Your Echo
TEXT PHOTOS, VIDEOS + NEWS TO 80360, TYPE BE, THEN LEAVE A SPACE BEFORE YOUR MESSAGE OR E-MAIL »
SPEED TICKET SHOCK
6:16am Thursday 24th July 2008
Comments (43)DRIVERS in the BH postcode district are the most likely in the country to be caught speeding, a shock survey has revealed.
In a top ten table of motorists to receive at least one speeding conviction in the past five years, Bournemouth and Poole appeared an astonishing four times - more than any UK area.
The village of Radlett in Hertfordshire topped the table, with 27 per cent of drivers snapped by speed cameras. But Bournemouth's Westbourne came second, and Boscombe, Parkstone and West Cliff all featured prominently.
These findings are sure to leave drivers across the conurbation, already reeling from record fuel prices, feeling the odds really are stacked against them.
Those least likely to fall foul to the Gatso are drivers in Glasgow's G22 area, where just 4.1 per cent have recent points for speeding.
Borough of Poole councillor Phil Eades said: "This table suggests that drivers in BH are six times worse than Glasgow drivers.
"This is clearly nonsensical and the only explanation can be the number and the locations of speed cameras rather than the driving habits or abilities locally."
The councillor says the speed camera on Castle Lane East in Iford, Bournemouth, is partially hidden behind a tree, and Poole's Castle Hill speed camera is also placed "a bit sneakily".
He added: "These are more about revenue raising rather than driver education or casualty reduction.
"Everyone would support cameras outside schools or hospitals but it cannot be right that the Dorset Safety Camera Partnership - with the full support of all local councils - is overseeing a situation where BH residents are the most penalised postcode area anywhere in the country."
The survey, carried out by Admiral Insurance, put data from 1.5million motorists under the spotlight.
Admiral managing director Sue Longthorn said: "One thing is for sure, there are certain parts of the country where people are far more likely to have a conviction for speeding and there are parts where hardly anyone has."
A Dorset Safety Camera Partnership spokesman refused to comment because he felt the survey was commercially driven and argued the results were not a true representation of the national picture.
Speeding hotspots: 1. WD7 postcode, Radlett, Herts, percentage of drivers with speeding conviction 27.0% 2. BH4, Westbourne, Bournemouth, percentage of drivers with speeding conviction 26.4% 3. HP27, Princes Risborough, Bucks, percentage of drivers with speeding conviction 25.0% 4. BH5, Boscombe, Bournemouth, percentage of drivers with speeding conviction 23.6% 5. BH14, Parkstone, Poole, percentage of drivers with speeding conviction 23.6% 6. HP15, Holmer Green & Hazlemere, Bucks, percentage of drivers with speeding conviction 23.1% 7. HP8, Chalfont St Giles, Bucks, percentage of drivers with speeding conviction 22.0% 8. MK17, Woburn, Beds, percentage of drivers with speeding conviction 21.6% 9. RG9, Henley-on-Thames, Oxon, percentage of drivers with speeding conviction 21.4% 10. BH2, West Cliff, Bournemouth, percentage of drivers with speeding conviction 21.1%
Your Say YourBournemouth Echo
muffin the mule, wallisdown says...
7:56am Thu 24 Jul 08
Podster, Bournemouth says...
8:38am Thu 24 Jul 08
As someone who has recently attended a driver awarness day for speeding in Hampshire, I am now very conscious of the potential consequences of driving just 4 or 5 mph above the speed limit.
The answer is simple - stick to the speed limit and you won't get any points!!
Phil, Poole says...
8:54am Thu 24 Jul 08
Podster, Bournemouth says...
9:43am Thu 24 Jul 08
And taking your line of thought one step further, you seem to be suggesting that camera sites are extremely safe. So if every strip of road had it's speed limit enforced with a zero tolerance policy then there would be NO more fatalities? An interesting idea...
sinbad, upton says...
10:50am Thu 24 Jul 08
muffin the mule wrote:Since when is 17% over the speed limit "creeping over"?
its simple really ,the Tories under Thatcher sold off every asset we had so the country has no 'earner' well fines on motorists are the 'new earner',and fair enough that we get fined but why the points - its a fearsome system absolutely wreck yor life (if you get a ban )for the most minor infringement say 4 x over the 30 limit at 35 mph - it defies logic and doesnt treat everyone the same way ,if you drive for a living ,everything goes,if you are a casual driver it may make not the slightest difference to your life - the system is flawed and thats the biggest issue and rightly so especially as its only another tax which you cant complain about because it is self inflicted.the system needs a complete overhaul
omegaman, Bournemouth says...
