As motoring solicitors we are seeing more and more cases inolving average speed cameras.

Initially they were used on motorways when there were road works. Anyone who drives along M1 between junctions 25-28 will be familiar with them.

We have now been told that the average speed cameras will stay on the M1 after the roadworks are finished. It was also announced today that average speed cameras will be introduced into an urban area for the first time. Average speed cameras will be installed along a 7 1/2 mile stretch of the A13 east of London.

So how do average speed cameras work? Unlike traditional speed cameras it is no use braking when you see one and then speeding up, as the name suggests they work out the average speed between 2 points.

The cameras can be located between 200 yds and 10Km apart, normally they are fairly close together.

Each camera has a ‘pair’, an entry and exit camera. The camera recognises your number as you go past the entry camera and then again as you go past the exit camera. They then work out the time it took and your average speed. If you are above the speed limit then you will be prosecuted. The cameras to be installed in London are made by RedFusion – thier website states -

“Initially, lane specific cameras, utilising Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR) software, capture and record details of a passing vehicles license plate. This information is then sent via a public network to a centralised computer. As the vehicle travels along the carriageway it then reaches a second set of cameras at which time its license plate details are captured and recorded for a second time. Again this information is sent to the central computer where the data from the two readings is matched and analysed. By using the data from this analysis it is possible to measure a vehicles average speed by looking at the time taken to travel a known distance. When the system calculates a speed that is above the desired threshold a violation file will be created.

Within the violation file all the high resolution images and data collected by the camera system relating to that particular offending vehicle are collated. This violation data is then transferred into specialist computer software for back office processing. From here violation notices can be created against which payments can be made.

All data that is sent to the central computer system is encrypted to ensure the nature of the data is unrecognisable to an unauthorised observer. This allows for total security and ensures complete evidential integrity.

By using multi point to multi point technology, RedFusion is capable of offering accurate speed measurements even if a vehicle changes lane or leaves the particular carriageway being monitored, reducing potential incidents caused by vehicles changing lane in order to avoid detection and in turn ensuring maximum possible offence detection.”

The good news is that there will be a series of photographs. This should help identify the driver and avoid the many cases where drivers are unable to recall who was driving and face 6 penalty points as opposed to the 3 for speeding.

SPEED cameras could be taken down following a review of their impact on road safety.

A study of 264 camera sites in Staffordshire was carried out to see if the speed traps were effective.


The review looked at every camera and placed them into one of 4 categories - Justified, Not Justified, Superseded (for example other road safety measure - speed humps etc) and Under- performing (not effective in reducing collisions where people were injured or killed).

Those that were classed as not justified or superseded will now be considered for removal, those that under performed will be investigated further.

The deciding factor in whether they were justified or not seems to be one of 2 things. Firstly they looked at the number of collisions for 3 years before the camera against a 3 year period after they were introduced and also a more vague. Chief Inspector Simon Tweats said - "We also look at the speed issue – we can monitor speed through the sites to give us a picture of driver behaviour over a period of time"

the findings apparently found that nearly all were justified.

It seems to us in our 20 years experience of dealing with motorists that the biggest gripe isn't the existence of speed cameras but their effectiveness and a feeling that the forces use them more as a way of raising revenue. Many clients have pointed out that they don't have cameras near schools which would be the obvious place to reduce speed. Many people argue that this is because most people do slow down near schools so the cameras would not earn as much money.

Particularly annoying it seems is where there is the impression of 'sneaky' tactics such as placing cameras within a feet of a speed change. One local camera to us is within 10 feet (and around a corner) of a 60 mph limit which drops to 30. Legally you could be driving at 60 and then expected to slow to 30 within a foot.

No one questions the need for safer driving but is this the most effective way? Should there be more speed signs, a gradual slowing down? Lights warning of your speed and more prominent warning signs when the speed is changing.

If you have any questions you can call or email us for a FREE initial advice - visit our website at http://www.motoringlawyersonline.com