# Camera Vans



## Johnnywb (May 31, 2006)

Fucking c.un.t.s Just about got away with my last one (times out Dec 29th) and then last night, whilst driving north on the A38 though Filton, there's one of the tossers sat blocking an emergency crash gate to Filton Airport in his fucking Mercedes Vito with the back door up, saw him too late and unless he's a complete fucking chimp (possible) i'll be getting an NIP in the next two weeks. Wankers wankers wankers.


----------



## Hilly10 (Feb 4, 2004)

I hate them bastards so much just the other day went past one the other way. I had to pull in at a lay by because my lights went all haywire they just kept flashing. :roll: I dont think any NIPs will go out for that 15 mins :lol:


----------



## W7 PMC (May 6, 2002)

You'll be needing one of those Laser Jammers.

Mines being activated (& jamming them nicely  ) almost once a week by these feckers hiding in bushes.


----------



## Johnnywb (May 31, 2006)

Personally i'm blaming Audi. Had my car turned up when it should have originally, i would have had a laser diffuser on it and all would have been well, but no, i was still in the focus. FUCK.

Which jammer have you got W7? Sextons are offering me a deal on the Lidatek and Origin B2 system, but i've seen a review of the defender 2 claiming the lidatek is crap and the defender is the way to go??


----------



## Hannibal (Dec 1, 2003)

W7 PMC said:


> You'll be needing one of those Laser Jammers.
> 
> Mines being activated (& jamming them nicely  ) almost once a week by these feckers hiding in bushes.


That's interesting as I don't have a jammer or any points, but am no Mother Teresa when it comes to speed limits. Having said that, I often have a traffic enforced limit!

H


----------



## W7 PMC (May 6, 2002)

Johnnywb said:


> Personally i'm blaming Audi. Had my car turned up when it should have originally, i would have had a laser diffuser on it and all would have been well, but no, i was still in the focus. FUCK.
> 
> Which jammer have you got W7? Sextons are offering me a deal on the Lidatek and Origin B2 system, but i've seen a review of the defender 2 claiming the lidatek is crap and the defender is the way to go??


I've got the Target Lasertrack which is linked into my Hard-Wired Origin B2. Only got the front covered, but it does provide full 180degree frontal coverage. The neat part (if the police read this i'm for ever telling lies) is that you get 2 manuals with the 1st being for jamming & the 2nd being for garage/gate opening & of course that's the manual i have in the car with me in case i get quizzed.

Not really often doing silly speeds on UK roads, as i tend to keep my higher speeds for European roads & tracks. It has saved me at least twice where i was doing say 45ish on a 40mph unfamiliar country road & last week on the motorway were i was probably doing 85ish & jammed a laser gun a copper was pointing from his car on one of their little parking humps.


----------



## TeeTees (Mar 9, 2006)

I can see this being a looooong thread - who the f'k does approve of the sneeky b'stards in the vans after all :?


----------



## KammyTT (Jun 28, 2006)

I thought they had to be clearly in view with a sign etc??? i read an article in my local rag staing that if the camera van or laser gun guy isnt in view clearly the ticket can be cancelled.


----------



## TeeTees (Mar 9, 2006)

KammyTT said:


> I thought they had to be clearly in view with a sign etc??? i read an article in my local rag staing that if the camera van or laser gun guy isnt in view clearly the ticket can be cancelled.


They did have to have a sign in view at one point, but I'm not TOTALLY sure on this, but I think that changed. :?


----------



## fastasflip (May 13, 2003)

Tis only ACPO guidlines


----------



## KammyTT (Jun 28, 2006)

:lol: :lol: :lol:


----------



## Stu-Oxfordshire (May 7, 2002)

I detest these fuckers. The only place I approve of them is outside a school or built up area, in a 30 or 40 mph zone.

Last year, I got done at 6am (yes, fucking 6am) on a deserted dual carriageway near Peterborough on the way to a trackday by a "Safety Camera partnership" van. They got me at over 1,400 feet doing 98mph.

Up until that point, (2 mths earlier 9 points had dropped off my licence) I had been driving like noddy for 3 years: everywhere at the speed limit. I took one liberty accelerating hard down a sliproad and was (fortunately) slowing down from a much higher speed down to 70 when they got me.

