Old signs 'illegal'

The study of British and Irish roads - their construction, numbering, history, mapping, past and future official roads proposals and general roads musings.

There is a separate forum for Street Furniture (traffic lights, street lights, road signs etc).

Registered users get access to other forums including discussions about other forms of transport, driving, fantasy roads and wishlists, and roads quizzes.

Moderator: Site Management Team

Post Reply
User avatar
Bryn666
Elected Committee Member
Posts: 35754
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2002 20:54
Contact:

Post by Bryn666 »

Even with beer goggles on I doubt you'd mistake that for a 50 sign.
Bryn
Terminally cynical, unimpressed, and nearly Middle Age already.
She said life was like a motorway; dull, grey, and long.

Blog - https://showmeasign.online/
X - https://twitter.com/ShowMeASignBryn
YouTube - https://www.youtube.com/@BrynBuck
User avatar
Lewis
Member
Posts: 1765
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2005 11:40
Location: Shoreham, Nr Brighton, Sussex

Post by Lewis »

I think weve had this discussion before. According to the highway code, an NSL sign in an urban area does indeed mean 30mph.

But come on, how does a flat topped 3 look like a 5, it doesnt. I really do think that the teacher should be charged with speeding.
DavidBrown
Member
Posts: 8398
Joined: Sun May 29, 2005 00:35

Post by DavidBrown »

Lewis wrote:But come on, how does a flat topped 3 look like a 5, it doesnt. I really do think that the teacher should be charged with speeding.
The weird thing is we don't officially know why he got away with it. On Friday night's BBC Spotlight, there was a report on this. The reporter requested under the Freedom of Information act to the Safety Camera Patnership how many speeding convictions were made from this camera, and why the teacher's prosicution was dropped. Both times, they refused to tell him.

So much for freedom of information. :roll:
User avatar
PeterA5145
Member
Posts: 25347
Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2002 00:19
Location: Stockport, Cheshire
Contact:

Post by PeterA5145 »

Lewis wrote:But come on, how does a flat topped 3 look like a 5, it doesnt. I really do think that the teacher should be charged with speeding.
He was, but the case was dropped.
“The human race divides politically into those who want people to be controlled and those who have no such desire.” – Robert A. Heinlein
User avatar
Lewis
Member
Posts: 1765
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2005 11:40
Location: Shoreham, Nr Brighton, Sussex

Post by Lewis »

PeterA5145 wrote:
Lewis wrote:But come on, how does a flat topped 3 look like a 5, it doesnt. I really do think that the teacher should be charged with speeding.
He was, but the case was dropped.
OK then smartypants, he should have been convicted of speeding. :-)
Lil
Member
Posts: 466
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2005 23:15

Post by Lil »

To me personally, it looks nothing like 50.

This aside, I think again, too much emphasis is placed on low speed = better driving, or rather that speed is the only means of affecting road safety and low speed = good driving.

Balls.

Only today did I have a silly sod within 3yds of the back of my car as I was driving down the lovely A272, and it is NSL and I was doing a steady 50mph—rather than the business of speeding up to 60 and then slamming on the brakes down to 40 at a curve and so forth.

I personally do not see 50mph on a winding S2 a slow speed, so the driver behind me had poor driving not because he was following me at the same speed but because he was up my jaxxy—so that would be bad driving in my book. Of course, I have yet to see in 5 years of driving any one policing tailgating.

Then there was someone yapping on their phone, not forgetting half of the driving population who do not indicate any of their manouveres but just do it expecting your intuition to tell you where they are going, those who do not know how to use a roundabout, middle/outside lane hogs... The list goes on—but these are all examples of poor driving that I experienced at least once today AND things that constitute bad driving skill, regardless of speed involved.

Do you see these being police nearly as much? Not on your nelly, but they should be. Speed is to my mind not the only way to increase road safety but just one part of driving skill and safety... But no, we focus on speed limits, speed cameras, painting our roads with a myriad of hatching and shading that would make Picasso blush and creating ugly slalom courses, topped off with 'Las Vegas' style neon flashing signs to make the once scenic village a cornucopia of road over-engineering crap. But don't you forget the neon backed chevron signs dears... Flurorecent yellow backed 12ft high signs in front of the village green...

The issue that arises from this is a worrying one. The on whereby it is apparent already that unless there is an explicit sign guiding the driver what to do, at which speed to do it at, and when to do it etc., the modern day driver is incapable of taking rational and well judged decisions of his or her driving, and adjusting their style of driving that is suitable to the place in which they are passing through at the time.

Unfortunately it seems that the nanny state has decided that we needed it rammed down our throats how everything should be done, so that the less bright folk (sorry, it's not PC but hey...) become absolutely lost when there isn't a sign by the side of the road telling them how they should be driving.

So it seems we will continue down this merry path of turning little Winterbourne Green into something that will soon resemble a theme park ride in the middle of a Las Vegas casino, what with its red coloured humps, lurid white markings, flurorecent yellow repeater signs with forewarning of bends, flashing signs to tell you that yes—that is a cross road ahead and even though the limit is 30mph and you are doing 25mph, I'll bloody well flash like a jackpot machine anyway!

