Snapped: Poole council’s controversial “spy car” caught speeding by police safety camera

Bournemouth Echo: Snapped: Council’s controversial “spy car” caught speeding by police safety camera Snapped: Council’s controversial “spy car” caught speeding by police safety camera

A DRIVER of the camera car used to enforce parking regulations in Poole has been caught speeding.

Out patrolling for motorists contravening highway laws, the driver was trapped by the Dorset Police safety camera car.

It is believed the “spy car” was exceeding the 30mph speed limit by 6mph in Banks Road, Sandbanks on the morning of Saturday, January 18.

The driver is believed to have received a speeding ticket.

The penalty for speeding is a fixed fine of £100 and three points, however a £110 driver awareness course may be offered.

Borough of Poole has confirmed that a driver of the £67,000 Citroen camera car, which uses GPS satellite technology and an infrared camera system to record vehicles parking where loading and waiting is prohibited, was caught speeding.

Steve Tite, traffic manager said: “We can confirm that the council has received a notice for an alleged speeding offence which occurred on January 18.

“While it is not council policy to comment on individual matters such as this, we would expect all staff to drive safely and responsibly while on council business.

“We will be speaking with the individual concerned,” he added.

Ken Sanson, chairman of the Sandbanks Association said residents had not been complaining about excessive vehicle speeds.

“The residents are careful, observant and law abiding,” he said.

Fines of £70 are dished out for parking offences and Poole issued 2,423 from its camera car in 2012/13 and 1,189 this financial year up to the end of August.

Fines are halved if paid within two weeks.

Labelled “cash cows” by local government secretary Eric Pickles last September, he said councils were breaking the law by using parking enforcement powers as money-makers.

However, Julian McLaughlin, head of transportation services said at the time: “A recent independent review of parking in Poole has identified that the use of the camera car is an efficient way of providing a parking enforcement service around schools, bus stops, taxi ranks and no loading/waiting areas.”

Dorset Road Safe says:

“Speeding is a traffic offence with potentially serious consequences and driving at excessive or inappropriate speeds continues to be a problem that can result in a collision, often resulting in fatal, serious and slight injuries.

“We enforce the speed limits in Dorset to reduce the number of people injured on our roads and to reduce the devastation that collisions cause both on the roads and for the people involved in collisions.

“The difference of a few miles per hour really can mean the difference between life and death.”

Comments (86)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

7:21am Sat 1 Feb 14

Chris@Bmouth says...

Cant help but think that camera looks like Johnny Number 5.
Cant help but think that camera looks like Johnny Number 5. Chris@Bmouth
  • Score: 19

7:25am Sat 1 Feb 14

Peggy Babcock says...

That is simply unbelievable
That is simply unbelievable Peggy Babcock
  • Score: -9

7:31am Sat 1 Feb 14

Chris@Bmouth says...

Peggy Babcock wrote:
That is simply unbelievable
I bet the "safety" camera was parked illegally too. Since when do you see those in a parking bay?
[quote][p][bold]Peggy Babcock[/bold] wrote: That is simply unbelievable[/p][/quote]I bet the "safety" camera was parked illegally too. Since when do you see those in a parking bay? Chris@Bmouth
  • Score: 19

7:32am Sat 1 Feb 14

Happy Hobbit says...

I'm surprised the council didn't get 'special dispensation' to be immune from prosecution...
I'm surprised the council didn't get 'special dispensation' to be immune from prosecution... Happy Hobbit
  • Score: 34

7:36am Sat 1 Feb 14

billy bumble says...

Peggy Babcock wrote:
That is simply unbelievable
Why?

Seems a perfectly ordinary chain of events - hardly a hanging offense

It happened and was properly dealt with

Nothing to see here................
..
[quote][p][bold]Peggy Babcock[/bold] wrote: That is simply unbelievable[/p][/quote]Why? Seems a perfectly ordinary chain of events - hardly a hanging offense It happened and was properly dealt with Nothing to see here................ .. billy bumble
  • Score: 32

7:36am Sat 1 Feb 14

BIGTONE says...

67 grand for a standard small vehicle with a 5 grand camera that is simply astounding.
GPS technology? Tom Tom?
Most in car cams you can buy for £50 have GPS.
I wish the Council had come to me. I could have done it for half that and still bought myself a car out of it.
They got nailed to the wall on that one.
67 grand for a standard small vehicle with a 5 grand camera that is simply astounding. GPS technology? Tom Tom? Most in car cams you can buy for £50 have GPS. I wish the Council had come to me. I could have done it for half that and still bought myself a car out of it. They got nailed to the wall on that one. BIGTONE
  • Score: 51

7:38am Sat 1 Feb 14

Lord Spring says...

The biter bit.
The biter bit. Lord Spring
  • Score: 10

7:44am Sat 1 Feb 14

retry69 says...

Fantastic!! stand by for some brilliant comments,it`s going to be entertaining :)
Fantastic!! stand by for some brilliant comments,it`s going to be entertaining :) retry69
  • Score: 17

7:48am Sat 1 Feb 14

Chardonnaychar says...

Bit unfortunate, but it's nice to know that the driver is human too and suffers under the same laws as me. And good to know the law is enforced - so this is a story about a driver getting a ticket for 36mph (3 over the acceptable). Wow.

And the reporter wants me to be annoyed about this perhaps, because the car is used to enforce the law? Why should this be a knickers-twisting story when the Echo's other headliner is "Storms - stay away from the coast!... Send us your photos !".
Good luck with that one.
Bit unfortunate, but it's nice to know that the driver is human too and suffers under the same laws as me. And good to know the law is enforced - so this is a story about a driver getting a ticket for 36mph (3 over the acceptable). Wow. And the reporter wants me to be annoyed about this perhaps, because the car is used to enforce the law? Why should this be a knickers-twisting story when the Echo's other headliner is "Storms - stay away from the coast!... Send us your photos [of not staying away from the coast]!". Good luck with that one. Chardonnaychar
  • Score: 30

8:00am Sat 1 Feb 14

davecook says...

BIGTONE wrote:
67 grand for a standard small vehicle with a 5 grand camera that is simply astounding.
GPS technology? Tom Tom?
Most in car cams you can buy for £50 have GPS.
I wish the Council had come to me. I could have done it for half that and still bought myself a car out of it.
They got nailed to the wall on that one.
No, we, and all the other council tax payers got nailed. We bought the car.
[quote][p][bold]BIGTONE[/bold] wrote: 67 grand for a standard small vehicle with a 5 grand camera that is simply astounding. GPS technology? Tom Tom? Most in car cams you can buy for £50 have GPS. I wish the Council had come to me. I could have done it for half that and still bought myself a car out of it. They got nailed to the wall on that one.[/p][/quote]No, we, and all the other council tax payers got nailed. We bought the car. davecook
  • Score: 32

8:01am Sat 1 Feb 14

djd says...

If the police sipped safety camera car had been caught parked on a yellow line by the Council camera car which had just been caught speeding by the police speed safety car.................
..now that would have made a story.
If the police sipped safety camera car had been caught parked on a yellow line by the Council camera car which had just been caught speeding by the police speed safety car................. ..now that would have made a story. djd
  • Score: 40

8:02am Sat 1 Feb 14

djd says...

How predictive text can turn speed into sipped, is beyond me!!! sorry.
How predictive text can turn speed into sipped, is beyond me!!! sorry. djd
  • Score: 12

8:28am Sat 1 Feb 14

davecook says...

retry69 wrote:
Fantastic!! stand by for some brilliant comments,it`s going to be entertaining :)
The comments are often better than the stories.............
.......
[quote][p][bold]retry69[/bold] wrote: Fantastic!! stand by for some brilliant comments,it`s going to be entertaining :)[/p][/quote]The comments are often better than the stories............. ....... davecook
  • Score: 26

8:32am Sat 1 Feb 14

retry69 says...

davecook wrote:
retry69 wrote:
Fantastic!! stand by for some brilliant comments,it`s going to be entertaining :)
The comments are often better than the stories.............

.......
you make a very good point as I think most people view this online option for that very reason :)
[quote][p][bold]davecook[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]retry69[/bold] wrote: Fantastic!! stand by for some brilliant comments,it`s going to be entertaining :)[/p][/quote]The comments are often better than the stories............. .......[/p][/quote]you make a very good point as I think most people view this online option for that very reason :) retry69
  • Score: 17

8:47am Sat 1 Feb 14

nickynoodah says...

No comment
No comment nickynoodah
  • Score: -7

8:48am Sat 1 Feb 14

susi.m says...

Why is it so many people get done for just 36 in a 30?
That's always made me suspicious.
Why is it so many people get done for just 36 in a 30? That's always made me suspicious. susi.m
  • Score: 0

8:57am Sat 1 Feb 14

Chris@Bmouth says...

susi.m wrote:
Why is it so many people get done for just 36 in a 30? That's always made me suspicious.
20 percent over. Not to mention the degree of error. The speedo in the car was probably reading around 40.
[quote][p][bold]susi.m[/bold] wrote: Why is it so many people get done for just 36 in a 30? That's always made me suspicious.[/p][/quote]20 percent over. Not to mention the degree of error. The speedo in the car was probably reading around 40. Chris@Bmouth
  • Score: 7

9:09am Sat 1 Feb 14

Chris the plumber says...

this story is very enlightening... £67,000 for a car with GPS and a camera ????
The ads next to this stoy tell me I can get a Vauxhall Corsa for £8995 add a camera and gps tracking to that = £67000.... no wonder we have holes in the roads everywhere now we know where all the money is going !!!!
this story is very enlightening... £67,000 for a car with GPS and a camera ???? The ads next to this stoy tell me I can get a Vauxhall Corsa for £8995 add a camera and gps tracking to that = £67000.... no wonder we have holes in the roads everywhere now we know where all the money is going !!!! Chris the plumber
  • Score: 37

9:14am Sat 1 Feb 14

afcb-mark says...