My lawyer told me that I would have been better getting done at 100-110 mph as he would have got me off with a 1 week ban and a fine ie: no points. As it is, I got 5 points for the "offence" and a Â£ 800 fine.

If I ever meet one of the people who operates these vans I would dearly like to quiz them on how they justify positioning them on a deserted dual carriageway, in a 70mph zone, at 6am in the morning.


----------



## sipajen (Nov 6, 2006)

**POST REMOVED**


----------



## jdn (Aug 26, 2002)

Stu-Oxfordshire said:



> If I ever meet one of the people who operates these vans I would dearly like to quiz them on how they justify positioning them on a deserted dual carriageway, in a 70mph zone, at 6am in the morning.


To catch people breaking the law??

Unfortunately there is no room for common sense in the law.


----------



## fastasflip (May 13, 2003)

So if we got rid of all the camera vans and traffic police how do you suggest speed is policed, relying on motorists using common sense? All of us on a day to day basis witness bad driving whether it be speeding, red lights being run etc, etc this is with the threat of cameras and dibble being around god knows what it would be like. I like most on here like to make maximum progress, but leave anything to your average motorist let alone common sense.....your having a giraffe.


----------



## Johnnywb (May 31, 2006)

I've got nothing against traffic police. I would rather see them back on the road and fewer camera vans. At least that way they migh get som of the tossers who drive like cretins.


----------



## W7 PMC (May 6, 2002)

It's the aged old is speed a killer in it's own right??

Charging down a residential road (30MPH limit) at anything above this is a little stupid i grant you & if a busy residential road with schools etc. then any speed over 30MPH deserves to be punished.

However making progress on a clear stretch of motorway at 85-90MPH can hardly be described as any more dangerous than 70MPH & likewise the same applies to roads with the national speed limit. Doing say 10MPH over the limit is not directly linked to safety.

However those who drive in a dangerous way & that does not always mean speeding, those with no insurance or licence, those cars with no MOT etc. all those in my mind are far more likely to be a danger than the average Jo doing 85 on the Motorway.

I know it will never be different laws for different people, but most of these camera vans, coppers with laser guns & dodgy positioned gatsos, really are just a way to increase the conviction & solved crime percentages & to generate revenue.


----------



## Leg (Jan 11, 2006)

Just got back after having a road angel plus and 'parking sensor' system fitted.

Now got GPS warnings of all fixed cameras, laser detectors front and rear and also a laser diffuser at the front. Bring it on if yer think yer hard enough plod! :lol: :wink:

Along with satnav, phone, Parrot 3200CS and head unit the angel and LED light for the diffusers makes it look like I ramraided a f**king Currys :lol: I had to resist mounting my XDA on the dash otherwise it would look liek blackpool front!

Takes 18 hours to get in, set everything up and put my seat belt on so my next task is more BHP so I can make up for the lost time on journeys :wink: :lol: :lol: :lol:


----------



## quattronics (Aug 30, 2006)

Going across country in a new RS4 Avant (thank you Audi UK) for the Rally of GB, we were driving on a perfectly clear dual carriageway with an A8 4.0TDi in front of us at around 140mph, the A8 jumped on his brakes like his life depended on it, yup what loomed into view a mobile camera van.
He was just there to get the people on their way to Wales for the rally, but not us thanks to the A8 (whoever you are a big thank you  )


----------



## jdn (Aug 26, 2002)

fastasflip said:


> So if we got rid of all the camera vans and traffic police how do you suggest speed is policed, relying on motorists using common sense? All of us on a day to day basis witness bad driving whether it be speeding, red lights being run etc, etc this is with the threat of cameras and dibble being around god knows what it would be like. I like most on here like to make maximum progress, but leave anything to your average motorist let alone common sense.....your having a giraffe.


I think you missed my point.

6am on dual carriageway - unlikely to be harmful.

Same speed in a built up area - desverving of points.

If the police involved use this common sense then we would all be more happy.

Still, he was speeding, and got caught.


----------



## Mapeiman (Sep 25, 2006)

i'm sure its all about crime statistics -- catch a speeder with a camera - you have a crime, a crime solved, a criminal caught, and a conviction. its too easy. perhaps they're on performance related pay ???


