20mph - is it legally enforceable?

[Dave83]

I live in a central London borough which would appear to have an ambiguous speed limit policy. There is street lighting but there are 20 roundels and so the speed limit is apparently 20mph but traffic often flows considerably above 20mph with no enforcement of the speed limit.

The area is not a 20mph zone and the only terminal signs seem to be where the council roads intersect with TfL roads and at the boundaries of the borough. There are 20 roundels every 200m or so but one can drive from street to street within the borough without passing any terminal signs or vertical roadside repeater signs.

Do you know in a court of law what the speed limit would be on such roads? 30mph (Street light rule) or 20mph?

I suspect the answer lies in the positioning of terminal signs but I can’t see clearly from legislation where terminal signs have to be placed.

I would be most grateful if anyone is able to answer my question and if you are able to refer to any court cases or legislation that back up your answer.

[WHBM]

I suspect your main road is a TfL Red Route, which requires the periodic 20 repeaters.

The lesser roads each side will have been designated by the borough a 20 zone, which only requires start and finish zone boundary signs.

Enforcement does not appear to take place by the Met Police any more than before, but one aspect is that if picked up for say 55mph, where in a 30 it would be a significant fine, in an official 20 it is more than 30 over the limit, which normally means a disqualification.

[Dave83]

The borough has designated the whole borough to be 20mph but there are no signs as you enter the borough to state that there is a borough wide 20 zone and within this particular part of the borough there is not a 20 zone, the only 20 terminal signs are on the boundaries of the borough and where the council roads cross the TfL roads. You can travel for miles within the borough on A roads, B roads and lesser roads all with 20 roundels but without passing terminal signs or vertical roadside 20 repeater signs.

My understanding from legislation is that 20 roundels are not sufficient in a court of law unless there is a 20 terminal sign. I am not sure if simply placing terminal signs at the boundaries of the borough would be sufficient in a court of law for the CPS to successfully win a case against a driver driving say 30mph on one of these supposed 20mph roads.

Westminster for instance places terminal signs on many of their streets with vertical 20 repeater signs in addition to the 20 roundels - this strategy would appear to be more squarely inline with legislation and easier to enforce in a court of law.

[jnty]

The borough has designated the whole borough to be 20mph but there are no signs as you enter the borough to state that there is a borough wide 20 zone and within this particular part of the borough there is not a 20 zone, the only 20 terminal signs are on the boundaries of the borough and where the council roads cross the TfL roads. You can travel for miles within the borough on A roads, B roads and lesser roads all with 20 roundels but without passing terminal signs or vertical roadside 20 repeater signs.

My understanding from legislation is that 20 roundels are not sufficient in a court of law unless there is a 20 terminal sign. I am not sure if simply placing terminal signs at the boundaries of the borough would be sufficient in a court of law for the CPS to successfully win a case against a driver driving say 30mph on one of these supposed 20mph roads.

Westminster for instance places terminal signs on many of their streets with vertical 20 repeater signs in addition to the 20 roundels - this strategy would appear to be more squarely inline with legislation and easier to enforce in a court of law.

I'm slightly confused - are there terminal '20mph' signs at every transition from a higher limit? Do they say '20mph ZONE' or are they just a larger '20mph' sign? Local authority boundaries have no particular relevance to speed limit signage rules. My understanding, backed up by TSM, is that roundels (and a lot of other road features) count as repeaters within lawfully signed 20mph zones.

There's nothing particularly weird, I don't think, about terminal signs being absent from within a blanket speed limit area. Many large built-up areas are entirely 30mph, indicated throughout only by street lights acting as repeaters, with terminal signs only placed at the edges of the built-up are. These areas could be many miles across and the average local journey may never pass a terminal sign as a result. Similarly, if you live on a rural NSL road you might be able to drive for tens of miles without seeing any speed limit signage at all.

Your example highlights the difficulties presented, in signage terms, as many roads authorities transition to mass use of 20mph limits in residential areas. The intent of the 'street lights' rule is presumably to make it so that the majority of residential/urban roads need no speed limit signage at all, which is obviously breaks down if miles and miles of the smallest roads now require 20mph repeaters or roundels. Wales has solved this problem by making 20mph the default residential limit, meaning that 30mph routes through residential areas need to be signed specifically as 40mph+ routes are now.