Sack him/her.
Sack him/her. afcb-mark
  • Score: -4

9:23am Sat 1 Feb 14

speedy231278 says...

nickynoodah wrote:
No comment
That's the only sensible thing you have ever posted.
[quote][p][bold]nickynoodah[/bold] wrote: No comment[/p][/quote]That's the only sensible thing you have ever posted. speedy231278
  • Score: 34

9:24am Sat 1 Feb 14

speedy231278 says...

If it was a Poole camera car, why is the picture clearly taken at Richmond Hill?
If it was a Poole camera car, why is the picture clearly taken at Richmond Hill? speedy231278
  • Score: 1

9:25am Sat 1 Feb 14

billy bumble says...

speedy231278 wrote:
If it was a Poole camera car, why is the picture clearly taken at Richmond Hill?
Looks like Evening Hill to me
[quote][p][bold]speedy231278[/bold] wrote: If it was a Poole camera car, why is the picture clearly taken at Richmond Hill?[/p][/quote]Looks like Evening Hill to me billy bumble
  • Score: 10

9:31am Sat 1 Feb 14

Wesoblind says...

Chardonnaychar wrote:
Bit unfortunate, but it's nice to know that the driver is human too and suffers under the same laws as me. And good to know the law is enforced - so this is a story about a driver getting a ticket for 36mph (3 over the acceptable). Wow.

And the reporter wants me to be annoyed about this perhaps, because the car is used to enforce the law? Why should this be a knickers-twisting story when the Echo's other headliner is "Storms - stay away from the coast!... Send us your photos !".
Good luck with that one.
What law? It does not enforce any law.
[quote][p][bold]Chardonnaychar[/bold] wrote: Bit unfortunate, but it's nice to know that the driver is human too and suffers under the same laws as me. And good to know the law is enforced - so this is a story about a driver getting a ticket for 36mph (3 over the acceptable). Wow. And the reporter wants me to be annoyed about this perhaps, because the car is used to enforce the law? Why should this be a knickers-twisting story when the Echo's other headliner is "Storms - stay away from the coast!... Send us your photos [of not staying away from the coast]!". Good luck with that one.[/p][/quote]What law? It does not enforce any law. Wesoblind
  • Score: -13

9:45am Sat 1 Feb 14

muscliffman says...

Perhaps the real story here is not the headline one.

For at a cost to Poole taxpayers of £67,000(!) a budget priced small Citroen van equipped with even a fancy camera is an absolute scandal - someone somehwere has had a 'nice little laugh' with the public's money!
Perhaps the real story here is not the headline one. For at a cost to Poole taxpayers of £67,000(!) a budget priced small Citroen van equipped with even a fancy camera is an absolute scandal - someone somehwere has had a 'nice little laugh' with the public's money! muscliffman
  • Score: 22

9:54am Sat 1 Feb 14

sea poole says...

Ha, ha -payback!
Ha, ha -payback! sea poole
  • Score: 4

9:55am Sat 1 Feb 14

Townee says...

Walleeeee.
Walleeeee. Townee
  • Score: 9

10:06am Sat 1 Feb 14

nickynoodah says...

there was a man called Site

speeding with all his might

the speed he was going

stopped the traffic from flowing

he's got his p45 in the post

serves him right

the s***e.
there was a man called Site speeding with all his might the speed he was going stopped the traffic from flowing he's got his p45 in the post serves him right the s***e. nickynoodah
  • Score: -29

10:21am Sat 1 Feb 14

rayc says...

No doubt the operators of the roadsafe camera van also exceeds the speed limit whilst going about their business.
No doubt the operators of the roadsafe camera van also exceeds the speed limit whilst going about their business. rayc
  • Score: 11

10:21am Sat 1 Feb 14

nermal says...

The only way that could be any funnier was if it was the other way round!
The speed camera van only seems to turn up in Banks Road in the winter, have you noticed, when that big wide road is clear and empty and the 30 mph limit is inappropriately low. They never turn up in the summer when the road is so busy you're lucky to do 13mph let alone 30. Funny, that.
The only way that could be any funnier was if it was the other way round! The speed camera van only seems to turn up in Banks Road in the winter, have you noticed, when that big wide road is clear and empty and the 30 mph limit is inappropriately low. They never turn up in the summer when the road is so busy you're lucky to do 13mph let alone 30. Funny, that. nermal
  • Score: 19

10:21am Sat 1 Feb 14

Mindvor says...

muscliffman wrote:
Perhaps the real story here is not the headline one.

For at a cost to Poole taxpayers of £67,000(!) a budget priced small Citroen van equipped with even a fancy camera is an absolute scandal - someone somehwere has had a 'nice little laugh' with the public's money!
Whilst I agree with the sentiment I suspect that the £67k is not just for the car and camera. More likely the figure provided was for the entire "camera-car" service so that would probably include: the car, the camera, some sort of SLA to provide appropriate support, software maintenance/upgrades for the camera/desktop software clients etc..not to mention it may also include the cost of the post to actually drive/operate the vehicle.
...or maybe it is just £67k for a Citroen and an industrial Go-Pro ;)
[quote][p][bold]muscliffman[/bold] wrote: Perhaps the real story here is not the headline one. For at a cost to Poole taxpayers of £67,000(!) a budget priced small Citroen van equipped with even a fancy camera is an absolute scandal - someone somehwere has had a 'nice little laugh' with the public's money![/p][/quote]Whilst I agree with the sentiment I suspect that the £67k is not just for the car and camera. More likely the figure provided was for the entire "camera-car" service so that would probably include: the car, the camera, some sort of SLA to provide appropriate support, software maintenance/upgrades for the camera/desktop software clients etc..not to mention it may also include the cost of the post to actually drive/operate the vehicle. ...or maybe it is just £67k for a Citroen and an industrial Go-Pro ;) Mindvor
  • Score: 3

10:41am Sat 1 Feb 14

nickynoodah says...

They use these cars to go on holiday you know
same as the postmen use theirs
Ive seen them down Cornwall speeding like mad.
They use these cars to go on holiday you know same as the postmen use theirs Ive seen them down Cornwall speeding like mad. nickynoodah
  • Score: -14

11:04am Sat 1 Feb 14

Cookie Jar says...

Most probably had 'special dispensation' from the council! ; )
Most probably had 'special dispensation' from the council! ; ) Cookie Jar
  • Score: 1

11:14am Sat 1 Feb 14

TWERLY says...

Typical isn't it - Do as I say and not as I do !!!!
Typical isn't it - Do as I say and not as I do !!!! TWERLY
  • Score: 0

11:29am Sat 1 Feb 14

live-and-let-live says...

Poole council. KEEPING YOU SAFE!!!!!!!
Poole council. KEEPING YOU SAFE!!!!!!! live-and-let-live
  • Score: 2

12:05pm Sat 1 Feb 14

smhinto says...

No doubt the Council will come back and say that the speeding driver of the camera car was given dispensation in the execution of his duties!! Just like the council vehicle that was caught parking on a double yellow the other day.
.
Just wait for it!!
No doubt the Council will come back and say that the speeding driver of the camera car was given dispensation in the execution of his duties!! Just like the council vehicle that was caught parking on a double yellow the other day. . Just wait for it!! smhinto
  • Score: 3

12:07pm Sat 1 Feb 14

boblister says...

Yet more Waste of Taxpayers money, £67000 for a camera car!!!
Central Government's Eric pickles has said they showed not be used.
Resale value Car with high mileage £3000
Yet more Waste of Taxpayers money, £67000 for a camera car!!! Central Government's Eric pickles has said they showed not be used. Resale value Car with high mileage £3000 boblister
  • Score: 9

12:17pm Sat 1 Feb 14

madras says...

Chris@Bmouth wrote:
Cant help but think that camera looks like Johnny Number 5.
'Number 5 IS alive!'
[quote][p][bold]Chris@Bmouth[/bold] wrote: Cant help but think that camera looks like Johnny Number 5.[/p][/quote]'Number 5 IS alive!' madras
  • Score: 6

12:22pm Sat 1 Feb 14

RM says...

And will the driver of this car be paying his/her fine or attending & paying for the 'driver education session'? I can feel an FOI request coming on......
And will the driver of this car be paying his/her fine or attending & paying for the 'driver education session'? I can feel an FOI request coming on...... RM
  • Score: 6

12:23pm Sat 1 Feb 14

Kevin_123 says...

Chris@Bmouth wrote:
Cant help but think that camera looks like Johnny Number 5.
You are right, I keep laughing now, thanks lol
[quote][p][bold]Chris@Bmouth[/bold] wrote: Cant help but think that camera looks like Johnny Number 5.[/p][/quote]You are right, I keep laughing now, thanks lol Kevin_123
  • Score: 4

12:32pm Sat 1 Feb 14

BIGTONE says...