11:03am Thu 24 Jul 08
muffin the mule, wallisdown says...
11:05am Thu 24 Jul 08
Podster wrote:YOU got done for speeding - not me .you need to learn the lesson instead of preaching to the rest of us .i am not saying camera sites are safe or an road is safe where someone is speeding but you cant police them all and we all see idiots out on the roads every day - cameras are a revenue source and no mistake ..people will be killed on the roads ,where there are no cameras people will exceed the speed limit .there are constraints on our time and occassionally we need to get a move on to meet deadlines. but where is the justification for a speed camera at 2-3 oclock in the morning ? the roads arent overun with people walking are they . fatalities are a fact of life and not always the fault of the driver.but you do the course and suddenly you are an authority on the matter
And your point is what exactly? It's like that joke about elephant powder... if you don't see any elephants then it must be assumed to work.
And taking your line of thought one step further, you seem to be suggesting that camera sites are extremely safe. So if every strip of road had it's speed limit enforced with a zero tolerance policy then there would be NO more fatalities? An interesting idea...
muffin the mule, wallisdown says...
11:08am Thu 24 Jul 08
sinbad wrote:firstly there is an allowable speedo error of 10% what difference ever will/has 2 mph made to the fatality totals - at least apply some logic
muffin the mule wrote:Since when is 17% over the speed limit "creeping over"?
its simple really ,the Tories under Thatcher sold off every asset we had so the country has no 'earner' well fines on motorists are the 'new earner',and fair enough that we get fined but why the points - its a fearsome system absolutely wreck yor life (if you get a ban )for the most minor infringement say 4 x over the 30 limit at 35 mph - it defies logic and doesnt treat everyone the same way ,if you drive for a living ,everything goes,if you are a casual driver it may make not the slightest difference to your life - the system is flawed and thats the biggest issue and rightly so especially as its only another tax which you cant complain about because it is self inflicted.the system needs a complete overhaul
In Absentia, Bournemouth says...
11:14am Thu 24 Jul 08
The Dorset Safety Camera Partnership exists to basically fund its own salaries and provide extra tax for the government. We need a local council leader to be brave enough to follow the example of Swindon and get rid of loads of them.
I'm sure that a number in our area do not meet the installation criteria and the one in Castle Lane on the way to Iford is pointless, the traffic is so choked along there it would be an achievement to actually reach 30 mph!
Dorsetknob, Lytchett Matravers says...
11:16am Thu 24 Jul 08
simon, bournemouth says...
11:58am Thu 24 Jul 08
rayc, Poole says...
12:36pm Thu 24 Jul 08
Portsmouth council have threatened to withdraw funding from the Hampshire Partnership because they refuse to provide them information on the cameras within their area. This is in spite of them paying £400,000 a year to support them!
PokesdownMark, Pokesdown says...
12:41pm Thu 24 Jul 08
Since when is 17% over the speed limit "creeping over"?
Not all 17%s are equal.
Adam, Bournemouth says...
12:49pm Thu 24 Jul 08
If nobody sped then no-one would get caught and then these "money-making" partnerships won't be making any money!!!
The amount of times I go up the A338 and get overtaken by idiots only to catch up with them at roundabouts still amazes me. What time are you saving? Since religiously sticking to the speed limit my petrol consumption has reduced therefore saving me money!!!
Jonny, Alum Chine says...
12:52pm Thu 24 Jul 08
PokesdownMark wrote:Well said.
Since when is 17% over the speed limit "creeping over"?Not all 17%s are equal.
Jonny, Alum Chine says...
12:54pm Thu 24 Jul 08
V annoying.
dibbles, Bournemouth says...
1:15pm Thu 24 Jul 08
Jonny wrote:I think its got something to do with the lengths of road between roundabouts etc, volume of traffic and stopping distances. I believe that slow drivers on these roads cause more accidents than anyone.
Does anyone know why the Wessex Way is 50 anyway? National road speed for a dual carriage way is 70. V annoying.
Newsreader, North Dorset says...
1:17pm Thu 24 Jul 08
I would guess that it is 50 because it is a built up area with lots of houses around, therefore a slower speed means less noise.
Rogman, Boscombe East says...
