Road Safety News
 

More than 80% of cars exceeding 20mph limits

Friday 30th June 2017

New statistics show that during 2016, 81% of cars exceeded the speed limit on roads with a 20mph limit, with 15% exceeding the limit by more than 10mph.

The DfT statistics, published yesterday (29 June), measure speed and compliance at sites where the road conditions are free flowing - for example roads with no junctions, hills, sharp bends, speed enforcement cameras or other traffic calming measures.

Overall, the figures show that since 2011, the percentages of vehicles exceeding the speed limit in free flow conditions have declined slightly for most vehicle and road types.

IAM RoadSmart says 'widespread confusion' over 20mph limits is 'undermining a more general trend to slow down'.

The 2016 statistics show that single carriageway roads where the national speed limit (60mph) applies had the highest levels of speed limit compliance; 8% of cars exceeded the speed limit on these roads, with 1% exceeding by more than 10mph.

On motorways, 46% of cars exceeded the 70mph speed limit, falling to 11% exceeding the limit by more than 10mph - while on 30mph roads, 53% of cars exceeded the speed limit.

The number exceeding the speed limit is lower during the daytime and higher at night, for most vehicle and road type combinations.

Neil Greig IAM RoadSmart’s director of policy and research, said: “It’s really good news for road safety that the roads with the highest speed compliance are actually our most dangerous - 60mph rural single carriageways.  

“The main problem is clearly getting drivers to comply on the ever increasing number of roads in our towns and cities with a 20mph limit. IAM RoadSmart have always felt that blanket 20mph limits, enforced by signposts only, are simply not enough to convey the reason for slowing down to drivers.  

“We must all work to make it easy to stick to the speed limit and our main concern is that widespread confusion over 20mph may be undermining a more general trend to slow down.”


Want to know more about speed and road safety?
Online library of research and reports etc - visit the Road Safety Knowledge Centre
Key facts and summaries of research reports - visit the Road Safety Observatory (speed limits)

Comments

Comment on this story
Report a reader comment

What's your view - comment on this story:

I confirm that I have read and accept the moderation policy and house rules relating to comments posted on this website.
Your comment:
Your name and location:
Your email:

That last paragraph was a joke, but seriously if they want people to take 20 seriously down ordinary residential streets, it's probably not good idea to also include much higher standard residential roads with good sight lines and lacking in parked cars like they have in Bristol. In fact in Bristol there are roads that aren't included that are of a lower standard than others that are, it's so non-uniform I know of about 3 places where the road standard seemingly improves but the speed limit decreases. In Cornwall it's much better, almost any road that is in anyway main isn't included unless it has traffic calming, the rest are all ordinary residential streets.

Even if you are doing 30mph down an ordinary narrow residential street lined with parked cars just because the speed limit allows it, if you were clearly going too fast for the conditions then I think reckless driving laws kick in for that if you run someone over.
Alex Hosking

Agree (1) | Disagree (0)
+1

But you wouldn't hit anyone whilst driving at no more than 20 Alex - you'd be able to see and stop in time - that's the whole point of 20s, whereas at higher speeds you would be unlikely to see and stop in time. I think you're looking at residential speed limits purely through the eyes of the motorist and not taking the wider view.
Hugh Jones, Cheshire

Agree (0) | Disagree (1)
-1

I don't think I quoted a level of non-compliance for a 30 limit road only some speed averages, for some roads in South Gloucestershire, but they have some extremely stupid ones outside of built up areas or where they start half a mile from the built up area, I think one 30 limit road has an 85th percentile speed of 49mph.

In Bristol someone from the local paper went out somewhere hidden and spent an hour with a speed gun and on all 4 roads it was over 90% non compliance. Trouble is the nature of the road invites people to go speeds faster than 20.

The signs are there telling people the absolute max speed they should be able to achieve safely under ideal conditions is 20mph. 30mph might be too fast, yet, but that's why it's a speed limit, why would you want to put a prohibition on people already going slower than that, in many cases significantly so people tootling along in the low 20s when conditions allow for it, it's tantamount to a prohibition of the behavior of some of the safer drivers on the road while doing nothing to pursue people who drive around the streets like maniacs.