Chris@Bmouth wrote:
susi.m wrote:
Why is it so many people get done for just 36 in a 30? That's always made me suspicious.
20 percent over. Not to mention the degree of error. The speedo in the car was probably reading around 40.
If you have a navigation device,any navigation device,compare the far more accurate GPS speed of 30mph on the device to the speedometer of any vehicle.
The car speedo always reads 3-4mph more than the navigation device.
Therefore all car speedo's are over calibrated.
So if you are doing 34mph on a car speedo the true speed is 30 mph.
I wonder how many have been convicted of speeding within this margin.
[quote][p][bold]Chris@Bmouth[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]susi.m[/bold] wrote: Why is it so many people get done for just 36 in a 30? That's always made me suspicious.[/p][/quote]20 percent over. Not to mention the degree of error. The speedo in the car was probably reading around 40.[/p][/quote]If you have a navigation device,any navigation device,compare the far more accurate GPS speed of 30mph on the device to the speedometer of any vehicle. The car speedo always reads 3-4mph more than the navigation device. Therefore all car speedo's are over calibrated. So if you are doing 34mph on a car speedo the true speed is 30 mph. I wonder how many have been convicted of speeding within this margin. BIGTONE
  • Score: 0

12:45pm Sat 1 Feb 14

nickynoodah says...

Kevin_123 wrote:
Chris@Bmouth wrote:
Cant help but think that camera looks like Johnny Number 5.
You are right, I keep laughing now, thanks lol
me to its hilarious
been rofl since 7 21 this morning
haven't eaten my full English breakfast yet
its so funny
cant eat with all this laughter going on
where's my tissues gone
[quote][p][bold]Kevin_123[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Chris@Bmouth[/bold] wrote: Cant help but think that camera looks like Johnny Number 5.[/p][/quote]You are right, I keep laughing now, thanks lol[/p][/quote]me to its hilarious been rofl since 7 21 this morning haven't eaten my full English breakfast yet its so funny cant eat with all this laughter going on where's my tissues gone nickynoodah
  • Score: -3

12:54pm Sat 1 Feb 14

The Seasider says...

Will the driver of Bournemouth's driving enforcement car be sent on a 'Driver Awareness Course', courtesy of Dorset Police?
Will the driver of Bournemouth's driving enforcement car be sent on a 'Driver Awareness Course', courtesy of Dorset Police? The Seasider
  • Score: -2

12:56pm Sat 1 Feb 14

kalebmoledirt says...

It is illegal to profit from these cars said the Pickle person,so it is in order to make money to recoup the capital outlay for the car and a equipment the running costs .including the wages pension plan and all that get lost in admin.how can anyone work out when they become a cash cow
It is illegal to profit from these cars said the Pickle person,so it is in order to make money to recoup the capital outlay for the car and a equipment the running costs .including the wages pension plan and all that get lost in admin.how can anyone work out when they become a cash cow kalebmoledirt
  • Score: 1

1:21pm Sat 1 Feb 14

spryte67 says...

A few weeks ago I saw a Traffic Warden asking the driver of the "speed camera car", to move off of the single yellow line in Littledown Avenue. It was there in restricted hours, but the I expect the speeding offences weren't cancelled as a result of the illegal parking.
A few weeks ago I saw a Traffic Warden asking the driver of the "speed camera car", to move off of the single yellow line in Littledown Avenue. It was there in restricted hours, but the I expect the speeding offences weren't cancelled as a result of the illegal parking. spryte67
  • Score: 3

3:06pm Sat 1 Feb 14

scrumpyjack says...

TWERLY wrote:
Typical isn't it - Do as I say and not as I do !!!!
That's right I'm sure the driver is a major decision maker at 'Town Hall'.....

Not like he is just a bloke doing a job.
[quote][p][bold]TWERLY[/bold] wrote: Typical isn't it - Do as I say and not as I do !!!![/p][/quote]That's right I'm sure the driver is a major decision maker at 'Town Hall'..... Not like he is just a bloke doing a job. scrumpyjack
  • Score: 4

5:34pm Sat 1 Feb 14

Niel says...

billy bumble wrote:
speedy231278 wrote:
If it was a Poole camera car, why is the picture clearly taken at Richmond Hill?
Looks like Evening Hill to me
I'd lay even odd's they've stolen someone else's photograph, probably from Flickr, and used that... Like the photo both this paper and the Brighton sister paper used of an Ambulance I took in Fareham! One that WAS copyrighted!
[quote][p][bold]billy bumble[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]speedy231278[/bold] wrote: If it was a Poole camera car, why is the picture clearly taken at Richmond Hill?[/p][/quote]Looks like Evening Hill to me[/p][/quote]I'd lay even odd's they've stolen someone else's photograph, probably from Flickr, and used that... Like the photo both this paper and the Brighton sister paper used of an Ambulance I took in Fareham! One that WAS copyrighted! Niel
  • Score: 4

5:43pm Sat 1 Feb 14

HRH of Boscombe says...

davecook wrote:
BIGTONE wrote:
67 grand for a standard small vehicle with a 5 grand camera that is simply astounding.
GPS technology? Tom Tom?
Most in car cams you can buy for £50 have GPS.
I wish the Council had come to me. I could have done it for half that and still bought myself a car out of it.
They got nailed to the wall on that one.
No, we, and all the other council tax payers got nailed. We bought the car.
It won't be a £67k car! That cost will include Admin charges ect but most importantly a massive consultancy cost to some dodgy shell company they're in cahoots with. Just look at the 'cost' Bournemouth council claimed on the 'Welcome' sign.
.
Dig deep enough and you'll probably find £1000 staplers in their accounts.
[quote][p][bold]davecook[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]BIGTONE[/bold] wrote: 67 grand for a standard small vehicle with a 5 grand camera that is simply astounding. GPS technology? Tom Tom? Most in car cams you can buy for £50 have GPS. I wish the Council had come to me. I could have done it for half that and still bought myself a car out of it. They got nailed to the wall on that one.[/p][/quote]No, we, and all the other council tax payers got nailed. We bought the car.[/p][/quote]It won't be a £67k car! That cost will include Admin charges ect but most importantly a massive consultancy cost to some dodgy shell company they're in cahoots with. Just look at the 'cost' Bournemouth council claimed on the 'Welcome' sign. . Dig deep enough and you'll probably find £1000 staplers in their accounts. HRH of Boscombe
  • Score: -4

6:06pm Sat 1 Feb 14

tbpoole says...

rayc wrote:
No doubt the operators of the roadsafe camera van also exceeds the speed limit whilst going about their business.
....and no doubt you never exceed any speed limit anywhere.
[quote][p][bold]rayc[/bold] wrote: No doubt the operators of the roadsafe camera van also exceeds the speed limit whilst going about their business.[/p][/quote]....and no doubt you never exceed any speed limit anywhere. tbpoole
  • Score: 1

6:30pm Sat 1 Feb 14

tbpoole says...

afcb-mark wrote:
Sack him/her.
Following that logic, should we sack every company car driver who gets caught speeding / whatever?
[quote][p][bold]afcb-mark[/bold] wrote: Sack him/her.[/p][/quote]Following that logic, should we sack every company car driver who gets caught speeding / whatever? tbpoole
  • Score: 4

6:33pm Sat 1 Feb 14

Bournemouth common sense says...

This is not news. Daily Echo, take yourselves a bit more seriously please.
This is not news. Daily Echo, take yourselves a bit more seriously please. Bournemouth common sense
  • Score: 5

7:39pm Sat 1 Feb 14

rayc says...

tbpoole wrote:
rayc wrote:
No doubt the operators of the roadsafe camera van also exceeds the speed limit whilst going about their business.
....and no doubt you never exceed any speed limit anywhere.
I try not to, as do most drivers in these days of camera enforcement . I think I am on about par with most and that includes all those involved in speed enforcement, whether they be Council Traffic Engineers, Chief Constables and their staff and Officers, Magistrates, Driver Awareness Course instructors, Camera Van operators and fellow members of Dorset Roadsafe.

On a positive note I hope that the efforts of Dorset Roadsafe and the Council Camera car, which we are told are road safety led, lead to a reduction in the Dorset Road fatalities in 2014 compared to the 29 for 2013. Taking into consideration that in 2010 there were 10 fatalities the numbers for the following years have been tragically high.
[quote][p][bold]tbpoole[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]rayc[/bold] wrote: No doubt the operators of the roadsafe camera van also exceeds the speed limit whilst going about their business.[/p][/quote]....and no doubt you never exceed any speed limit anywhere.[/p][/quote]I try not to, as do most drivers in these days of camera enforcement . I think I am on about par with most and that includes all those involved in speed enforcement, whether they be Council Traffic Engineers, Chief Constables and their staff and Officers, Magistrates, Driver Awareness Course instructors, Camera Van operators and fellow members of Dorset Roadsafe. On a positive note I hope that the efforts of Dorset Roadsafe and the Council Camera car, which we are told are road safety led, lead to a reduction in the Dorset Road fatalities in 2014 compared to the 29 for 2013. Taking into consideration that in 2010 there were 10 fatalities the numbers for the following years have been tragically high. rayc
  • Score: -2

7:40pm Sat 1 Feb 14

The Cerne Giant says...

Hey Ho

Echo readers

A little consideration

Like me . . . at times . . . I took a chance to achieve my employers heady targets to get a target bonus

LOL
Hey Ho Echo readers A little consideration Like me . . . at times . . . I took a chance to achieve my employers heady targets to get a target bonus LOL The Cerne Giant
  • Score: -3

8:06pm Sat 1 Feb 14

Hobad1 says...

Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha .........love it.
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha .........love it. Hobad1
  • Score: 1

8:21pm Sat 1 Feb 14

hooplaa says...

