planning than 'lower limits, safer roads'.
teuchter
je suis teuchter
So, on the issue of whether speed cameras pay for themselves - in response to mauvais ' suggestion that it's budgetary rather than political issues that stop more cameras being installed - I looked up this report:
www.speedcamerareport.co.uk/4_year_evaluation.pdf
In there there is a fair bit of discussion of cost recovery. Their conclusion is that in cost terms there's a net benefit:
So does their assessment take into account the follow-up costs to police and the courts? As far as I an see yes it does:
Essentially all the 'partnerships' recovered their costs with a surplus being paid to HMT.
The report also makes the important point about costs associated with crashes and injuries. So the actual revenue from the cameras is only part of the 'benefit' side of the financial equation. The cost of dealing with the aftermath of crashes are significant. Once they are factored in there's a very substantial benefit to the public purse of enforcement. But even without that, the cameras pay for themselves.
The reasons there aren't more cameras are mainly political.
www.speedcamerareport.co.uk/4_year_evaluation.pdf
In there there is a fair bit of discussion of cost recovery. Their conclusion is that in cost terms there's a net benefit:
(page 8)
So does their assessment take into account the follow-up costs to police and the courts? As far as I an see yes it does:
(page 82)
Essentially all the 'partnerships' recovered their costs with a surplus being paid to HMT.
The report also makes the important point about costs associated with crashes and injuries. So the actual revenue from the cameras is only part of the 'benefit' side of the financial equation. The cost of dealing with the aftermath of crashes are significant. Once they are factored in there's a very substantial benefit to the public purse of enforcement. But even without that, the cameras pay for themselves.
The reasons there aren't more cameras are mainly political.
mauvais
on reddit or something
Yes, the current cameras on average pay for themselves and related road traffic initiatives, but then it could be argued that this is a product of siting guidelines. If a new wave of cameras don't catch enough people - or as a wider benefit prevent enough casualties - then obviously it stops happening.
Costs per se are also not necessarily the problem with the police & courts, which is volume of work in relation to the overall public good - i.e. not clogging up the courts with motoring offences.
Costs per se are also not necessarily the problem with the police & courts, which is volume of work in relation to the overall public good - i.e. not clogging up the courts with motoring offences.
teuchter
je suis teuchter
There's zero evidence of your claim, in that opinion piece, relating to American roads, you link to.
What that article is talking about is risk of motor vehicles being involved in accidents, related to prevailing speed. On American highways. It ignores the implications for pedestrians and other users. It's entirely irrelevant to what we're discussing here.
teuchter
je suis teuchter
Volume of work problem is the same as a cost problem. Provide more court staff if necessary, with the revenue generated, which the report says is sufficient. If we approach a point of diminishing returns, thanks to siting guidelines, then we review the situation. Is there any evidence at all that we are approaching that point?
They also appear to be eye wateringly expensive - 12.5k first year, 8.5k thereafter. Which will affect this a lot.
You only clog up the courts if offences end up there.
The other way to do this would be via insurance.
Introduce a new grade of zero cost motoring offence, for low end speeding. Cost drivers in the pocket via insurance costs.
Alex
RoyReed
Must fly!
For that they'd have to be insured in the first place. I wouldn't mind betting that a lot of the motorists who've been talked about in this thread are uninsured.
Driving records including penalty points are already factored into insurance premiums, this is already happening.
Only if you get caught
For a camera? In criminal justice terms, that strikes me as pretty darned cheap.
Gramsci
Well-Known Member
I'm asking straightforward question as a Lambeth resident who lives on busy road.
Do you object to Lambeth council 20mph speed limit? Do you think it should be scrapped? Its not an unreasonable question.
I support it.
A mass produced camera for 30 grand over three years ?
Cheap ?
If that cost includes the cost of someone sending out fines it seems a bit better.
Alex
SpamMisery
Pretty comfortable here right under your skin
Welcome to the world of government procurement.
snowy_again
Slush
Last week:
Hopefully that includes the entire cost of running them, with the only additial cost being the stamps for the fine - but who knows !
Alex
T & P
|-o-| (-o-) |-o-|
I’ve never understood why the authorities have to wait until there have been several serious accidents at a spot before they can erect a speed camera. I can understand the government’s desire to control the number of cameras that get approved for installation, but the decision to approve them should be based on risk assessment and prevention, rather than wait for repeated carnage at a spot before deciding it could benefit from a camera.
cuppa tee
Well-Known Member
That gentleman looks like he shouldn't be allowed out on a kiddies trike without supervision...
Last edited:
SpamMisery
Pretty comfortable here right under your skin
I would imagine its something like that but may or may not include police staff time. Usually these figures are arrived at by dividing sum of the contract by the number of, in this, cameras. That normally includes things like through-life support and they might have included police staff time, they might not.
teuchter
je suis teuchter
Where did those numbers come from, anyway?
BBC website but I now can’t find it.
This
Gatso Speed Cameras Explained and How They Work
says 20k urban / 40k country.
Alex
teuchter
je suis teuchter
We need to invent some kind of something that leaves a traceable record of such collisions on the culprit's vehicle, so that the cost of constantly fixing all these things can be recovered from drivers' insurance instead of public money. A bit like the ink that explodes all over bank robbers.
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
or you could use cctv / anpr to get a licence number
snowy_again
Slush
That film / data gets deleted, or isn't shared despite public requests though...
Spymaster
Plastic Paddy
This is a Lambeth thread, remember. Most of these cars are probably nicked.
Festina lente, ennitThese have just been driven into and knocked into the street, again, by someone in a hurry. It happens all the time. View attachment 144069 (loughborough junction).
Gramsci
Well-Known Member
The issue you are referring to is in Loughborough Junction.
The cars that go through it are middle class people going through a working class area to get to there nice houses in south London.
Gramsci
Well-Known Member
I was going down Loughborough road this week. There is the old road narrowing traffic calming measures in the road.
This week in morning saw workers fixiing the lighted plastic bollards again. Coming back up today noticed the bollards on one had been knocked out and had disappeared.
This started during the road closures.
Its happening so regularly now I think it is deliberate.
Personally I find it rather aggressive.
Similar threads