And think about it, if I was to hit someone going 20mph all things being equal if the person had walked out at the same moment and I'd been going 30, I'd have already have gone past them.
Alex Hosking

Agree (1) | Disagree (1)
0

The article headline is no doubt correct for some 20mph limit roads Alex, but I was actually questioning the levels of non-compliance in 30s which you had quoted earlier on, which to me suggested flawed speed measurement (quite possible with automatic devices) rather than actual levels of infringement - they didn't ring true compared to my own experiences of speed measurement in 30 limit roads, that's all.
Hugh Jones, Cheshire

Agree (0) | Disagree (0)
0

Look at the article headline.
Alex Hosking

Agree (1) | Disagree (0)
+1

I've never surveyed a road for speed and found 90% non-compliance! I think 30 40 % was the highest. Something's wrong somewhere - I suspect a flawed speed measurement method rather than a flawed speed limit. Have you been able to verify them independently. Not sure driving examiners are fully au fait with speed limit regs and guidelines.
Hugh Jones,Cheshire

Agree (1) | Disagree (1)
0

Well I've had it drummed into me for a long time how/why speed limits work because my mum is married to a driving examiner.

I also read the American study, the Effects Of Raising And Lowering Speed limits, you could dismiss as being from another country and over 20 years ago, however the example I gave from Yate and then the local rag here in Bristol found a road having a non-compliance rate of over 97%, both if which still surprised even me.


Bristol City Council have openly admitted in a freedom of information request that they have not followed DfT guidelines for many of the roads included, I'm pretty sure some of the modern main roads included were engineered with the 30mph limit in mind. Also during the consultation in Bristol someone I wrote to described the lack of a 25mph speed limit as "unfortunate".

If levels of non-compliance of over 90% don't tell that speed limit is set incorrectly and might be an example of a law being brought into contempt, I'm not sure what will. All the roads the local paper looked at were over 90% non-compliance.
Alex Hosking

Agree (2) | Disagree (0)
+2

I take it you've never worked in, or had any direct experience of the workings of local government highways and traffic departments Alex?

No disrespect, but in another thread on another news item, I've had a moan about uninformed, disgruntled motorists chipping in with internet-sourced knowledge. Hope you're not one. I'm curious nevertheless as to how you've ascertained that apparently all local authorities don't follow guidelines and why traffic engineers are apparently no longer involved.
Hugh Jones, Cheshire

Agree (0) | Disagree (1)
-1

I think local authorities never used to be allowed to set whatever speed limit they feel like, they had to follow the guidelines and now they don't.

And setting speed limits really shouldn't be a political decision, it should be down to road engineers, most people don't know diddly about why a speed limit is set they way it is, they just want it really low outside their house even though even most of them have no intention of sticking to it.
Alex Hosking

Agree (2) | Disagree (0)
+2

If anything Alex, your comments have highlighted the inconsistencies in local authorities' application of local limits. From what you've said, your LAs seem to have a different approach to the three in my immediate areas and where all the limits are to me, appropriate. As I've said before, one man's appropriate speed limit is another man's inappropriate speed limit.

Perhaps the nationals should include 20s, 40 and 50s which can't be altered and with rigid criteria for their application which councils must follow.
Hugh Jones, Cheshire

Agree (0) | Disagree (2)
-2

Another thing to mention about setting speed limits below the mean average, you've only put a prohibition on normal driver behavior like that somehow achieves something, law enforcement have little interest in it, they want to be able to pursue exceptional driver behavior, and it makes it a lot harder for them to single that out.
Alex Hosking

Agree (4) | Disagree (1)
+3

Possibly people expect too much from speed limits - it is the authorities simply saying that it s desirable that traffic speeds do not exceed x mph for certain roads of certain characteristics... but there are no guarantees with that..it is still up to the drivers to drive safely within those limits.

I'm still not sure, as I asked in another thread, why some drivers get so worked up about having their speed limited, especially where it is primarily for the benefit of others, as in residential areas.