Another top story.... not!!! Car got caught speeding.... along with 100's of others.
Another top story.... not!!! Car got caught speeding.... along with 100's of others. hooplaa
  • Score: 6

8:57pm Sat 1 Feb 14

ashleycross says...

This car has revolutionized the safety of children around Poole schools. I feel much safer that my child can walk to school alone now knowing that the pavement next to the school won't be crowded with idiots who could't care less about the safety of children trying to cross the road or even walk along the pavement. However, I have been shocked by how fast it drives near one of the schools given that there are so many children about.
This car has revolutionized the safety of children around Poole schools. I feel much safer that my child can walk to school alone now knowing that the pavement next to the school won't be crowded with idiots who could't care less about the safety of children trying to cross the road or even walk along the pavement. However, I have been shocked by how fast it drives near one of the schools given that there are so many children about. ashleycross
  • Score: 2

9:28pm Sat 1 Feb 14

O'Reilly says...

Hoisted by their own petard....
Hoisted by their own petard.... O'Reilly
  • Score: 1

9:51pm Sat 1 Feb 14

muscliffman says...

ashleycross wrote:
This car has revolutionized the safety of children around Poole schools. I feel much safer that my child can walk to school alone now knowing that the pavement next to the school won't be crowded with idiots who could't care less about the safety of children trying to cross the road or even walk along the pavement. However, I have been shocked by how fast it drives near one of the schools given that there are so many children about.
How exactly has it 'revolutionised' the safety of children around Poole Schools? Whilst it may assist with maintaining traffic regulations (good) and raising revenue most of us are certainly not aware of there having been a significant number of actual accidents or incidents near schools before it was introduced - perhaps you would be kind enough to provide some detailed evidence in support of that sweeping and rather emotive statement.
[quote][p][bold]ashleycross[/bold] wrote: This car has revolutionized the safety of children around Poole schools. I feel much safer that my child can walk to school alone now knowing that the pavement next to the school won't be crowded with idiots who could't care less about the safety of children trying to cross the road or even walk along the pavement. However, I have been shocked by how fast it drives near one of the schools given that there are so many children about.[/p][/quote]How exactly has it 'revolutionised' the safety of children around Poole Schools? Whilst it may assist with maintaining traffic regulations (good) and raising revenue most of us are certainly not aware of there having been a significant number of actual accidents or incidents near schools before it was introduced - perhaps you would be kind enough to provide some detailed evidence in support of that sweeping and rather emotive statement. muscliffman
  • Score: 7

11:09pm Sat 1 Feb 14

fairandsquared says...

I guess we wouldn't have to have a camera car if people parked properly and not right on the zig zags by the schools. At our local school it has made a difference and people are a bit more careful. the zigzags were put in to keep the entrances to the school clearer as children have been hit by cars there a long time back. Sadly, some parents only care about their own child and don't give a thought to other children and park all over the place, and even double park. The camera car does make a difference. I doubt the driver did it deliberately - anyone else here ever made a driver error or make a mistake in life??
I guess we wouldn't have to have a camera car if people parked properly and not right on the zig zags by the schools. At our local school it has made a difference and people are a bit more careful. the zigzags were put in to keep the entrances to the school clearer as children have been hit by cars there a long time back. Sadly, some parents only care about their own child and don't give a thought to other children and park all over the place, and even double park. The camera car does make a difference. I doubt the driver did it deliberately - anyone else here ever made a driver error or make a mistake in life?? fairandsquared
  • Score: 4

11:10pm Sat 1 Feb 14

Yankee1 says...

However, Julian McLaughlin, head of transportation services said at the time: “A recent independent review of parking in Poole........

OK, Jules, cite the review. Let's read it. Because we do not take your word for it.
However, Julian McLaughlin, head of transportation services said at the time: “A recent independent review of parking in Poole........ OK, Jules, cite the review. Let's read it. Because we do not take your word for it. Yankee1
  • Score: 3

12:58am Sun 2 Feb 14

tbpoole says...

muscliffman wrote:
ashleycross wrote:
This car has revolutionized the safety of children around Poole schools. I feel much safer that my child can walk to school alone now knowing that the pavement next to the school won't be crowded with idiots who could't care less about the safety of children trying to cross the road or even walk along the pavement. However, I have been shocked by how fast it drives near one of the schools given that there are so many children about.
How exactly has it 'revolutionised' the safety of children around Poole Schools? Whilst it may assist with maintaining traffic regulations (good) and raising revenue most of us are certainly not aware of there having been a significant number of actual accidents or incidents near schools before it was introduced - perhaps you would be kind enough to provide some detailed evidence in support of that sweeping and rather emotive statement.
Muscliffman. Whether or not you choose to judge the camera car's success or otherwise solely in terms of reducing accidents, other people have (quite sensibly) decided that there are clearly other safety benefits - for instance in terms of feeling more confident in allowing their children to walk to and from school alone. This in turn will help reduce the amount of school run traffic making the risk of any collision that much lower. Have you actually stood outside a school for any length of time observing the behaviour of some of these careless drivers? Or do you just spend all day in front of your pc monitor passing judgement?
[quote][p][bold]muscliffman[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ashleycross[/bold] wrote: This car has revolutionized the safety of children around Poole schools. I feel much safer that my child can walk to school alone now knowing that the pavement next to the school won't be crowded with idiots who could't care less about the safety of children trying to cross the road or even walk along the pavement. However, I have been shocked by how fast it drives near one of the schools given that there are so many children about.[/p][/quote]How exactly has it 'revolutionised' the safety of children around Poole Schools? Whilst it may assist with maintaining traffic regulations (good) and raising revenue most of us are certainly not aware of there having been a significant number of actual accidents or incidents near schools before it was introduced - perhaps you would be kind enough to provide some detailed evidence in support of that sweeping and rather emotive statement.[/p][/quote]Muscliffman. Whether or not you choose to judge the camera car's success or otherwise solely in terms of reducing accidents, other people have (quite sensibly) decided that there are clearly other safety benefits - for instance in terms of feeling more confident in allowing their children to walk to and from school alone. This in turn will help reduce the amount of school run traffic making the risk of any collision that much lower. Have you actually stood outside a school for any length of time observing the behaviour of some of these careless drivers? Or do you just spend all day in front of your pc monitor passing judgement? tbpoole
  • Score: -5

7:48am Sun 2 Feb 14

Lord Spring says...

fairandsquared wrote:
I guess we wouldn't have to have a camera car if people parked properly and not right on the zig zags by the schools. At our local school it has made a difference and people are a bit more careful. the zigzags were put in to keep the entrances to the school clearer as children have been hit by cars there a long time back. Sadly, some parents only care about their own child and don't give a thought to other children and park all over the place, and even double park. The camera car does make a difference. I doubt the driver did it deliberately - anyone else here ever made a driver error or make a mistake in life??
You are only punished if you get caught . so the fine is for getting caught not for the offence, that was my grandfather's advice
[quote][p][bold]fairandsquared[/bold] wrote: I guess we wouldn't have to have a camera car if people parked properly and not right on the zig zags by the schools. At our local school it has made a difference and people are a bit more careful. the zigzags were put in to keep the entrances to the school clearer as children have been hit by cars there a long time back. Sadly, some parents only care about their own child and don't give a thought to other children and park all over the place, and even double park. The camera car does make a difference. I doubt the driver did it deliberately - anyone else here ever made a driver error or make a mistake in life??[/p][/quote]You are only punished if you get caught . so the fine is for getting caught not for the offence, that was my grandfather's advice Lord Spring
  • Score: 2

8:12am Sun 2 Feb 14

BILLY THE BUBBLE says...

The Cerne Giant wrote:
Hey Ho

Echo readers

A little consideration

Like me . . . at times . . . I took a chance to achieve my employers heady targets to get a target bonus

LOL
It must be great being a submissive slave then.
Early grave for you I see.
[quote][p][bold]The Cerne Giant[/bold] wrote: Hey Ho Echo readers A little consideration Like me . . . at times . . . I took a chance to achieve my employers heady targets to get a target bonus LOL[/p][/quote]It must be great being a submissive slave then. Early grave for you I see. BILLY THE BUBBLE
  • Score: 1

8:15am Sun 2 Feb 14

BILLY THE BUBBLE says...

HRH of Boscombe wrote:
davecook wrote:
BIGTONE wrote:
67 grand for a standard small vehicle with a 5 grand camera that is simply astounding.
GPS technology? Tom Tom?
Most in car cams you can buy for £50 have GPS.
I wish the Council had come to me. I could have done it for half that and still bought myself a car out of it.
They got nailed to the wall on that one.
No, we, and all the other council tax payers got nailed. We bought the car.
It won't be a £67k car! That cost will include Admin charges ect but most importantly a massive consultancy cost to some dodgy shell company they're in cahoots with. Just look at the 'cost' Bournemouth council claimed on the 'Welcome' sign.
.
Dig deep enough and you'll probably find £1000 staplers in their accounts.
No the 67k will be when books are juggled and can't be juggled no more.
[quote][p][bold]HRH of Boscombe[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]davecook[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]BIGTONE[/bold] wrote: 67 grand for a standard small vehicle with a 5 grand camera that is simply astounding. GPS technology? Tom Tom? Most in car cams you can buy for £50 have GPS. I wish the Council had come to me. I could have done it for half that and still bought myself a car out of it. They got nailed to the wall on that one.[/p][/quote]No, we, and all the other council tax payers got nailed. We bought the car.[/p][/quote]It won't be a £67k car! That cost will include Admin charges ect but most importantly a massive consultancy cost to some dodgy shell company they're in cahoots with. Just look at the 'cost' Bournemouth council claimed on the 'Welcome' sign. . Dig deep enough and you'll probably find £1000 staplers in their accounts.[/p][/quote]No the 67k will be when books are juggled and can't be juggled no more. BILLY THE BUBBLE
  • Score: 1

8:17am Sun 2 Feb 14

BILLY THE BUBBLE says...

scrumpyjack wrote:
TWERLY wrote:
Typical isn't it - Do as I say and not as I do !!!!
That's right I'm sure the driver is a major decision maker at 'Town Hall'.....