----------



## Rhod_TT (May 7, 2002)

Aren't the safety camera partnerships separate from the traditional "Police" force?

Either way it's the government making an easy buck out of 'law abiding' taxpayers. It's just to hard for them to make money out of catching crims.


----------



## fastasflip (May 13, 2003)

Or maybe it's an attempt to reduce serious and fatal accidents :?


----------



## Johnnywb (May 31, 2006)

fastasflip said:


> Or maybe it's an attempt to reduce serious and fatal accidents :?


I think it started there somewhere and has now gone far too far. In the same way as traffic wardens used to be there to ensure traffic could flow and you could reason with them. Now, most of them don't even speak english where i live. It's a disgrace, but that's for another thread.

What has been lost through the 'Safety (...) parternships' is common sense and discretion. A camera cannot discriminate between times of day and traffic conditions. Whereas years ago, a traffic officer might pull you over and give you a telling off for doing 90mph on a deserted motorway at 3am, a camera won't, it will catch you and you'll then get the points and fine. The real danger isn't speed (flame suit on) it's the tossers who drive two inches from your bumper in unroadworthy cars, undertaking and generally driving like tossers, endangering other road users, but will a camera catch them? No, and there's nigh on no traffic officers left to catch them, pathetic.


----------



## Leg (Jan 11, 2006)

jdn said:


> fastasflip said:
> 
> 
> > So if we got rid of all the camera vans and traffic police how do you suggest speed is policed, relying on motorists using common sense? All of us on a day to day basis witness bad driving whether it be speeding, red lights being run etc, etc this is with the threat of cameras and dibble being around god knows what it would be like. I like most on here like to make maximum progress, but leave anything to your average motorist let alone common sense.....your having a giraffe.
> ...


To whom? On Saturday I saw a car 2 minutes after it crashed. No other cars involved. I couldnt even tell you the model it was so badly smashed up.

The cause?

Long straight, a dip in the road, too much speed, too shit a car (im guessing as it was some kind of small hatch and had 16 inch wheels I think, certainly smallish), too little talent behind the wheel. Add to that a concrete base with a steel chimney sticking out of it and you have 1 smashed up motor, 1 dead 30 year old driver and 1 wife with no husband and 2 kids without a Dad. As a minor aside you also have Leg Â£170 lighter for a new tyre as I got a piece of his car in my rear drivers tyre.

Now I admit I go along that road at 70-80. Even allowing for the more stable nature of my car Im guessing he must have been well into triple figures. As you can see by my earlier post in this thread and other posts I make, not to mention the mods I have, I like to drive my car hard but unfortunately not everyone can and not everyone has a TT with specific handling mods and big fook off brakes. Unfortunately the police cant differentiate and nick those speeding in cars not designed to do it or without the skill to handle it.

I know my limits, hence I havent had a ticket or accident for over a decade and I do 25K miles per year minimum. Unfortunately some do not.

I dont like the police anymore than anyone else, in fact I also moan about them constantly, but I have to reluctantly admit that if a police car had been parked there on Saturday or a speed camera was in place, that chap would be sat at home now with his family. :?


----------



## zedman (Jan 31, 2005)

personally i think it's about time the police/government started to try and promote better driving rather than giving indiscriminate points and fines that sometimes do not seem to relate to the seriousness of the offence. It seems like police officers are not told to use their discression to judge between when speeding is dangerous (i.e. round a school at 3pm) and when it isnt as dangerous (6am on the dual carriageway), and it's a shame because if the traffic policing system could distinguish the difference then people would have a lot more respect for the fuzz and people having lots of points may actually be frowned upon rather than just being thought of as 'unlucky' - know what i mean.
I think in Canada you can trade your points in for advanced driving lessons and courses - entirely at your own expense, shame the government can't pretend to be concerned enough about low driving standards in this country to try and introduce a similar system.
bo
Z


----------



## Leg (Jan 11, 2006)

zedman said:


> I think in Canada you can trade your points in for advanced driving lessons and courses - entirely at your own expense, shame the government can't pretend to be concerned enough about low driving standards in this country to try and introduce a similar system.