Oh a joy it is to walk!

Vicky
User avatar
bealach na ba
Member
Posts: 1868
Joined: Mon Nov 25, 2002 12:41
Location: Lochcarron and Dunfermline
Contact:

Post by bealach na ba »

boing_uk wrote:Street lighting automatically makes a road a restricted road - i.e. 30mph ...
Wouldn't be more correct to say that street lighting automatically denotes a restricted road and is equivalent to the use of "30" repeaters? Traffic orders are still needed to create a new speed limit, and installing lamps (without NSL repeaters, I mean) won't magically do so.
boing_uk
Account deactivated at user request
Posts: 5366
Joined: Wed Dec 04, 2002 16:01

Post by boing_uk »

No.

Street lighting automatically makes a road a restricted road. If it is to remain de-restricted you have to have a de-restriction order, or other traffic order in place for a speed limit other than 30mph.
User avatar
FosseWay
Assistant Site Manager
Posts: 19621
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2006 22:26
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden

Post by FosseWay »

boing_uk wrote:Street lighting automatically makes a road a restricted road. If it is to remain de-restricted you have to have a de-restriction order, or other traffic order in place for a speed limit other than 30mph.
That's what I was always led to believe by my driving instructor.

But, based on the case we're discussing, there seems to be a contradiction. (Leave aside the other argument of whether the pre-Worboys sign was legal: let's presume for a minute it isn't.)

If there's a missing/'wrong' 30 sign at the start of a restricted zone, despite street lighting at regulation intervals, it would seem that the restriction can't be enforced. Now, does this apply only up to the first camera within the restriction, or to every other camera/cop you drive past before you reach another speed limit sign?

Put another way: I live on an estate of 30-limited, street-lit roads. The main road is NSL, then 40, then 30 as it comes into town. If the 30 sign was missing, presumably a jobsworth lawyer could get me off a ticket on the stretch of the road coming into town, if I was still doing 40. But if I drive off my estate onto the main road at a point where the latter has a 30 limit, could I get my lawyer to argue the same case because the starting 30 sign was missing, even though I hadn't driven past where it should have been?

Common sense would suggest no, but then why should I be treated differently for driving at the same speed on the same road, depending only on where I joined that road?

The streetlight rule for determining 30 limits may have its faults, but it does exist, and as such should surely be enforced in the same way as any other speed limit.

But regardless of any of the above, I was under the impression that ignorance is not a defence...
boing_uk
Account deactivated at user request
Posts: 5366
Joined: Wed Dec 04, 2002 16:01

Post by boing_uk »

Yes, but when leaving one limit for another there should be signs telling you that the limit has changed.

I would agree however that the presence of street lighting should automatically mean that the speed limit should be enforced as 30mph in the absence of other signs, especially if you are entering a street lit zone from an unlit NSL.

But you would not be able to do this in a lit area where the speed limit is greater than 30mph for a section. In that case you would have to put up signs instructing the change of limit.
User avatar
FosseWay
Assistant Site Manager
Posts: 19621
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2006 22:26
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden

Post by FosseWay »

boing_uk wrote:But you would not be able to do this in a lit area where the speed limit is greater than 30mph for a section. In that case you would have to put up signs instructing the change of limit.
Yes. And I agree that the signs *should* be there and visible, but human life is not perfect. Vandals vandalise, bad drivers knock stuff over, trees grow...

How long does the 'exemption' created by the lack of a 30 sign last? Say you're coming into a big city along a D2 that starts as 40 but reduces to 30 as the hazards become more numerous. The 30 signs at the start are missing, but let's say there's another 4 miles of D2 in the 30 limit. OK, I can see the grey area around going through a camera at 40 just after the missing 30 signs, but surely if there are no repeaters for the next 4 miles and you get caught at the end of this stretch, you haven't got a leg to stand on?
DavidBrown
Member
Posts: 8398
Joined: Sun May 29, 2005 00:35

Post by DavidBrown »

But lets take, for example, the M5 heading north from the M50. Streetlighing starts there and, IIRC, there's no NSL repeaters. Does that mean that after a few miles you assume that you've missed the 30 signs and slow to 30 along the motorway? Of course not.

As far as I am concerned, if you can prove that you entered the zone on a road without terminal limit signs or repeaters, then you have a very good case for challenging a speeding conviction.
User avatar
FosseWay
Assistant Site Manager
Posts: 19621
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2006 22:26
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden

Post by FosseWay »

DavidBrown wrote:But lets take, for example, the M5 heading north from the M50. Streetlighing starts there and, IIRC, there's no NSL repeaters. Does that mean that after a few miles you assume that you've missed the 30 signs and slow to 30 along the motorway? Of course not.
Does the street lighting rule apply on motorways?

The only time I can recall the derestriction sign being used on motorways, lit or unlit, is after roadworks, at the end of the variable speed limits on the M25/M42 and after random 50 limits such as you get on urban motorways.
if you can prove that you entered the zone on a road without terminal limit signs or repeaters, then you have a very good case for challenging a speeding conviction.
How do you prove this? To go back to my original example, I could either have headed into town past where the 30 sign should be, or start from my house which is already in the 30 limit, on a side road. Either way I would not have passed a 30 sign. Unless the police could prove otherwise, they would presumably have to take my word for it that I had headed in from out of town, as the burden of proof would be on them. This could potentially make every speed enforcing tactic -- Gatso or cop -- within the affected 30 zone meaningless just because of one missing sign.

This is bats! The streetlight rule isn't that difficult to grasp...
User avatar
sotonsteve
Member
Posts: 6079
Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2005 21:01

Post by sotonsteve »

I went for a drive around Old Bursledon near Southampton last night. Many of the roads are NSL, but they are extremely narrow and bendy, and often 30mph feels dangerous. Consistency, eh?

Anyway, there are streetlights on these roads, but I didn't see any NSL repeaters. I'm sure they weren't too far apart, but they were wooden post-mounted. Maybe emphasising such a speed limit is pointless (well, there is no maybe about it!).
DavidBrown
Member
Posts: 8398
Joined: Sun May 29, 2005 00:35

Post by DavidBrown »

sotonsteve wrote:I went for a drive around Old Bursledon near Southampton last night. Many of the roads are NSL, but they are extremely narrow and bendy, and often 30mph feels dangerous. Consistency, eh?

Anyway, there are streetlights on these roads, but I didn't see any NSL repeaters. I'm sure they weren't too far apart, but they were wooden post-mounted. Maybe emphasising such a speed limit is pointless (well, there is no maybe about it!).
You want to see pointless NSL repeaters?!
User avatar
PeterA5145
Member
Posts: 25347
Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2002 00:19
Location: Stockport, Cheshire
Contact:

Post by PeterA5145 »

FosseWay wrote:How long does the 'exemption' created by the lack of a 30 sign last? Say you're coming into a big city along a D2 that starts as 40 but reduces to 30 as the hazards become more numerous. The 30 signs at the start are missing, but let's say there's another 4 miles of D2 in the 30 limit. OK, I can see the grey area around going through a camera at 40 just after the missing 30 signs, but surely if there are no repeaters for the next 4 miles and you get caught at the end of this stretch, you haven't got a leg to stand on?
Surely this is something where in practice reasonableness would have to be tested by the courts.

It would not be reasonable to convict someone a few hundred yards inside a 30 zone if the terminal signs were missing. But equally, missing 30 signs on the other side of Stockport would not really be a valid defence to a prosecution for speeding ten miles away in central Manchester. Between the two is a grey area.
“The human race divides politically into those who want people to be controlled and those who have no such desire.” – Robert A. Heinlein
User avatar
Paul Townsend
Member
Posts: 841
Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2005 22:31
Location: Cardiff

Post by Paul Townsend »

Are there no "grandfather's rights" with the old signs? OK so to erect a new sign using the old standard would be illegal, but the old signs should still be valid if they haven't yet been replaced.

I don't know what the legal standing of Grandfather's Rights is, it's an expression used elsewhere to justify the continued existence of an old building or other structure that would be illegal if newly built now. Look at M50 J3 http://www.cbrd.co.uk/badjunctions/50-4221.shtml for example
User avatar
Mark Hewitt
Member
Posts: 31407
Joined: Fri Dec 17, 2004 12:54
Location: Chester-le-Street

Post by Mark Hewitt »

Paul Townsend wrote:Are there no "grandfather's rights" with the old signs? OK so to erect a new sign using the old standard would be illegal, but the old signs should still be valid if they haven't yet been replaced.
It shouldn't be the case IMO. Drivers have enough to think about with regard to regulatory signs having to understand and obey current signage, without having to know about all the signs which preceeded them!
User avatar
PeterA5145
Member
Posts: 25347
Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2002 00:19
Location: Stockport, Cheshire
Contact:

Post by PeterA5145 »

Paul Townsend wrote:Are there no "grandfather's rights" with the old signs? OK so to erect a new sign using the old standard would be illegal, but the old signs should still be valid if they haven't yet been replaced.
It is my understanding that there are "grandfather rights" with speed limit signs, which after all are in the same format, just a different font. I don't think there are any other common examples of pre-Worboys mandatory signs.

I suspect the authorities dropped this particular case because they were concerned that if they pursued it, there was a chance it might result in pre-Worboys speed limit signs being declared invalid, which would lead to a huge amount of refunds and considerable expense in replacing those that still existed, not to mention a lot of egg on faces :oops:
“The human race divides politically into those who want people to be controlled and those who have no such desire.” – Robert A. Heinlein
User avatar
SubaruImprezaWRX
Member
Posts: 2799
Joined: Mon Feb 20, 2006 12:37
Location: London

Post by SubaruImprezaWRX »

sotonsteve wrote:I went for a drive around Old Bursledon near Southampton last night. Many of the roads are NSL, but they are extremely narrow and bendy, and often 30mph feels dangerous. Consistency, eh?
I have thought this before.

I reckon :nsl: are simply to do with lack of poulation density - the actual type of road seems irrelevant.
Post Reply