Not like he is just a bloke doing a job.
What like sleesley?
[quote][p][bold]scrumpyjack[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]TWERLY[/bold] wrote: Typical isn't it - Do as I say and not as I do !!!![/p][/quote]That's right I'm sure the driver is a major decision maker at 'Town Hall'..... Not like he is just a bloke doing a job.[/p][/quote]What like sleesley? BILLY THE BUBBLE
  • Score: 0

9:19am Sun 2 Feb 14

nickynoodah says...

I am sure I already posted on this article
how wrong can one be
Steve Tite, traffic manager is a wonderful traffic manager
probably the best on this planet
he deserves his picture in the echo you know
I am sure I already posted on this article how wrong can one be Steve Tite, traffic manager is a wonderful traffic manager probably the best on this planet he deserves his picture in the echo you know nickynoodah
  • Score: -1

9:34am Sun 2 Feb 14

Chris the plumber says...

Chardonnaychar wrote:
Bit unfortunate, but it's nice to know that the driver is human too and suffers under the same laws as me. And good to know the law is enforced - so this is a story about a driver getting a ticket for 36mph (3 over the acceptable). Wow.

And the reporter wants me to be annoyed about this perhaps, because the car is used to enforce the law? Why should this be a knickers-twisting story when the Echo's other headliner is "Storms - stay away from the coast!... Send us your photos !".
Good luck with that one.
it 6 miles an hour above the acceptabile... a 30 mph means a max of 30 !!
anyone who exceeds that should be punished !
[quote][p][bold]Chardonnaychar[/bold] wrote: Bit unfortunate, but it's nice to know that the driver is human too and suffers under the same laws as me. And good to know the law is enforced - so this is a story about a driver getting a ticket for 36mph (3 over the acceptable). Wow. And the reporter wants me to be annoyed about this perhaps, because the car is used to enforce the law? Why should this be a knickers-twisting story when the Echo's other headliner is "Storms - stay away from the coast!... Send us your photos [of not staying away from the coast]!". Good luck with that one.[/p][/quote]it 6 miles an hour above the acceptabile... a 30 mph means a max of 30 !! anyone who exceeds that should be punished ! Chris the plumber
  • Score: -6

9:41am Sun 2 Feb 14

Hessenford says...

fairandsquared wrote:
I guess we wouldn't have to have a camera car if people parked properly and not right on the zig zags by the schools. At our local school it has made a difference and people are a bit more careful. the zigzags were put in to keep the entrances to the school clearer as children have been hit by cars there a long time back. Sadly, some parents only care about their own child and don't give a thought to other children and park all over the place, and even double park. The camera car does make a difference. I doubt the driver did it deliberately - anyone else here ever made a driver error or make a mistake in life??
Have you ever thought that the zig zags outside schools were only put there to generate more revenue, funny how parking on these zig zags is more prevalent that zebra crossing zig zags, perhaps if a zebra crossing was installed outside each school the parking infringements would drop, but then that would mean less money for councils.
[quote][p][bold]fairandsquared[/bold] wrote: I guess we wouldn't have to have a camera car if people parked properly and not right on the zig zags by the schools. At our local school it has made a difference and people are a bit more careful. the zigzags were put in to keep the entrances to the school clearer as children have been hit by cars there a long time back. Sadly, some parents only care about their own child and don't give a thought to other children and park all over the place, and even double park. The camera car does make a difference. I doubt the driver did it deliberately - anyone else here ever made a driver error or make a mistake in life??[/p][/quote]Have you ever thought that the zig zags outside schools were only put there to generate more revenue, funny how parking on these zig zags is more prevalent that zebra crossing zig zags, perhaps if a zebra crossing was installed outside each school the parking infringements would drop, but then that would mean less money for councils. Hessenford
  • Score: 0

10:20am Sun 2 Feb 14

dorsetspeed says...

tbpoole wrote:
muscliffman wrote:
ashleycross wrote:
This car has revolutionized the safety of children around Poole schools. I feel much safer that my child can walk to school alone now knowing that the pavement next to the school won't be crowded with idiots who could't care less about the safety of children trying to cross the road or even walk along the pavement. However, I have been shocked by how fast it drives near one of the schools given that there are so many children about.
How exactly has it 'revolutionised' the safety of children around Poole Schools? Whilst it may assist with maintaining traffic regulations (good) and raising revenue most of us are certainly not aware of there having been a significant number of actual accidents or incidents near schools before it was introduced - perhaps you would be kind enough to provide some detailed evidence in support of that sweeping and rather emotive statement.
Muscliffman. Whether or not you choose to judge the camera car's success or otherwise solely in terms of reducing accidents, other people have (quite sensibly) decided that there are clearly other safety benefits - for instance in terms of feeling more confident in allowing their children to walk to and from school alone. This in turn will help reduce the amount of school run traffic making the risk of any collision that much lower. Have you actually stood outside a school for any length of time observing the behaviour of some of these careless drivers? Or do you just spend all day in front of your pc monitor passing judgement?
The perception of improved safety without actual improved safety is dangerous. I've never seen a camera car at a school but I have seen it charging around (full throttle over the narrow lifting bridge was the last time) making money, and just to put the icing on the cake, parked in a KEEP CLEAR zone when not in use.
[quote][p][bold]tbpoole[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]muscliffman[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ashleycross[/bold] wrote: This car has revolutionized the safety of children around Poole schools. I feel much safer that my child can walk to school alone now knowing that the pavement next to the school won't be crowded with idiots who could't care less about the safety of children trying to cross the road or even walk along the pavement. However, I have been shocked by how fast it drives near one of the schools given that there are so many children about.[/p][/quote]How exactly has it 'revolutionised' the safety of children around Poole Schools? Whilst it may assist with maintaining traffic regulations (good) and raising revenue most of us are certainly not aware of there having been a significant number of actual accidents or incidents near schools before it was introduced - perhaps you would be kind enough to provide some detailed evidence in support of that sweeping and rather emotive statement.[/p][/quote]Muscliffman. Whether or not you choose to judge the camera car's success or otherwise solely in terms of reducing accidents, other people have (quite sensibly) decided that there are clearly other safety benefits - for instance in terms of feeling more confident in allowing their children to walk to and from school alone. This in turn will help reduce the amount of school run traffic making the risk of any collision that much lower. Have you actually stood outside a school for any length of time observing the behaviour of some of these careless drivers? Or do you just spend all day in front of your pc monitor passing judgement?[/p][/quote]The perception of improved safety without actual improved safety is dangerous. I've never seen a camera car at a school but I have seen it charging around (full throttle over the narrow lifting bridge was the last time) making money, and just to put the icing on the cake, parked in a KEEP CLEAR zone when not in use. dorsetspeed
  • Score: 4

10:37am Sun 2 Feb 14

dorsetspeed says...

rayc wrote:
tbpoole wrote:
rayc wrote:
No doubt the operators of the roadsafe camera van also exceeds the speed limit whilst going about their business.
....and no doubt you never exceed any speed limit anywhere.
I try not to, as do most drivers in these days of camera enforcement . I think I am on about par with most and that includes all those involved in speed enforcement, whether they be Council Traffic Engineers, Chief Constables and their staff and Officers, Magistrates, Driver Awareness Course instructors, Camera Van operators and fellow members of Dorset Roadsafe.

On a positive note I hope that the efforts of Dorset Roadsafe and the Council Camera car, which we are told are road safety led, lead to a reduction in the Dorset Road fatalities in 2014 compared to the 29 for 2013. Taking into consideration that in 2010 there were 10 fatalities the numbers for the following years have been tragically high.
"fellow" members of Dorset Roadsafe - interesting.

Actually, if I wanted to speed, I'd be quite happy with things as they are, predictable enforcements, no traffic cops, and loads of road never targeted.

Yes we are told that these enforcements are safety led, but surely you do not believe that? They are revenue led! As you say, the performance of "no excuse" has been pretty dismal up to now, what makes you think things will change?

Can you let me know where the figure of 10 deaths in 2010 comes from? I can seem to get a definite answer for this.
[quote][p][bold]rayc[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]tbpoole[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]rayc[/bold] wrote: No doubt the operators of the roadsafe camera van also exceeds the speed limit whilst going about their business.[/p][/quote]....and no doubt you never exceed any speed limit anywhere.[/p][/quote]I try not to, as do most drivers in these days of camera enforcement . I think I am on about par with most and that includes all those involved in speed enforcement, whether they be Council Traffic Engineers, Chief Constables and their staff and Officers, Magistrates, Driver Awareness Course instructors, Camera Van operators and fellow members of Dorset Roadsafe. On a positive note I hope that the efforts of Dorset Roadsafe and the Council Camera car, which we are told are road safety led, lead to a reduction in the Dorset Road fatalities in 2014 compared to the 29 for 2013. Taking into consideration that in 2010 there were 10 fatalities the numbers for the following years have been tragically high.[/p][/quote]"fellow" members of Dorset Roadsafe - interesting. Actually, if I wanted to speed, I'd be quite happy with things as they are, predictable enforcements, no traffic cops, and loads of road never targeted. Yes we are told that these enforcements are safety led, but surely you do not believe that? They are revenue led! As you say, the performance of "no excuse" has been pretty dismal up to now, what makes you think things will change? Can you let me know where the figure of 10 deaths in 2010 comes from? I can seem to get a definite answer for this. dorsetspeed
  • Score: 1

10:38am Sun 2 Feb 14

dorsetspeed says...