I don't think I've encountered a road where exceeding the limit wasn't undesirable and didn't make collisions more likely and in that respect, considering the logistical problem of applying speed limits to all highways in the country, I think the system is good enough. Anyway, pottering along residential roads at under 20 mph is not the end of the world and creates a calmer environment for everyone - including the drivers.
Hugh Jones, Cheshire

Agree (1) | Disagree (3)
-2

Pat

I wasn't criticising your quote, just correcting its source. When those surveyed said that they though they seem to be implying that its "other people". Another question was "I will be careful to observe new 20mph limits wherever they are and 64% agreed.
Rod King, Warrington, Cheshire, 20's Plenty for Us

Agree (0) | Disagree (2)
-2

Hugh, I was also going to mention such speed limits, I go to a lot of small villages that have no local speed limit and no street lights, Upper Wraxall and Slaughterford in Wiltshire, in fact even though NSL applies you couldn't possibly go that fast if you tried so for all intents they have no speed limit. But for some reason people don't drive through them very fast at all.

I'd say both inappropriately low and high posted speed limits can make a road less safe but you're more likely to make a road more dangerous with a speed limit that's too low than one that's too high, that's because few people will just drive really fast just because the speed limit says they can.

And I feel a lot of what Rod King is saying is apologetics for showing contempt for people to judge their speed appropriately for the conditions. Unfortunately the kind of people who don't do that are some of the least likely to pay any attention to lower posted limits.

I know of one road where at some times you genuinely find it unintuitive to even do 20 along it safely, there's a lot of parked cars and a lot of kids, and people do natually crawl along it and other times when it's quiet you have good clear sight lines in front of you no cars parked a long it, 30 is easily achievable safely, it would be difficult for a pedestrian to get run over without making an effort to, not that people should be thinking that it's a good idea to go bumbling into roads in the first place.
Alex Hosking

Agree (4) | Disagree (1)
+3

Fair enough Rod
I was referring to that You Gov one relating to UWE. Obviously a different survey, so could you specify which one you are quoting from? The quote I made from the UWE survey is correct for that survey. Effectively saying 71% perception of drivers intention to not comply.
Pat, Wales

Agree (4) | Disagree (0)
+4

No Pat. You are referring to the YouGov survey conducted for University of West of England. This also showed that 57% hoped that the police would enforce the limits with only 20% against.

David The limits are quite logical. It's the "presence and potential presence of people". Of course to some its completely illogical that roads need to be shared in such a manner as to take account of people not in cars. Indeed if you look at most street scenes you will probably see more people moving outside of cars than inside cars.
Rod King, Warrington, Cheshire, 20's Plenty for Us

Agree (2) | Disagree (1)
+1

Not surprising. The speed limit zones are too bluntly implemented and often illogical. Time zones limits gain far more respect, when the reason for the limit is clear. Once danger periods are over, limits increase again. Fair, safe and logical.
David, Norfolk

Agree (4) | Disagree (3)
+1

Just one more post to clarify - the Dft guidelines quoted relate to Local speed limits (20, 40 and 50) and not the national default limits (30, 60 and 70). The latter, although applied by default, are not necessarily inappropriate. One man's appropriate speed limit is another man's inappropriate speed limit.
Hugh Jones, Cheshire

Agree (2) | Disagree (0)
+2

Is that the same British Social Attitudes Survey that also said:

71% of drivers agreed ‘people will ignore 20mph limits because they don’t see themselves getting caught by the police.

Obviously a real need for behaviour change if 20s are ever going to reach a tipping point. Good luck with that.
Pat, Wales

Agree (4) | Disagree (2)
+2

Alex

DfT accepts that when it says people's assessment then it means all road users. That's pedestrians and cyclists as well as drivers.

You are conflating "setting the right speed limit" with "how to gain compliance". The whole point of speed limits is to advise drivers of the hazards and risks even if they cannot be seen by the driver. Basing a speed limit on the flawed view of just one mode of road users (motor vehicle driver) is not acceptable or in guidance. In fact guidance says that authorities MUST take full account of the needs of vulnerable road users when setting speed limits.

WE also know that when asked (British Social Attitudes Survey) 73% of people say 20mph is the right limit for residential roads. That's twice the %age of voters voting to leave the EU in the referendum.
Rod King, Warrington, Cheshire, 20's Plenty for Us

Agree (4) | Disagree (5)
-1

I wasn't going to post anymore, however just to round off, it's a common misconception Alex that all our speed limits are set by local councils when probably at least 90% of the miles we travel are on roads with the 'one size fits all' national default limit (there's only three) for the type of road and which does not involve the local council (apart from placing the signs). It would be logistically impossible to have any other system. Your gripe Alex seems to be with the local speed limits in your area however and your perception of them, right or wrong. On the other hand, the roads which I frequently drive in Cheshire, Merseyside and North Wales have speed limits which I see as appropriate (again the 90/10 split) apart from parts of Liverpool which again highlights the problem of which urban roads should be 30 and not 20.