You are correct, for minor offences Canadians are given the option to take points or extra instruction. It is also at the drivers expense as you say. I have an applcation in for residency and this is detailed in one of my many books on living in Canada.


----------



## Johnnywb (May 31, 2006)

Personally i think it's farscicle (sp?) that you can obtain a licence in the UK without ever driving on a motorway, in fact you're not allowed to drive on a motorway until you have a licence, it's ridiculous.


----------



## fastasflip (May 13, 2003)

Leg said:


> zedman said:
> 
> 
> > I think in Canada you can trade your points in for advanced driving lessons and courses - entirely at your own expense, shame the government can't pretend to be concerned enough about low driving standards in this country to try and introduce a similar system.
> ...


They do, should you have a bump and it's clearly your fault you maybe offered a driver improvement scheme costing Â£120 ish rather than go to court and face the beak.

http://www.cheshire.police.uk/uploads/p ... scheme.pdf


----------



## TJS (May 6, 2002)

Camera vans are a necessity, in the right places.

I am currently looking at at NIP for the "alleged offence of excess speed - 60 mph (camera detected) at 9.54 on 27/10 at the A143, Needham, towards Harleston. Banged to riights at 80 mph.

OK .. hands up I was wrong. The road is open, fast, the sun was shining, the top was down and I was having fun and was late. After all its only money and 3 points

2 niggling issues;

The camera van operator must have been military trained, probably a sniper. Travelling east round a long sweeping left hand bend and in the distance was the van on the left half a mile away. I was down to 60 within 5 secs so can only assume the camera was targeted on the apex of the bend. Very little traffic, not an accident blackspot !

Admitted I was the driver and provided the necessary details. Photograhed in a convertible, grey recedeing hair, unshaven, and overweight so it isnt the wife. Could have been the mother in law though!
The conditional offer of a fixed penalty arrives with the wrong spelling of my name, (bear in mind smith isnt an unusual name). Pondered ignoring the notice (max Â£1k and 6 points) but phoned the sub contracted agency who were most helpful and confirmed the notice was invalid ... so will send out a new one with the correct spelling. Asked if they would be lenient on the basis I 'fessed up to their error but no joy!

oh well back to 6 points ... reducing to 3 next march.

TJS

p.s. why does traffic in Norfolk plod along at 47 mph irrespective of speed limits .. including 30 mph limits !!


----------



## kmpowell (May 6, 2002)

Rhod_TT said:


> Either way it's the government making an easy buck out of 'law abiding' taxpayers.


Sorry, but that is a contradiction in terms Rhod. People (Speeders) are breaking the law, hence why they are being punished with points and a fine. If people didn't speed they wouldn't make money, and there would be no need for the vans/cameras. So no, they aren't 'Law abiding'.

Personally I don't see an issue with the vans /cameras etc providing there are clearly signed and advance warning is given. There has to be a way that the Police can enforce the roads, otherwise everybody would drive around as fast as possible (I know I would!), so to do this they contract it out to SCP's. "More coppers in car's!" I hear you cry, but how is that effective policing? We all know that once a copper has gone by, we speed back up again. The only way to stop speeding is to have vans and cameras, otherwise it would be a lawless road society.

One of the biggest points, a point people seem to forget, is this money is not given to the government, it's pumped back into the SCP's. The money earned is hardly groundbreaking figures either - For example; Cliff Richard pays more in income tax in one year then the WHOLE of the SCP's earn put together per annum.

We seem to forget too that gone are the days of hidden cameras behind trees and signs, and gone are the days of hidden vans. All cameras and vans are accompanied with signs, so if you see the signs you slow down, simple! Only last month a friend of mine was moaning that he got caught doing 65mph on the 50mph stretch coming off the Severn Bridge to the tolls. For fucks sake, there is 1 and a half miles of camera signs, overhead speed camera warning signs stating 50mph and then the fucking great white van parked on the bridge! You have so much time to re-adjust your speed that if you choose to ignore all that, then you have nobody to blame but yourself when you get caught.

Johnnywb, back to the original post in question. I know the road you got caught on very well as I live in Bristol. That stretch of road has countless amounts of speed camera signs and speed warnings, and is VERY clearly labelled, so how you can moan about getting caught is beyond me, you would have had at least 2 miles of warning signs! It's not like he was hid in a bush, he is sat in full public view catching speeders who ignore the speed camera signs.