**can't**
**can't** dorsetspeed
  • Score: 0

12:35pm Sun 2 Feb 14

AKKA45 says...

Happy Hobbit wrote:
I'm surprised the council didn't get 'special dispensation' to be immune from prosecution...
"Steve Tite, traffic manager said: “We can confirm that the council has received a notice for an alleged speeding offence which occurred on January 18."
So it's only "alleged" when a council employee speeds, but you are immediately guilty if you're a private citizen
[quote][p][bold]Happy Hobbit[/bold] wrote: I'm surprised the council didn't get 'special dispensation' to be immune from prosecution...[/p][/quote]"Steve Tite, traffic manager said: “We can confirm that the council has received a notice for an alleged speeding offence which occurred on January 18." So it's only "alleged" when a council employee speeds, but you are immediately guilty if you're a private citizen AKKA45
  • Score: 2

1:49pm Sun 2 Feb 14

bisadave says...

djd wrote:
If the police sipped safety camera car had been caught parked on a yellow line by the Council camera car which had just been caught speeding by the police speed safety car.................

..now that would have made a story.
I don't ever remember seeing a 'Safety' camera car parked legally. Bearing in mind that parking restrictions for a road extend back across the pavement or grass verge, I would say that every camera van I've seen has been parked illegally.
[quote][p][bold]djd[/bold] wrote: If the police sipped safety camera car had been caught parked on a yellow line by the Council camera car which had just been caught speeding by the police speed safety car................. ..now that would have made a story.[/p][/quote]I don't ever remember seeing a 'Safety' camera car parked legally. Bearing in mind that parking restrictions for a road extend back across the pavement or grass verge, I would say that every camera van I've seen has been parked illegally. bisadave
  • Score: 6

2:15pm Sun 2 Feb 14

rayc says...

dorsetspeed wrote:
rayc wrote:
tbpoole wrote:
rayc wrote:
No doubt the operators of the roadsafe camera van also exceeds the speed limit whilst going about their business.
....and no doubt you never exceed any speed limit anywhere.
I try not to, as do most drivers in these days of camera enforcement . I think I am on about par with most and that includes all those involved in speed enforcement, whether they be Council Traffic Engineers, Chief Constables and their staff and Officers, Magistrates, Driver Awareness Course instructors, Camera Van operators and fellow members of Dorset Roadsafe.

On a positive note I hope that the efforts of Dorset Roadsafe and the Council Camera car, which we are told are road safety led, lead to a reduction in the Dorset Road fatalities in 2014 compared to the 29 for 2013. Taking into consideration that in 2010 there were 10 fatalities the numbers for the following years have been tragically high.
"fellow" members of Dorset Roadsafe - interesting.

Actually, if I wanted to speed, I'd be quite happy with things as they are, predictable enforcements, no traffic cops, and loads of road never targeted.

Yes we are told that these enforcements are safety led, but surely you do not believe that? They are revenue led! As you say, the performance of "no excuse" has been pretty dismal up to now, what makes you think things will change?

Can you let me know where the figure of 10 deaths in 2010 comes from? I can seem to get a definite answer for this.
It was reported in the Echo on Wed 30th March 2011 in regards to Dorset Traffic officer numbers being cut by a third.
"Dorset Police say fatal and serious injury accidents fell to an all-time low of 346 in 2010. And the number of people who lost their lives on the county’s roads dropped from 21 in 2009 to 10 in 2010."
"Chief Superintendent Martin Hiles said: “The demand isn’t at the same level as it was a few years ago. Operation No Excuse and the awareness of it is now really huge.”
http://www.dorsetech
o.co.uk/news/8941542
.Traffic_officers_cu
t_by_a_third/
[quote][p][bold]dorsetspeed[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]rayc[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]tbpoole[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]rayc[/bold] wrote: No doubt the operators of the roadsafe camera van also exceeds the speed limit whilst going about their business.[/p][/quote]....and no doubt you never exceed any speed limit anywhere.[/p][/quote]I try not to, as do most drivers in these days of camera enforcement . I think I am on about par with most and that includes all those involved in speed enforcement, whether they be Council Traffic Engineers, Chief Constables and their staff and Officers, Magistrates, Driver Awareness Course instructors, Camera Van operators and fellow members of Dorset Roadsafe. On a positive note I hope that the efforts of Dorset Roadsafe and the Council Camera car, which we are told are road safety led, lead to a reduction in the Dorset Road fatalities in 2014 compared to the 29 for 2013. Taking into consideration that in 2010 there were 10 fatalities the numbers for the following years have been tragically high.[/p][/quote]"fellow" members of Dorset Roadsafe - interesting. Actually, if I wanted to speed, I'd be quite happy with things as they are, predictable enforcements, no traffic cops, and loads of road never targeted. Yes we are told that these enforcements are safety led, but surely you do not believe that? They are revenue led! As you say, the performance of "no excuse" has been pretty dismal up to now, what makes you think things will change? Can you let me know where the figure of 10 deaths in 2010 comes from? I can seem to get a definite answer for this.[/p][/quote]It was reported in the Echo on Wed 30th March 2011 in regards to Dorset Traffic officer numbers being cut by a third. "Dorset Police say fatal and serious injury accidents fell to an all-time low of 346 in 2010. And the number of people who lost their lives on the county’s roads dropped from 21 in 2009 to 10 in 2010." "Chief Superintendent Martin Hiles said: “The demand isn’t at the same level as it was a few years ago. Operation No Excuse and the awareness of it is now really huge.” http://www.dorsetech o.co.uk/news/8941542 .Traffic_officers_cu t_by_a_third/ rayc
  • Score: 0

2:20pm Sun 2 Feb 14

rayc says...

Dorset speed said ""fellow" members of Dorset Roadsafe - interesting."
I wasn't implying they were MY fellow members but meant "Camera Van operators and THEIR fellow members of Dorset Roadsafe."
Dorset speed said ""fellow" members of Dorset Roadsafe - interesting." I wasn't implying they were MY fellow members but meant "Camera Van operators and THEIR fellow members of Dorset Roadsafe." rayc
  • Score: 0

5:44pm Sun 2 Feb 14

ashleycross says...

muscliffman wrote:
ashleycross wrote:
This car has revolutionized the safety of children around Poole schools. I feel much safer that my child can walk to school alone now knowing that the pavement next to the school won't be crowded with idiots who could't care less about the safety of children trying to cross the road or even walk along the pavement. However, I have been shocked by how fast it drives near one of the schools given that there are so many children about.
How exactly has it 'revolutionised' the safety of children around Poole Schools? Whilst it may assist with maintaining traffic regulations (good) and raising revenue most of us are certainly not aware of there having been a significant number of actual accidents or incidents near schools before it was introduced - perhaps you would be kind enough to provide some detailed evidence in support of that sweeping and rather emotive statement.
See back copies of daily echo with pictures of how parents used to park around schools before the camera car. If that doesn't convince you then nothing will, which I sadly suspect will be the case.
[quote][p][bold]muscliffman[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ashleycross[/bold] wrote: This car has revolutionized the safety of children around Poole schools. I feel much safer that my child can walk to school alone now knowing that the pavement next to the school won't be crowded with idiots who could't care less about the safety of children trying to cross the road or even walk along the pavement. However, I have been shocked by how fast it drives near one of the schools given that there are so many children about.[/p][/quote]How exactly has it 'revolutionised' the safety of children around Poole Schools? Whilst it may assist with maintaining traffic regulations (good) and raising revenue most of us are certainly not aware of there having been a significant number of actual accidents or incidents near schools before it was introduced - perhaps you would be kind enough to provide some detailed evidence in support of that sweeping and rather emotive statement.[/p][/quote]See back copies of daily echo with pictures of how parents used to park around schools before the camera car. If that doesn't convince you then nothing will, which I sadly suspect will be the case. ashleycross
  • Score: 1

6:00pm Sun 2 Feb 14

dorsetspeed says...

rayc wrote:
dorsetspeed wrote:
rayc wrote:
tbpoole wrote:
rayc wrote:
No doubt the operators of the roadsafe camera van also exceeds the speed limit whilst going about their business.
....and no doubt you never exceed any speed limit anywhere.
I try not to, as do most drivers in these days of camera enforcement . I think I am on about par with most and that includes all those involved in speed enforcement, whether they be Council Traffic Engineers, Chief Constables and their staff and Officers, Magistrates, Driver Awareness Course instructors, Camera Van operators and fellow members of Dorset Roadsafe.

On a positive note I hope that the efforts of Dorset Roadsafe and the Council Camera car, which we are told are road safety led, lead to a reduction in the Dorset Road fatalities in 2014 compared to the 29 for 2013. Taking into consideration that in 2010 there were 10 fatalities the numbers for the following years have been tragically high.
"fellow" members of Dorset Roadsafe - interesting.