On a general point, could any drivers out there please explain what exactly is the problem with having to limit their speed to 20 on certain roads? It's not as though you're being made to drive everywhere in reverse. Lower urban speed limits do not adversely affect drivers, but do have significant benefits for the non-motorised road-user and residents.
Hugh Jones, Cheshire

Agree (3) | Disagree (3)
0

The DfT guidelines seem pretty clear on this "Speed limits should be evidence-led and self-explaining and seek to reinforce people's assessment of what is a safe speed to travel. They should encourage self-compliance. Speed limits should be seen by drivers as the maximum rather than a target speed."

You see if you can't assume favorable conditions for the driver and start setting the speed limit assuming the conditions are always unfavorable, then you're treating people like they're idiots, well then they're likely to start acting like idiots.

If studies into the effects of changing speed limits all concluded that you can set them however you like no need to take any account of average road speeds, and the vast majority of people will stick to them to the letter then many of the speed limits would be correct, that's not the case but many authorities seem to be setting them as if that were the case.

There are many speed limits that change seemingly for no reason, probably because they are and the council have pushed the boundary back X distance from where it's needed and there are a few examples of counter intuitive speed limit changes where there's a drop exactly where you'd expect a gain. But what you're doing with this is training people to expect speed limits to be arbitrary.

I think the American study on speed limits has my favourite quote on the subject.

"Arbitrary, unrealistic and nonuniform speed limits have created a socially acceptable disregard for speed limits. Unrealistic limits increase accident risks for persons who attempt to comply with limit by driving slower or faster than the majority of road users. Unreasonably low limits significantly decrease driver compliance and give road users such as person not familiar with the road and PEDESTRIANS, a false indication of actual traffic speeds."
Alex Hosking

Agree (10) | Disagree (1)
+9

Lots of modern cars flash the speed limit up on dashboard. There is enough technology in veh RS now to prevent them exceeding this. Tell me it isn't about getting the revenue and it's about road safety?
Keith Caldicott, Monmouth, Gwent

Agree (0) | Disagree (3)
-3

I live in a share the road development in Scotland - Eaglesham and I can honestly say particularly delivery drivers totally ignore the road conditions - children are supposed to play in a road that cars/vans routinely drive in speeds upwards of 20mph - I believe forcing people to retake tests and drive to road conditions and educate people is the only way to prevent a fatal accident!
Kat Glasgow

Agree (2) | Disagree (7)
-5

Alex - you may wish to search this forum's archives under 'speed' and 'enforcement' where there have been quite lengthy explanations (some by me even!) on speed limits and how they come into existence (National v local limits), what they are and what they are not, plus typical driver behaviour with respect to those limits. I would agree however that it doesn't help the cause of speed management, if local highway authorities are inconsistent when interpreting what's required of them by the Dft.
Hugh Jones, Cheshire

Agree (1) | Disagree (2)
-1

20mph is not "undermining a more general trend to slow down". Since 2011, there is no trend reduction in those exceeding the speed limit. E.g. on 30mph roads, 55% were over the speed limit in 2011; by 2016 this was still 53%. What IS noticeable, is that where the speed limit is 20mph, only 15% are exceeding 30mph. That means that 38% FEWER people are going over 30mph on roads with a 20mph speed limit. On residential streets, rather than the arterial roads surveyed by the DfT, the %age reduction will be even higher - in our (20 mph) street, around 2 or 3% go over 30mph, according to Community Speedwatch records, and the vast majority are travelling at less than 25mph.

20mph on all residential roads is the clear message from these statistics. It reduces speeds, removes road danger and makes our streets more pleasant places to live.
Adrian Berendt, TN4

Agree (7) | Disagree (8)
-1

Hugh, remember the speed limit is supposed to assume favourable conditions ie when it's dry, sight lines are clear and there aren't lots of kids about, and most people should not feel safe exceeding it, at least not by much most of the time.

Most people have a serious aversion to running people over, crashing or getting run over, and drive accordingly, only a small minority will drive in a manner deliberately disregarding both their own and other people's safety.

