I can't post a link as I saw this via a news aggregator app, but according to a BBC story, illuminated signs on the M42 were not legal because the characters were the wrong shape and size (too tall and thin).
To be legal, signs need to comply with the relevant legislation, and these did not, ir in the absence of compluance, specific permission needs to be obtained from the Department of Transport, and it was not.
Much like parking bay restrictions, they are specific written requirements for markings, and councilsy, goverment departments, etc, either comply or the markings amount to nothing more than road graffiti. To be "Traffic sign", it needs to comply, and if it doesn't, it has no more force than if I hung a "20" notice painted on a bit of hardboard up over the motorway.
Yet, many people were convicted, fined and some even lost their licence, as a result of these illegal signs. At least 11,000 fixed penalties were issued lsst year alone, and these signs have been in operation since 2006. Police have dropped pending prosecutions and stopped using these signs for enforcement.
The really irritating bit? The Highways Agency were, according to that BBC story, told these signs were wrong in 2009. But they only went to get specific permission for the variation about 4 months ago. So they sat with their thumbs where the sun don't shine for nearly 4 YEARS.
And that revealed that similar signs had been in use, for years, on the M1, M6, M20, M25, and M40, casting doubts over the legaluty of penalties there, too.
Police said they felt the signs were "fully illuminated and clearly showed what the speed limit should be". Very likely true, but the hint is in the "should be" bit, because if the signs weren't legal, they weren't showing what the limit was. An apparently, the Act authorising this type of sign actually prohibits conviction in the absence of valid traffic signs.
Which begs the question .... if you've geen done by an illegal sign, are you entitled to :-
a) your fines back, and/or
b) your licence cleaned of any points, and/or
c) compensation for increased insurance premiums, or other costs incurred?
Oh, and for the record, permission for these signs has now been granted and as of Jan 1st, they're back in use and fully enforceable, so don't go blasting past them now.


LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With Quote