Actually, if I wanted to speed, I'd be quite happy with things as they are, predictable enforcements, no traffic cops, and loads of road never targeted.

Yes we are told that these enforcements are safety led, but surely you do not believe that? They are revenue led! As you say, the performance of "no excuse" has been pretty dismal up to now, what makes you think things will change?

Can you let me know where the figure of 10 deaths in 2010 comes from? I can seem to get a definite answer for this.
It was reported in the Echo on Wed 30th March 2011 in regards to Dorset Traffic officer numbers being cut by a third.
"Dorset Police say fatal and serious injury accidents fell to an all-time low of 346 in 2010. And the number of people who lost their lives on the county’s roads dropped from 21 in 2009 to 10 in 2010."
"Chief Superintendent Martin Hiles said: “The demand isn’t at the same level as it was a few years ago. Operation No Excuse and the awareness of it is now really huge.”
http://www.dorsetech

o.co.uk/news/8941542

.Traffic_officers_cu

t_by_a_third/
Interesting, it is shown as 18 on Dorset Road Safe, I saw it as 11 elsewhere. Anyway, it seems that 10 was perhaps uncharacteristically low, more by random variation than an indication of true level
[quote][p][bold]rayc[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]dorsetspeed[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]rayc[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]tbpoole[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]rayc[/bold] wrote: No doubt the operators of the roadsafe camera van also exceeds the speed limit whilst going about their business.[/p][/quote]....and no doubt you never exceed any speed limit anywhere.[/p][/quote]I try not to, as do most drivers in these days of camera enforcement . I think I am on about par with most and that includes all those involved in speed enforcement, whether they be Council Traffic Engineers, Chief Constables and their staff and Officers, Magistrates, Driver Awareness Course instructors, Camera Van operators and fellow members of Dorset Roadsafe. On a positive note I hope that the efforts of Dorset Roadsafe and the Council Camera car, which we are told are road safety led, lead to a reduction in the Dorset Road fatalities in 2014 compared to the 29 for 2013. Taking into consideration that in 2010 there were 10 fatalities the numbers for the following years have been tragically high.[/p][/quote]"fellow" members of Dorset Roadsafe - interesting. Actually, if I wanted to speed, I'd be quite happy with things as they are, predictable enforcements, no traffic cops, and loads of road never targeted. Yes we are told that these enforcements are safety led, but surely you do not believe that? They are revenue led! As you say, the performance of "no excuse" has been pretty dismal up to now, what makes you think things will change? Can you let me know where the figure of 10 deaths in 2010 comes from? I can seem to get a definite answer for this.[/p][/quote]It was reported in the Echo on Wed 30th March 2011 in regards to Dorset Traffic officer numbers being cut by a third. "Dorset Police say fatal and serious injury accidents fell to an all-time low of 346 in 2010. And the number of people who lost their lives on the county’s roads dropped from 21 in 2009 to 10 in 2010." "Chief Superintendent Martin Hiles said: “The demand isn’t at the same level as it was a few years ago. Operation No Excuse and the awareness of it is now really huge.” http://www.dorsetech o.co.uk/news/8941542 .Traffic_officers_cu t_by_a_third/[/p][/quote]Interesting, it is shown as 18 on Dorset Road Safe, I saw it as 11 elsewhere. Anyway, it seems that 10 was perhaps uncharacteristically low, more by random variation than an indication of true level dorsetspeed
  • Score: 0

7:17pm Sun 2 Feb 14

dorsetspeed says...

ashleycross wrote:
muscliffman wrote:
ashleycross wrote:
This car has revolutionized the safety of children around Poole schools. I feel much safer that my child can walk to school alone now knowing that the pavement next to the school won't be crowded with idiots who could't care less about the safety of children trying to cross the road or even walk along the pavement. However, I have been shocked by how fast it drives near one of the schools given that there are so many children about.
How exactly has it 'revolutionised' the safety of children around Poole Schools? Whilst it may assist with maintaining traffic regulations (good) and raising revenue most of us are certainly not aware of there having been a significant number of actual accidents or incidents near schools before it was introduced - perhaps you would be kind enough to provide some detailed evidence in support of that sweeping and rather emotive statement.
See back copies of daily echo with pictures of how parents used to park around schools before the camera car. If that doesn't convince you then nothing will, which I sadly suspect will be the case.
Perhaps the authorities could actually try to assist with the ritual of getting children to school, instead of apparently doing everything they can to obstruct. How about setting up proper drop zones, or buses at a sensible price?
[quote][p][bold]ashleycross[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]muscliffman[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ashleycross[/bold] wrote: This car has revolutionized the safety of children around Poole schools. I feel much safer that my child can walk to school alone now knowing that the pavement next to the school won't be crowded with idiots who could't care less about the safety of children trying to cross the road or even walk along the pavement. However, I have been shocked by how fast it drives near one of the schools given that there are so many children about.[/p][/quote]How exactly has it 'revolutionised' the safety of children around Poole Schools? Whilst it may assist with maintaining traffic regulations (good) and raising revenue most of us are certainly not aware of there having been a significant number of actual accidents or incidents near schools before it was introduced - perhaps you would be kind enough to provide some detailed evidence in support of that sweeping and rather emotive statement.[/p][/quote]See back copies of daily echo with pictures of how parents used to park around schools before the camera car. If that doesn't convince you then nothing will, which I sadly suspect will be the case.[/p][/quote]Perhaps the authorities could actually try to assist with the ritual of getting children to school, instead of apparently doing everything they can to obstruct. How about setting up proper drop zones, or buses at a sensible price? dorsetspeed
  • Score: 0

7:25pm Sun 2 Feb 14

muscliffman says...

ashleycross wrote:
muscliffman wrote:
ashleycross wrote:
This car has revolutionized the safety of children around Poole schools. I feel much safer that my child can walk to school alone now knowing that the pavement next to the school won't be crowded with idiots who could't care less about the safety of children trying to cross the road or even walk along the pavement. However, I have been shocked by how fast it drives near one of the schools given that there are so many children about.
How exactly has it 'revolutionised' the safety of children around Poole Schools? Whilst it may assist with maintaining traffic regulations (good) and raising revenue most of us are certainly not aware of there having been a significant number of actual accidents or incidents near schools before it was introduced - perhaps you would be kind enough to provide some detailed evidence in support of that sweeping and rather emotive statement.
See back copies of daily echo with pictures of how parents used to park around schools before the camera car. If that doesn't convince you then nothing will, which I sadly suspect will be the case.
Thanks for responding, but regrettably no actual evidence on offer. However I agree with you about previous parent parking around schools and some of it was pretty unbelievable and illegal, but ironically the resultant chaos usually regulated the speed of all other traffic to a very safe virtual zero. So perhaps the worrying paradox here is that simply by it's threatened presence this camera car is now indeed keeping the roads outside all Poole schools clearer and thus enabling the passing traffic to move a lot faster and therefore far less safely!
[quote][p][bold]ashleycross[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]muscliffman[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ashleycross[/bold] wrote: This car has revolutionized the safety of children around Poole schools. I feel much safer that my child can walk to school alone now knowing that the pavement next to the school won't be crowded with idiots who could't care less about the safety of children trying to cross the road or even walk along the pavement. However, I have been shocked by how fast it drives near one of the schools given that there are so many children about.[/p][/quote]How exactly has it 'revolutionised' the safety of children around Poole Schools? Whilst it may assist with maintaining traffic regulations (good) and raising revenue most of us are certainly not aware of there having been a significant number of actual accidents or incidents near schools before it was introduced - perhaps you would be kind enough to provide some detailed evidence in support of that sweeping and rather emotive statement.[/p][/quote]See back copies of daily echo with pictures of how parents used to park around schools before the camera car. If that doesn't convince you then nothing will, which I sadly suspect will be the case.[/p][/quote]Thanks for responding, but regrettably no actual evidence on offer. However I agree with you about previous parent parking around schools and some of it was pretty unbelievable and illegal, but ironically the resultant chaos usually regulated the speed of all other traffic to a very safe virtual zero. So perhaps the worrying paradox here is that simply by it's threatened presence this camera car is now indeed keeping the roads outside all Poole schools clearer and thus enabling the passing traffic to move a lot faster and therefore far less safely! muscliffman
  • Score: -2

7:52am Mon 3 Feb 14

tbpoole says...