I am no angel I too do speed, but one thing I do know is that I drive in fear of the cameras, so obviously they must be effective. Whether the cameras are in the right spots or not is a seperate issue, but just for one momment say that they are in the right place, I still slow down to the best of my knowledge.

I got caught coming back from Cardiff to Bristol on New Years day 2 years ago. 94mph on the motorway. I was crising along in the S2000, flying past all the traffic and I for some reason ignored the camera signs - got zapped, pulled over, ticket issued there and then, 3 points Â£60 fine. I couldn't agrue really, I just held my hands up and accepted it.

Getting caught has made me slow down though, so in my view they have done their job properly as it has made me more aware.

There are countless amounts of devices these days that can warn you of vans, cameras etc, and everythign is clearly signposted, so if you get caught pay up & shut up is what I say.


----------



## Johnnywb (May 31, 2006)

kmpowell said:


> Rhod_TT said:
> 
> 
> > Either way it's the government making an easy buck out of 'law abiding' taxpayers.
> ...


Lots of points here (no pun intended...)

Firstly, the SCP's DO NOT have to put any warning signs up. In the operating guidelines, it says that they SHOULD, not that they MUST, therefore many do not put any signs up, so you get no warning.

Secondly the money being returned from he SCPs is now excessive and is not being put back into making our roads safer as much as it should. Notice how now the police all drive jags, BMWs, Mercs etc. On the M5 for example, Avon and Somerset are running E and ML 55 AMGs, funny considering they don't do pursuit driving anymore... What's wrong with the diesel version or a Vauxhall? If they drove less expensive cars (and they don't get much of a discount at all) they could put some traffic officers back on the road to catch the properly dangerous drivers.

The Government see speeding motorists as a soft target. Each speeder caught goes down as a solved crime and a conviction, making the crime statistics look good. Oh and it pts money in the bank as well. Ta.

What pisses me off is that they generally put cameras and vans on safe roads rather than using them outside schools etc (they don't often do this because they're concerned that a camera van could distract a drivers attention and cause an accident apparently). For example look at the bottom of the M4 / A4 into London, at the end of the bus lane, there are two cameras within about half a mile of each other, and yet i can't remember the last time i came through there at anywhere near the speed limit, but it's a reasonably open, straight piece of road?


----------



## kmpowell (May 6, 2002)

Johnnywb said:


> Firstly, the SCP's DO NOT have to put any warning signs up. In the operating guidelines, it says that they SHOULD, not that they MUST, therefore many do not put any signs up, so you get no warning.


Given that you are only partially correct, you had better look a little further into the regulations. The SCP's do not have to put their own mobile signs up, however they DO have to park their vans in places where fixed signs on lampposts are in place. So yes there may not be any of those moble signs that sit on the ground, but you would have ample warning from the fixed signs. If there are no fixed signage, then they MUST put their mobile signs up. So at the end of the day whatever the circumstance, you get warning of the camera's regardless!

Going back to your original post again - along the A38 there are literally dozens of those signs on lamp posts coupled with what the speed limit is, so you would have had ample warning to slow down before being caught!



Johnnywb said:


> Secondly the money being returned from he SCPs is now excessive and is not being put back into making our roads safer as much as it should.


It is documented in public replorts where the money goes, and provided that they aren't fabricating the reports, every penny is put back into the SCP's.



Johnnywb said:


> Notice how now the police all drive jags, BMWs, Mercs etc. On the M5 for example, Avon and Somerset are running E and ML 55 AMGs, funny considering they don't do pursuit driving anymore... What's wrong with the diesel version or a Vauxhall?


Most domestic patrol cars in the Avon & Somerset area are Focus', then on the motorways they are the high power Merc's etc. The reson for this is simple, the more dangerous criminals and speeders are caught with these cars, and to catch them the police need speed! If you have a high end speeder (fleeing bank robber for example) going along at 130mph on a short stretch of m/way, you need a damn quick car to catch them, hence the high powered Merc's etc.