[WHBM]

One does recall that when 20mph zones first came along, they were described as "self enforcing". Some here may recall that expression.

Somehow along the way this got lost, particularly as anti-car zealots like Islington put up speed cameras, and even sent speeding tickets to London Buses.

[AndyB]

There are two separate things.

A 20 ZONE will have a sign saying so. It is shorthand for “expect road humps on any street until you reach the 30/ZONE ENDS sign” and is not usually enforced.

A straight 20 limit outside Wales requires repeaters, and means what it says. Belfast city centre has a blanket 20 restriction, but the average speed on the few through routes affected is nowhere near 20. It’s enforceable in theory, but it’s not going to be a high priority for the police unless they happen to be behind an idiot.

[jnty]

One does recall that when 20mph zones first came along, they were described as "self enforcing". Some here may recall that expression.

I do find it curious that TSM defines a 20mph roundel as a 'traffic calming measure' as part of the same list as speed bumps and chicanes. There is, in my experience, a big effectiveness gulf there. But to be honest this is really a reflection of a global dilemma where human brains don't seem to like driving on straight roads at 20mph but human bodies really don't like colliding with a tonne of metal at 30mph.

Edinburgh's implementation uses signed repeaters on many roads, as well as painted roundels. I don't know if they only rely on the repeaters for legal validity, or whether they perhaps alternate or something like that as a mechanism to boost compliance.

[FosseWay]

Personally I feel that the Welsh approach to signing 20 limits is the least problematic: simply redefine roads whose speed limit is defined by the presence of street lighting as 20 mph rather than 30, and then sign roads whose limit is to remain at 30 using repeaters in the same way as is currently done with 40s.

Where the Welsh government got it wrong was to take the attitude "change everything to 20 and sort the roads that really ought to be 30 out later". That's not acceptable, and brings the general 20 limit into disrepute, which is unfortunate, since on the vast majority of residential roads to which it now applies, it is a clear benefit.

[jnty]

Personally I feel that the Welsh approach to signing 20 limits is the least problematic: simply redefine roads whose speed limit is defined by the presence of street lighting as 20 mph rather than 30, and then sign roads whose limit is to remain at 30 using repeaters in the same way as is currently done with 40s.

Where the Welsh government got it wrong was to take the attitude "change everything to 20 and sort the roads that really ought to be 30 out later". That's not acceptable, and brings the general 20 limit into disrepute, which is unfortunate, since on the vast majority of residential roads to which it now applies, it is a clear benefit.

You can possibly argue that roads authority funding/priorities meant that that was the practical outcome in certain circumstances, but the Welsh government did publish guidance prior to the change intended to allow councils to consider which roads should stay at 30 and allow time for them to install signage to that effect.

[Dave83]

I am sincerely grateful for all of your responses.

To clarify the area in question is not a 20mph zone. Locals may however know from the media there is a borough wide 20mph speed limit. The council acknowledges drivers should not be expected to know which borough they are in and therefore accept speed limit signage is required, they however argue that roundels alone are sufficient. I understand that the ambiguity in signage makes it difficult for the Police to enforce 20mph in the borough, by contrast the clearer signage in the borough of Westminster & other Cities such as @jnty noted in Edinburgh removes ambiguity around 20mph speed limit on lit streets.

If you look at page 21 of the The (UK) Department of Transport's "Know your signs guide" (https://assets.publishing.service.gov.u ... ns-dft.pdf) it states "Road marking used in conjunction with upright signs to indicate the speed limit". Note the phrase "in conjunction". I gather this means roundels are irrelevant unless there are upright signs to indicate the speed limit.

Paragraph 81 of The DoT's "Guidance Setting local speed limits" (https://www.gov.uk/government/publicati ... eed-limits) states "20 mph limits are signed with terminal and at least one repeater sign, and do not require traffic calming. 20 mph limits are similar to other local speed limits and normally apply to individual or small numbers of roads but are increasingly being applied to larger areas." Note the requirement for terminal sign.

The question therefore seems to be where should the terminal signs be. I can see a good barrister successfully persuading a court of law that a 20 terminal sign a few miles away is not sufficient proof that the speed limit is 20mph on a lit street (30mph rule) even if it has 20 roundels on it, indeed I think that is why the borough of Westminster places vertical 20mph terminal signs on many of their roads and vertical 20mph repeater signs along most of their roads.

I am however not an expert in road signage and so would really appreciate if someone knows definitively in a court of law what the speed limit would be on such ambiguously sign posted roads and if you do know the answer any court cases or legislation that back up your answer.

[Ruperts Trooper]

I am sincerely grateful for all of your responses.

To clarify the area in question is not a 20mph zone. Locals may however know from the media there is a borough wide 20mph speed limit. The council acknowledges drivers should not be expected to know which borough they are in and therefore accept speed limit signage is required, they however argue that roundels alone are sufficient. I understand that the ambiguity in signage makes it difficult for the Police to enforce 20mph in the borough, by contrast the clearer signage in the borough of Westminster & other Cities such as @jnty noted in Edinburgh removes ambiguity around 20mph speed limit on lit streets.

If you look at page 21 of the The (UK) Department of Transport's "Know your signs guide" (https://assets.publishing.service.gov.u ... ns-dft.pdf) it states "Road marking used in conjunction with upright signs to indicate the speed limit". Note the phrase "in conjunction". I gather this means roundels are irrelevant unless there are upright signs to indicate the speed limit.

Paragraph 81 of The DoT's "Guidance Setting local speed limits" (https://www.gov.uk/government/publicati ... eed-limits) states "20 mph limits are signed with terminal and at least one repeater sign, and do not require traffic calming. 20 mph limits are similar to other local speed limits and normally apply to individual or small numbers of roads but are increasingly being applied to larger areas." Note the requirement for terminal sign.

The question therefore seems to be where should the terminal signs be. I can see a good barrister successfully persuading a court of law that a 20 terminal sign a few miles away is not sufficient proof that the speed limit is 20mph on a lit street (30mph rule) even if it has 20 roundels on it, indeed I think that is why the borough of Westminster places vertical 20mph terminal signs on many of their roads and vertical 20mph repeater signs along most of their roads.

I am however not an expert in road signage and so would really appreciate if someone knows definitively in a court of law what the speed limit would be on such ambiguously sign posted roads and if you do know the answer any court cases or legislation that back up your answer.

I'm confused - surely a "borough wide 20 mph limit" is exactly the same as a "20 mph zone"

[Dave83]

It is indeed confusing. If it was a 20mph zone then it would need to be signed as a 20mph zone which the area/borough is not. The type of sign that would be required if it was a 20mph zone is shown on page 21 (middle right) of The (UK) Department of Transport's "Know your signs guide" (https://assets.publishing.service.gov.u ... ns-dft.pdf).

[ellandback]

In practice, at least in my neck of the woods, and unless you're really taking the , it seems to be "words of advice" rather than penal enforcement. The local police round my way recently put a post on Facebook explaining they had been conducting checks on a local road that is subject to a 20 limit and that most drivers were compliant but a few who were doing 25mph were "stopped and given words of advice".

25mph is above the 10%+1 threshold that I believe would typically land you at least a speed awareness course if the limit were higher.

As an aside, their post was accompanied by an image of the checks being undertaken, quite clearly showing their vehicle, which was very much not a bus, parked in this layby, having driven past this sign. Given they were not on emergency business, are they allowed to do that?

[Chris5156]

Can you just tell us which borough is being discussed so we can talk about specifics?

[swissferry]

As an aside, their post was accompanied by an image of the checks being undertaken, quite clearly showing their vehicle, which was very much not a bus, parked in this layby, having driven past this sign. Given they were not on emergency business, are they allowed to do that?

I've been stopped by police doing spot checks in a bus stop layby before. I didn't think they should be using the bus stop, but I thought it wiser not to mention it at the time.

[Conekicker]

Wales has problems. I passed this the other day, the image sadly isn't up to date.
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.59837 ... &entry=ttu
The vertical 30s have been replaced by 20s, one of which has had the "20" sprayed over with paint. The horizontal 30 is still there, so it would be interesting to see that in court. I've passed other 20s in that part of Wales that have been defaced as well.