dorsetspeed wrote:
ashleycross wrote:
muscliffman wrote:
ashleycross wrote:
This car has revolutionized the safety of children around Poole schools. I feel much safer that my child can walk to school alone now knowing that the pavement next to the school won't be crowded with idiots who could't care less about the safety of children trying to cross the road or even walk along the pavement. However, I have been shocked by how fast it drives near one of the schools given that there are so many children about.
How exactly has it 'revolutionised' the safety of children around Poole Schools? Whilst it may assist with maintaining traffic regulations (good) and raising revenue most of us are certainly not aware of there having been a significant number of actual accidents or incidents near schools before it was introduced - perhaps you would be kind enough to provide some detailed evidence in support of that sweeping and rather emotive statement.
See back copies of daily echo with pictures of how parents used to park around schools before the camera car. If that doesn't convince you then nothing will, which I sadly suspect will be the case.
Perhaps the authorities could actually try to assist with the ritual of getting children to school, instead of apparently doing everything they can to obstruct. How about setting up proper drop zones, or buses at a sensible price?
Buses are run privately as commercial organisations who have to make a profit and keep shareholders or others happy. To keep prices down would mean a public subsidy, i.e. Funded by all council tax payers whether or not they would use a bus.
[quote][p][bold]dorsetspeed[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ashleycross[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]muscliffman[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ashleycross[/bold] wrote: This car has revolutionized the safety of children around Poole schools. I feel much safer that my child can walk to school alone now knowing that the pavement next to the school won't be crowded with idiots who could't care less about the safety of children trying to cross the road or even walk along the pavement. However, I have been shocked by how fast it drives near one of the schools given that there are so many children about.[/p][/quote]How exactly has it 'revolutionised' the safety of children around Poole Schools? Whilst it may assist with maintaining traffic regulations (good) and raising revenue most of us are certainly not aware of there having been a significant number of actual accidents or incidents near schools before it was introduced - perhaps you would be kind enough to provide some detailed evidence in support of that sweeping and rather emotive statement.[/p][/quote]See back copies of daily echo with pictures of how parents used to park around schools before the camera car. If that doesn't convince you then nothing will, which I sadly suspect will be the case.[/p][/quote]Perhaps the authorities could actually try to assist with the ritual of getting children to school, instead of apparently doing everything they can to obstruct. How about setting up proper drop zones, or buses at a sensible price?[/p][/quote]Buses are run privately as commercial organisations who have to make a profit and keep shareholders or others happy. To keep prices down would mean a public subsidy, i.e. Funded by all council tax payers whether or not they would use a bus. tbpoole
  • Score: 0

8:13am Mon 3 Feb 14

dorsetspeed says...

tbpoole wrote:
dorsetspeed wrote:
ashleycross wrote:
muscliffman wrote:
ashleycross wrote:
This car has revolutionized the safety of children around Poole schools. I feel much safer that my child can walk to school alone now knowing that the pavement next to the school won't be crowded with idiots who could't care less about the safety of children trying to cross the road or even walk along the pavement. However, I have been shocked by how fast it drives near one of the schools given that there are so many children about.
How exactly has it 'revolutionised' the safety of children around Poole Schools? Whilst it may assist with maintaining traffic regulations (good) and raising revenue most of us are certainly not aware of there having been a significant number of actual accidents or incidents near schools before it was introduced - perhaps you would be kind enough to provide some detailed evidence in support of that sweeping and rather emotive statement.
See back copies of daily echo with pictures of how parents used to park around schools before the camera car. If that doesn't convince you then nothing will, which I sadly suspect will be the case.
Perhaps the authorities could actually try to assist with the ritual of getting children to school, instead of apparently doing everything they can to obstruct. How about setting up proper drop zones, or buses at a sensible price?
Buses are run privately as commercial organisations who have to make a profit and keep shareholders or others happy. To keep prices down would mean a public subsidy, i.e. Funded by all council tax payers whether or not they would use a bus.
There is a considerable difference between a bus service run by a private company to make money and a bus service that just breaks even which does not need any subsidy but is very much cheaper. It is areas like this that our public "servants" should be doing their best on, which would really properly deliver on safety and environment, rather than just setting up enforcements to make money out of the situation.
[quote][p][bold]tbpoole[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]dorsetspeed[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ashleycross[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]muscliffman[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ashleycross[/bold] wrote: This car has revolutionized the safety of children around Poole schools. I feel much safer that my child can walk to school alone now knowing that the pavement next to the school won't be crowded with idiots who could't care less about the safety of children trying to cross the road or even walk along the pavement. However, I have been shocked by how fast it drives near one of the schools given that there are so many children about.[/p][/quote]How exactly has it 'revolutionised' the safety of children around Poole Schools? Whilst it may assist with maintaining traffic regulations (good) and raising revenue most of us are certainly not aware of there having been a significant number of actual accidents or incidents near schools before it was introduced - perhaps you would be kind enough to provide some detailed evidence in support of that sweeping and rather emotive statement.[/p][/quote]See back copies of daily echo with pictures of how parents used to park around schools before the camera car. If that doesn't convince you then nothing will, which I sadly suspect will be the case.[/p][/quote]Perhaps the authorities could actually try to assist with the ritual of getting children to school, instead of apparently doing everything they can to obstruct. How about setting up proper drop zones, or buses at a sensible price?[/p][/quote]Buses are run privately as commercial organisations who have to make a profit and keep shareholders or others happy. To keep prices down would mean a public subsidy, i.e. Funded by all council tax payers whether or not they would use a bus.[/p][/quote]There is a considerable difference between a bus service run by a private company to make money and a bus service that just breaks even which does not need any subsidy but is very much cheaper. It is areas like this that our public "servants" should be doing their best on, which would really properly deliver on safety and environment, rather than just setting up enforcements to make money out of the situation. dorsetspeed
  • Score: 3

8:01pm Mon 3 Feb 14

tbpoole says...

Yes but the private ones are the only sort that operate in this area after bus deregulation back in the 80s so the second version aint going to happen
Yes but the private ones are the only sort that operate in this area after bus deregulation back in the 80s so the second version aint going to happen tbpoole
  • Score: 0

8:47pm Mon 3 Feb 14

dorsetspeed says...

If our wonderful authorities really cared about safety, congestion, efficiency, and environment, etc, then they would find a way to make it happen.
If our wonderful authorities really cared about safety, congestion, efficiency, and environment, etc, then they would find a way to make it happen. dorsetspeed
  • Score: 0

10:27pm Tue 4 Feb 14

tbpoole says...

dorsetspeed wrote:
If our wonderful authorities really cared about safety, congestion, efficiency, and environment, etc, then they would find a way to make it happen.
Would you pay more Council Tax to pay for it then?
[quote][p][bold]dorsetspeed[/bold] wrote: If our wonderful authorities really cared about safety, congestion, efficiency, and environment, etc, then they would find a way to make it happen.[/p][/quote]Would you pay more Council Tax to pay for it then? tbpoole
  • Score: 0

6:43am Wed 5 Feb 14

dorsetspeed says...

tbpoole wrote:
dorsetspeed wrote:
If our wonderful authorities really cared about safety, congestion, efficiency, and environment, etc, then they would find a way to make it happen.
Would you pay more Council Tax to pay for it then?
No, I expect them to work like people in the real work, like me, where if you don't do your best to provide the best products and services for the minimum cost, someone else does and you go out of business. It might need no more than a bit of hard negotiation with some of the bus companies. I bet they haven't even bothered to do that.
[quote][p][bold]tbpoole[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]dorsetspeed[/bold] wrote: If our wonderful authorities really cared about safety, congestion, efficiency, and environment, etc, then they would find a way to make it happen.[/p][/quote]Would you pay more Council Tax to pay for it then?[/p][/quote]No, I expect them to work like people in the real work, like me, where if you don't do your best to provide the best products and services for the minimum cost, someone else does and you go out of business. It might need no more than a bit of hard negotiation with some of the bus companies. I bet they haven't even bothered to do that. dorsetspeed
  • Score: 0

10:42pm Wed 5 Feb 14

tbpoole says...

dorsetspeed wrote:
tbpoole wrote:
dorsetspeed wrote:
If our wonderful authorities really cared about safety, congestion, efficiency, and environment, etc, then they would find a way to make it happen.
Would you pay more Council Tax to pay for it then?
No, I expect them to work like people in the real work, like me, where if you don't do your best to provide the best products and services for the minimum cost, someone else does and you go out of business. It might need no more than a bit of hard negotiation with some of the bus companies. I bet they haven't even bothered to do that.
Oh per-lease get real. The bus companies don't provide a service to the Council, they provide a bus service to the fare paying passengers and have to make a profit. There is nothing much to negotiate really. It's a virtual monopoly in this area and the customer doesn't have a real choice and will get charged more or less what the bus company wants.
[quote][p][bold]dorsetspeed[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]tbpoole[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]dorsetspeed[/bold] wrote: If our wonderful authorities really cared about safety, congestion, efficiency, and environment, etc, then they would find a way to make it happen.[/p][/quote]Would you pay more Council Tax to pay for it then?[/p][/quote]No, I expect them to work like people in the real work, like me, where if you don't do your best to provide the best products and services for the minimum cost, someone else does and you go out of business. It might need no more than a bit of hard negotiation with some of the bus companies. I bet they haven't even bothered to do that.[/p][/quote]Oh per-lease get real. The bus companies don't provide a service to the Council, they provide a bus service to the fare paying passengers and have to make a profit. There is nothing much to negotiate really. It's a virtual monopoly in this area and the customer doesn't have a real choice and will get charged more or less what the bus company wants. tbpoole
  • Score: 0

8:11am Thu 6 Feb 14

dorsetspeed says...

There is no reason why a bit of competition can't work here. Get the companies to bid for the school run work, a good guaranteed bus load twice a day would be worth a good discount. When it rains it costs my daughter £2 each way to go about 5 mins, ridiculous. I refuse to be ripped off like that so take her in the car. There might be any number of other solutions, all I'm saying is I would like my council to be putting effort into finding the safest, cleanest and most efficient solutions instead of just taking money off drivers where inadequate dropping facilities are provided.
There is no reason why a bit of competition can't work here. Get the companies to bid for the school run work, a good guaranteed bus load twice a day would be worth a good discount. When it rains it costs my daughter £2 each way to go about 5 mins, ridiculous. I refuse to be ripped off like that so take her in the car. There might be any number of other solutions, all I'm saying is I would like my council to be putting effort into finding the safest, cleanest and most efficient solutions instead of just taking money off drivers where inadequate dropping facilities are provided. dorsetspeed
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree