A20 Dover speeding fines unlawful (June-December 2015)

UK PROFESSIONAL DRIVERS FORUMS THE UK PROFESSIONAL DRIVERS FORUM (INTERACTIVE)
1

bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-kent-36795886

Hundreds of drivers caught speeding on a stretch of road leading to the UK’s busiest port may get their fines overturned following a legal ruling.

A judge has upheld a challenge by retired solicitor Sandra Upton, who was herself fined, that the 40mph order last year was incorrectly worded.

He ordered that Mrs Upton and another motorist should be found not guilty of the offence, on the A20 near Dover.

More than 1,600 other drivers may now also have their convictions rescinded.

The ruling focuses on a period between June and December 2015, before the wording on the order was corrected.

At Folkestone Magistrates’ Court, Judge Justin Barron ruled that ambiguities in drafting the speed limit order rendered it invalid.

He said in his judgement that it could apply to more than 1,600 cases during that period.

Mrs Upton, from Kingsdown, near Deal, who was caught travelling at 51mph, and Dover MP Charlie Elphicke want Kent Police to contact all those motorists to arrange refunds, which could amount to £200,000.

Mr Elphicke said: “We’ve had a court ruling that the fines are not lawful. The right thing to do would be for Highways England and Kent Police to get in touch with the people who have been wrongly fined and make sure they’re refunded.”

In a statement, Highways England said: “The 40mph speed limit on the coastbound A20 is clearly signed and it is important that drivers observe the speed limit and drive safely.”

Kent Police said any appeals would be dealt with case-by-case.

2

Very interesting if anyone lost a job through this

3

Ambiguous - open to more than one interpretation; not having one obvious meaning.

I get that bit, but what I don’t get is A judge has upheld a challenge by retired solicitor Sandra Upton, who was herself fined, that the 40mph order last year was incorrectly worded! I would like to know how it was worded…

4

I would definitely agree with overturning the penalty points imposed, but the fine in the instances which have been overturned on a technicality should stand. That money should then be donated to charity. There was a sign, the driver was obliged to comply but they chose not to do so.

5

cav551:
I would definitely agree with overturning the penalty points imposed, but the fine in the instances which have been overturned on a technicality should stand. That money should then be donated to charity. There was a sign, the driver was obliged to comply but they chose not to do so.

Without knowing how the signs were incorrectly worded it’s hard to come to a conclusion, but temporary speed limit signs have to comply with the law just as motorists do, allowing the authorities to penalise people on the basis of signs that do not meet legal requirements is a slippery road that could see some of the less scrupulous authorities deliberately putting up misleading signs in order to raise revenue.

6

tachograph:

cav551:
I would definitely agree with overturning the penalty points imposed, but the fine in the instances which have been overturned on a technicality should stand. That money should then be donated to charity. There was a sign, the driver was obliged to comply but they chose not to do so.

Without knowing how the signs were incorrectly worded it’s hard to come to a conclusion, but temporary speed limit signs have to comply with the law just as motorists do, allowing the authorities to penalise people on the basis of signs that do not meet legal requirements is a slippery road that could see some of the less scrupulous authorities deliberately putting up misleading signs in order to raise revenue.

I agree with you 100% that’s why I would like to know “How it was worded” been looking but can’t seem to find any details.

7

DaveTheMinion:

tachograph:

cav551:
I would definitely agree with overturning the penalty points imposed, but the fine in the instances which have been overturned on a technicality should stand. That money should then be donated to charity. There was a sign, the driver was obliged to comply but they chose not to do so.

Without knowing how the signs were incorrectly worded it’s hard to come to a conclusion, but temporary speed limit signs have to comply with the law just as motorists do, allowing the authorities to penalise people on the basis of signs that do not meet legal requirements is a slippery road that could see some of the less scrupulous authorities deliberately putting up misleading signs in order to raise revenue.

I agree with you 100% that’s why I would like to know “How it was worded” been looking but can’t seem to find any details.

I wouldn’t imaging they would release them otherwise half the country would be getting off with speeding fines.

8

I am reading this as the legal paperwork rasied to allow (temporary or permanent) speed limit signs was incorrectly worded. If there is (was) something wrong with the ironwork or its visibility that is a different kettle of fish entirely.