[Dave83]

Can you just tell us which borough is being discussed so we can talk about specifics?

I don't want to upset the council and so at this stage I would rather not disclose the borough in question but they have confirmed to me that they only have terminal signs at the boundary of the borough and then largely rely on roundel repeaters within the borough.

I think the borough is stretching too far the interpretation of "applying to individual or small numbers of roads" within paragraph 81* and so effectively the 20 roundels are irrelevant because any driver that starts and stops in the borough would never have passed a terminal sign and quite possibly not an upright repeater either and hence a driver's defence in a court of law could be the signage did not comply with "in conjunction with upright signs" from page 21 of the The (UK) Department of Transport's "Know your signs guide" (https://assets.publishing.service.gov.u ... ns-dft.pdf)

I have separately been informally told by a policeman that roundels are not speed limits unless they are accompanied by upright signs (which there are none in large parts of the borough).

* Paragraph 81 of The DoT's "Guidance Setting local speed limits" (https://www.gov.uk/government/publicati ... eed-limits) which states "20 mph limits are signed with terminal and at least one repeater sign, and do not require traffic calming. 20 mph limits are similar to other local speed limits and normally apply to individual or small numbers of roads but are increasingly being applied to larger areas."

[Chris5156]

Can you just tell us which borough is being discussed so we can talk about specifics?

I don't want to upset the council and so at this stage I would rather not disclose the borough in question but they have confirmed to me that they only have terminal signs at the boundary of the borough and then largely rely on roundel repeaters within the borough.

OK. From a bit of googling I will guess Waltham Forest but I’m not going to ask you to confirm. I think we may have an issue with terminology here: from the rest of your post I think you are using the word “roundel” to mean specifically speed limit signs painted on the surface of the road. Whereas I think the definition of a “roundel” is any circular sign of any sort - a painted one, or an upright sign of its face is circular, or the “London Underground” logo.

So, the situation is that the borough council have placed 20mph terminal signs where their blanket limit interfaces with other limits - which may be at the borough boundary or elsewhere, depending what other roads with other limits may be present - and then within the 20 limits they are relying largely or even solely on painted roundels on the road surface rather than upright repeaters.

If so - that’s certainly unusual. I’d expect a limit to be signed using regular vertical repeater signs in most cases. But it’s not necessarily wrong. For example, the blanket 40 limit covering the New Forest uses only painted repeaters on the road surface in most places and legislation exists to make that permissible, due to the special landscape considerations of the New Forest and the desire not to fill it with red circles on poles.

Certainly it was the case, once upon a time, that a painted roundel alone was not sufficient to satisfy the signage requirements for a speed limit. But equally it was the case that 20 zones needed traffic calming to comply, until repeater signs were classified in legislation as traffic calming devices. In other words, the rules keep changing, mostly in order to relax signage requirements to make speed limits easier to apply.

It seems to me that the only relevant question is whether a painted 20mph roundel on the road surface is now considered equivalent to an upright 20mph repeater roundel. That’s the question. Everything else (the fact it’s borough wide, the definition of a 20 limit in the guidance, etc) is immaterial.

[jnty]

To what degree are repeaters a strict legal requirement for any (non "zone") speed limit? Does the presence of street lighting after a terminal sign have a bearing on it?

[Chris5156]

To what degree are repeaters a strict legal requirement for any (non "zone") speed limit? Does the presence of street lighting after a terminal sign have a bearing on it?

The underlying concept is that a driver should be able to infer the speed limit from their surroundings. That was established in the 1930s when we just had restricted (30mph) roads and derestricted (then no limit, now NSL) roads. At that point you could look around and if there was a “system of street lighting” you were in a restricted area, if there was not, you were on an unrestricted road.

Provision was made for 30 limits on unlit roads, and street lighting on derestricted roads, by the use of repeater signs. They are there to make the limit apparent from your surroundings by making an indication of the limit visible from pretty much anywhere on the road.

When local limits came along - 20, 40, 50, 60 - they can never be indicated by the presence or absence of street lighting, so the only way to make those limits apparent from observation of your surroundings is to apply repeater signs. They always require them. The exception is 20 zones, which can use traffic calming instead, but they are a dying breed and repeaters are often used within them now anyway.