Johnnywb said:


> If they drove less expensive cars (and they don't get much of a discount at all) they could put some traffic officers back on the road to catch the properly dangerous drivers.


Traffic oficers are pointless against the day to day speeder, because once they have gone past you or turned off on a junction, the driver will speed back up again. It's simple really, no police means you can speed, but the aniticipation of a camera will make you think twice.



Johnnywb said:


> The Government see speeding motorists as a soft target. Each speeder caught goes down as a solved crime and a conviction, making the crime statistics look good. Oh and it pts money in the bank as well. Ta.


Oh my god, that old chestnut! Lets put it in simple terms: 1. You were speeding, 2. You got caught. Stop moaning and just accept the punishment.



Johnnywb said:


> What pisses me off is that they generally put cameras and vans on safe roads rather than using them outside schools etc (they don't often do this because they're concerned that a camera van could distract a drivers attention and cause an accident apparently). For example look at the bottom of the M4 / A4 into London, at the end of the bus lane, there are two cameras within about half a mile of each other, and yet i can't remember the last time i came through there at anywhere near the speed limit, but it's a reasonably open, straight piece of road?


Cameras are placed where deaths have occured, or where there is a high range of accidents.

Johnny, all your arguments (as far as I can see) are just sweeping generalisms based on the past. Get yourself some facts, and then try to have a moan, it's not possible.

The reason cameras and vans have such a bad reputation, is because of past tactics of hiding them behind bushes blah blah. BUT, these days things are different, due to the amount of legislation.


----------



## Stu-Oxfordshire (May 7, 2002)

kmpowell said:


> Given that you are only partially correct, you had better look a little further into the regulations. The SCP's do not have to put their own mobile signs up, however they DO have to park their vans in places where fixed signs on lampposts are in place. So yes there may not be any of those moble signs that sit on the ground, but you would have ample warning from the fixed signs. If there are no fixed signage, then they MUST put their mobile signs up. So at the end of the day whatever the circumstance, you get warning of the camera's regardless!
> 
> The reason cameras and vans have such a bad reputation, is because of past tactics of hiding them behind bushes blah blah. BUT, these days things are different, due to the amount of legislation.


Kev, 
You are talking some sense. I agree with much you have posted on this thread, but these comments are wide of the mark.

Things are not different at all nowadays - these parasites which man speed camera vans posiiton them in an area where they feel they can generate the highest amount of revnue in the shortest available time. They are working on the assumption of course, that speed is the main contributor to fatalities on our roads, which it simply is not.

When I got busted last year, there was no other sign on the road than a de-restriction sign onto the dual carriageway - certainly nothing about speed cameras. That doesn't bother me in the slightest - as far as I'm concerned, I expect these little fuckers to be hiding almost everywhere I go, so if I see one where I don't expect it, it's not a huge surprise (this doesn;t go any way to mitigating the feeling of destest I have towards them).

So, I'm not angry about the fact that there *weren't* any warning signs. I'm bitter about the flagrant double standards these parasites deploy in how hey position their vehicles, and under what banner they decide to justify their behaviour.

I'm angry about the fact that I live on estate where local chavs drive down the road linking my street to the local pub at 70mph (it's a 30mph limit). This road is in the middle of a brand new housing estate and is lined with a primary school, a playground, a health centre, the local town footbal club practice ground and a small shopping arcade AKA it is teeming with children on bikes, skateboards and so on. I have witnessed SEVERAL near misses with young children and speeding cars.

As a concerned parent, I have made many requests to the council about this. Despite these regular complaints, the local traffic authority have told me, word for word, that they will not invest in policing the area, or implementing traffic-calming measures UNTIL there is a fatality on that road. Can you believe it? I have an email to this effect from the local transport/roads authority.

My point is this: explain to me how a public-funded person, sitting in state of the art machinery, by the side of a deserted dual carriageway at 6am, is justifiable under the banner of "Safety Camera Partnership" when there are (no doubt) countless locations across the country where people are crying out for some kind of visible deterrent in built-up areas where there is a 24/7 need for a camera van.

This positioning is inappropriate and unnecessary. A motorist travelling at 90mph on a deserted dual carriageway poses next to no danger to pedestrians, or other motorists, compared to a speeding vehicle in a heavily built-up area.


----------

