Motorway speed cameras installed near Bristol have won the dubious honour of being named the nation's most lucrative speed trap. More than 100 drivers were caught everyday by a single speed camera, one of eight patrolling a temporary 40mph limit on the M5 between junctions 18 and 25 while a new crawler lane was built. Avon and Somerset Safety Camera Partnership was forced to release the figures on September 6th under the Freedom of Information Act and they underscore the full revenue raising potential of speed cameras. The single camera on the M5 raised more than £1.2 million in fines, also costing the 20,000 speeding motorists caught more than 60,000 in licence penalty points. Between May and November last year, the camera caught 20,383 drivers on the northbound carriageway between Avonmouth and Cribbs Causeway, earning £6,240 a day, or £260 an hour. The other seven speed cameras installed to patrol the roadworks area also caught 5,092 motorists between September 2005 and June 2006, raising a further £305,520 in fines and meting out an additional 15,276 in penalty points. The figures mean that the M5 camera was three times more lucrative than the gatso in Leeds, which previously held the claim of being the UK's biggest money maker. The speed camera on the M62 netted more than £1 million across an 18 month period, earning an average of £2,158 a day. With thousands of drivers speeding on regardless, the figures raise obvious questions as to the effectiveness of speed cameras as an anti-speeding device. The speed camera partnership admitted that it was disappointed but not surprised that so many drivers had been caught. Dave Gollicker, spokesman for the Avon and Somerset Safety Camera Partnership, defended their installation, pointing out that even the high numbers of drivers snapped was just a fraction of the thousand using the motorway over the period. Speaking to the Guardian, he also hit back at claims speed cameras were simply installed to raise money. He insisted: "They are there to protect the workforce and the motorist." Nevertheless, the figures have encouraged speed camera critics to reiterate their claims that gatsos are installed to raise revenue, not promote road safety. Nigel Humphries, of the Association of British Drivers, claims that the cameras force drivers to concentrate on their speed limit, rather than potential hazards on the road ahead. "Cameras at roadworks force drivers to look down at the speedometers and not at their surroundings, which, it has now been proven, causes accidents," he said. "This whole mess is made by the Safety Camera Partnership, which is ripping off people in the name of safety."
By Nigel Humphries' logic, all speed limits should be abolished as they must all affect a drivers ability to concentrate on hazard's in the road!</p> I must be a bit weird because I can watch my speed and the road at the same time. Do you think I should get help?</p>
RE: But it wouldn't have raised anything if people had stuck to the limit! Also, just shows how much attention drivers must have been paying (no pun intended) to the road ahead to not notice the 40 mph signs. If you see roadworks, especially on a motorway, it's a fair bet that there will be a speed restriction.
The daftness of that statement is breathtaking.</p> If that guy was representing MY interests I'd have him sacked.</p> Why don't we just remove speedometers from cars then. Surplus to requirements and obviously dangerous.</p>
RE: But it wouldn't have raised anything if people had stuck to the limit! 20mph limit around schools and put cameras there. Also parking restricions near schools to stop the Chelsea tractor mums. Raise the m way limit to 85 but enforce it. That'll do for starters
Obviously.What a pillock. I have to take exception at some speed cameras and some speeding fines, but generally they are a tax on the stupid/lazy/selfish</p> If I ever get caught, I'll deserve it. Probably</p>
colleague got done few years back on an open stretch of road 42 in a 30 area. Not built up. He said he couldn't believe it. A couple of years later it was reclassifed as a 40 zone. Taking into account the tolerance level he wouldn't have got done.</p> Inappropriate speed is the problem.</p>
Its an idiot trap and a very succesful one too. Congratulations Avon and Somerset Safety Camera Partnership, keep up the good work.
Agree to a certain extent, but we have to learn what is appropriate and what is not. It's not for us to judge, we do other jobs.</p> The point is - ALL speed limits are clearly marked, and usually all fixed cameras are preceded by signs. Even mobile speed traps tend to have a camera sign up somewhere.</p> And I speak as having attracted a fine and points 4 years ago. Now I drive within the limit specifies, cos that's the law. Those who don't, won't or can't shouldn't be on the road, and no doubt they'll be off it in due course.</p>
People who speed in roadwork areas complete pillocks !! if people want to speed in areas were workman are carrying out repairs they should have a automatic ban , what right have they got to show no duty of care in a work environment ?
if you drove home one night from work and caught caught doing 1mph over on 4 temporary cameras and lost your license due to totting up how would you feel?
RE: if you drove home one night from work and caught caught doing 1mph over A bit pissed off, but I'm not sure you'd get done for doing one mile over. For example, I know that my car is doing 30mph when the speedo reads about 35, so I would have been "speeding" anyway.
stupid typical of the world today , nobody will accept they are wrong even when they break the speed limit. if their child was run over by a 'speeding' motorist they would change.
i meant 1mph over what they would do you for i know speedos read 10% over so when your doing 33 your only doing 30 + they allow for another 10% so your speedo would be reading 36. Easty is such a lapdog to authority! What i hate is the fact that these cameras are for REVENUE not SAFETY! If that were the case there would be no fines - simply a points system to get you banned so you couldnt put road users at risks. If this was how it were run i would be behind them as i couldnt see them erecting one at their cost to just try and ban people when they werent going to make them any money!
when the highway code was written cars needed more than double the distance to stop than they do now so what is wrong? The speed limits back then or the braking distance now?
RE: i meant 1mph over what they would do you for It would be my fault then, I'd be bloody pissed off with myself. I've been caught once on a speed camera - I didn't try to lay the blame on anyone else. (well apart from ar lass at the time who was bloody nattering in my earhole!)
Maybe we should try this excuse From the BBC</p><table cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" width="629" border="0"><tbody><tr><td colspan="3"><div class="mxb"><div class="sh">'Goat-free roads made me speed' </div></div></td></tr><tr><td valign="top" width="416"><font size="2"><table cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" width="203" align="right" border="0"><tbody><tr><td><div> <div class="cap">Police said goats had not been reported on eastern Ontario's roads</div></div></td></tr></tbody></table>A Swiss man caught speeding on a Canadian highway has blamed his actions on the absence of goats on the roads. The man was caught driving at 161 km/h (100mph) in a 100 km/h (60mph) zone. </p> A traffic officer's notes said the Swiss driver had said he was taking advantage "of the ability to go faster without risking hitting a goat". </p> Canadian police spokesman Joel Doiron said he had never found a goat on the highways of eastern Ontario in his 20 years of service. </p> "Nobody's ever used the lack of goats here as an excuse for speeding," Mr Doiron told the AFP news agency. </p> "I've never been to Switzerland, but I guess there must be a lot of goats there," he said. </p> The driver was ordered to pay a fine of C$360 ($330; £175) for speeding. </p></font></td></tr></tbody></table>