1:27pm Thu 24 Jul 08
Yes - have them near schools etc but get rid of them on A and trunk roads - they are usually not needed.
Rogman, Boscombe East says...
1:30pm Thu 24 Jul 08
Jonny wrote:Good question - this road, for the most part, would be totally safe at 90 or even 100mph.
Does anyone know why the Wessex Way is 50 anyway? National road speed for a dual carriage way is 70. V annoying.
PokesdownMark, Pokesdown says...
1:38pm Thu 24 Jul 08
Jonny wrote:I think there were some bad accidents. I remember when it was 70mph it was a bit hairy at times. Everyone piling on the brakes for the old queens park roundabout!
Does anyone know why the Wessex Way is 50 anyway? National road speed for a dual carriage way is 70.
V annoying.
Now its 50 there still are accidents. Especially around cooper dean. Its very hard to know how much speed cameras contribute to safety. I thought the elephant powder comment was very apt. But I think increasing numbers of people are seeing the speed camera phenomenon for what it is... an big experiment and a major distraction from some other important road safety issues.
Paul, Bournemouth, Northbourne says...
1:50pm Thu 24 Jul 08
If you really are concerned about cameras, and especially the 'romming' safety camera which is used now and again. Then purchase a Beltronics Radar detector !
That way you'll know which camera sites are live and which that are not. There are around 20 camera sites in the area but Bournemouth have only 6 or so cameras that are moved from site to site. Poole has even less live sites.
simon, bournemouth says...
1:52pm Thu 24 Jul 08
Top_Starfish, UK says...
2:30pm Thu 24 Jul 08
If you claim you are a safe observant driver and can drive above the limit in a safe manner then speed cameras shouldnt worry you. You should be able to spot them in plenty of time, If you cant spot a big reflective yellow box, then what chance would you have at spotting a kid stepping out behind a parked van. If you get caught you are speeding AND unobservant therefore you deserve it.
Jonny, Alum Chine says...
2:35pm Thu 24 Jul 08
Top_Starfish wrote:Whilst I don't agree you do have a very good point there.
Whats the big rush leave a bit earlier, drive slower, save some of that expensive fuel and dont worry about the cameras. Its easy to keep below the limit if youre a good driver and youre not distracted by phone calls (hands free or worse, handheld), fiddling with your radio, sat nav, lighting a fag, etc. After all we all managed to stay below the limit for our driving tests. If you claim you are a safe observant driver and can drive above the limit in a safe manner then speed cameras shouldnt worry you. You should be able to spot them in plenty of time, If you cant spot a big reflective yellow box, then what chance would you have at spotting a kid stepping out behind a parked van. If you get caught you are speeding AND unobservant therefore you deserve it.
But its the sneaky vans that are the real problem for not GATSO's, because as you say they tend to be fairly spottable if your observing the road properly.
Jonny, Alum Chine says...
2:39pm Thu 24 Jul 08
Modern cars stop in what 4 or 5 times less distance than they used to?
This should be considered, especially on 3+ lane motorways. Well in my opinion.
The other real problem for me is not speed but the distance many many drivers (don't) keep between vehicles - very few use the "2nd rule" (I'm sorry but especially female drivers - and I say this from experience and not prejudice)
Jonny, Alum Chine says...
2:40pm Thu 24 Jul 08
Top_Starfish, UK says...
3:52pm Thu 24 Jul 08
(ie one who obeys the limit) as Im passing lorries, other cars (usually BMWs and Audis to be honest) will sit 2 foot from my bumper because I dare to do the speed limit.
By the way I would agree that 80mph is generally safe for cars on the motorway, but the problem comes with speed differentials - people pulling out at 60-65mph to overtake a lorry into faster moving traffic is dangerous.
Also the government could not be seen to sanction a higher limit, due to the huge increase in fuel consumption and subsequent CO2 emissions. There has been talk of stricter motorway enforcement on the basis of Kyoto commitments and some groups are pushing for a drop in the national speed limit.
kerry.w, Bournemouth says...
4:16pm Thu 24 Jul 08
Frank, Poole says...
4:21pm Thu 24 Jul 08
AndyC, Bournemouth says...
4:50pm Thu 24 Jul 08
Newsreader wrote:Indeed - I can think of a few places where I guess the restirctions are to restrict the noise pollution from the road for residents. I for one fully support speed restrictions for this reason.
It is 50 but then is 60 when you get outside Bournemouth and are heading to the A31 roundabout. I would guess that it is 50 because it is a built up area with lots of houses around, therefore a slower speed means less noise.
Jonny, Alum Chine says...
4:57pm Thu 24 Jul 08
Newsreader wrote:Ermm shouldn't that read 60?
It is 50 but then is 60 when you get outside Bournemouth and are heading to the A31 roundabout. I would guess that it is 50 because it is a built up area with lots of houses around, therefore a slower speed means less noise.
Dual Carriage ways are 70 not 60. (not many people know that)
Jonny, Alum Chine says...
5:00pm Thu 24 Jul 08
But I'm moron.
sinbad, upton says...
5:09pm Thu 24 Jul 08
Jonny wrote:Only for cars & motorcycles where national speed limit signs are displayed
Newsreader wrote: It is 50 but then is 60 when you get outside Bournemouth and are heading to the A31 roundabout. I would guess that it is 50 because it is a built up area with lots of houses around, therefore a slower speed means less noise.Ermm shouldn't that read 60? Dual Carriage ways are 70 not 60. (not many people know that)
Jonny, Alum Chine says...
5:13pm Thu 24 Jul 08
ActrosMan, Poole says...
5:45pm Thu 24 Jul 08
Hugh, Bournemouth says...
6:04pm Thu 24 Jul 08
Jonny wrote:I have had a clean license for over 35 years. Hence I feel that I am entitled to speak with authority on this subject.
Does anyone know why the Wessex Way is 50 anyway? National road speed for a dual carriage way is 70. V annoying.
I well remember the Wessex Way before the current 50 mph speed limit. It was an absolute race track with habitual dangerous driving. I dreaded going on it.
When the speed limit came in it was transformed into a pleasant and safe route, and amazingly with all the traffic going at the same speed the congestion and jams disappeared.
Hence I am now a convert to the need for enforced speed limits.
2Much, New Forest says...
9:21am Fri 25 Jul 08
Newsreader wrote:It was changed "supposedly" because of cyclists..i've seen 4 or 5 on that road since.
It is 50 but then is 60 when you get outside Bournemouth and are heading to the A31 roundabout.
I would guess that it is 50 because it is a built up area with lots of houses around, therefore a slower speed means less noise.
Newsreader...it's 70 along that stretch to the A31!
Phil, Poole says...
11:38am Fri 25 Jul 08
Chris, Bournemouth says...
2:10pm Fri 25 Jul 08
It amazes me that people slow down to 30mph for a speed camera and then, immediately, accelerate again. This I can only assume is wilful disobedience of the law!
One of the biggest risks of sppeding over 30 in built up areas is someone ahead of you pulling out of a junction, not expecting you to reach them so quickly.
paul, poole says...
3:04am Sat 26 Jul 08
Hugh, Bournemouth says...
4:45pm Sat 26 Jul 08
paul wrote:The simple answer is to obey the speed limits.
The comments from all above are like reading a Book....again and again and again. The same old comments about why they're there, where they should be or not, rambling on about limits being broken because of this and that camera....how come no-one actually comes up with a definitive answer?
Simple!
In this section
- BOURNEMOUTH AND POOLE COLLEGE IN CASH CRISIS
- Beth joins the cast of Hollyoaks
- Grogan and Calderwood guilty of plotting terrifying armed robbery on Academy Snooker Club
- Boscombe Arts Centre campaigners throw down the gauntlet
- Plane crashed at Bournemouth Airport after instructor's mistake
- Green shoots of recovery for McCarthy and Stone in Ferndown
- Much-maligned Purbeck online cookware store 'overwhelmed' by orders
- School alert as pair have swine flu virus
- Dorset traffic light speed camera list is fake
- Deal at Christchurch Woolies 'imminent'
Sponsored Links
Local Advertisers
Local Information
Enter your postcode, town or place name
alumchineboy, Alumchine says...
7:15am Thu 24 Jul 08
Personally i'd rather have cameras outside schools etc than where I got done on the wessex way just before the national speed limit starts. To get done at 54 in a 50 makes me slightly cross but thats the way it goes - they need the money.
I read in the echo about a serial burglar and drug user who was given a suspended sentence (with no financial penalty ) recently. How come I cant be given a suspended driving fine ? If I got caught again I should have to pay twice. That would seem to be reasonable and fair and would probably make people slow down more. But saying that, its not about justice but about the council needing the money.