Speed limits are there to single these people out, but they simply cannot do that if the limit is set for example 8mph below the mean average speed and the non-compliance rate was 97.5% as the local rag here in Bristol discovered to be the case when they put a hidden speed gun on one of the city's 20 limits. Some of these roads may even have been designed with the 30mph limit in mind also.

Also Bristol City Council's optimistic prediction was that free flowing traffic speeds would decrease by 2mph, it's been a lot less that that, but even their optimistic prediction has average speeds knowingly above the speed limit, so they're knowingly using speed limits inappropriately and aren't even even prepared to pretend otherwise. Speed limits are not traffic calming, they're there to single out morons.

It should also tell you something that when the speed limit seems generous, speeds aren't but the compliance is.
Alex Hosking

Agree (5) | Disagree (5)
0

Alex - unfortunately I don't believe that all drivers do drive at what they think is the safe speed or optimum speed - it would be great if they all did. The majority do and it does correspond to the average speed, but there are still too many who for the same conditions, will drive significantly above it and where the safety margin reduces dramatically. The perennial problem for the authorities and those tasked with speed management is getting that concept across to the speeders!! (It's the same for tailgaters incidentally - the message falls on deaf ears)

With regard to your road, if those speeds are correct for the most of its length (rather than a short, unusually wide section) I agree the limit could be higher - very hard to judge from Google maps.
Hugh Jones, Cheshire

Agree (2) | Disagree (2)
0

Just to make an additional comment about the road with a seemingly generous 40mph limit in Chipping Sodbury Heron Way.

It got that limit because I think it was originally meant to be part of a bypass of the A432. Look on aerial photo and you can see an abandoned duel carriageway further back, so now it's got nowhere near the traffic is was meant to have and as a consequence people park on it and it's lined with houses on both sides and yet somehow the average speed is low. People are natually very cautious of it and no one has been killed on it in 40 years.

Trying to Do 40 along there is a bit of a mission, it doesn't feel safe so you naturally don't do it, which is exactly how speed limits are supposed to work.
Alex Hosking

Agree (6) | Disagree (1)
+5

Hugh Jones
The road with the 38mph average speed was Peg Hill I think the 85th Percentile was 44, Heron Way is the name of the Road with a 40 limit and 31mph average speed (85th percentile of 36!), incidentally much closer to Heron Way is Shire Way which has a 30mph speed limit and an average speed of 34 and an 85th of 42. I think the highest 85th Percentile in South Gloucestershire for a 30 limit road was 49mph and an average speed of 42.

I'm not saying it's right that people judge their speed more on what what feels safe, it just is. If speeds are too high compared to the speed limit then either the speed limit is wrong or the design of the road is, something has to give.

Trouble is when reducing the speed limit doesn't work the standard response seems to be to reduce it further or move the boundary back so it changes somewhere 500 yards from the village seemingly for no reason, in the false belief that people will only drive X over the posted limit.

What you actually end up with is a speed limit that comes across to most drivers as being so divorced from the speed they feel comfortable driving to the conditions it ends up being held in contempt, not taken seriously and is about as effective as not having a posted speed limit.

The speed limit is there to single out exceptional driver behaviour, if you start setting them below the mean average, they cannot do that. It's even been known for speeds to increase after the limit has been lowered.
Alex Hosking

Agree (4) | Disagree (2)
+2

Fair enough David. Further, have you considered also that whilst (in your opinion) speed limits are sometimes set for what you call political reasons rather than collision reduction reasons, equally some drivers are opposed to them and the enforcement thereof and are inclined to non- compliance, for what also may be called political and/or libertarian reasons, thereby allowing their principles to compromise their safety? I've encountered it a lot.
Hugh Jones, Cheshire

Agree (4) | Disagree (1)
+3

As a clarification, I implied that it was a sizeable amount of limits themselves that are not fit for purpose; re-reading what I had wrote I can see how you interpreted it that way. I'm inclined to agree with you however.
David Weston, Corby

Agree (3) | Disagree (1)
+2

I agree with David's last paragraph where he implies that a large proportion of the (driving) populous are not fit for purpose. We're back to the shortcomings of the driving test again and the post-test decline in standards.
Hugh Jones, Cheshire

Agree (3) | Disagree (4)
-1

I'm in the camp that, unless conditions dictate otherwise, will set my speed limiter to 24mph indicated in a 20mph *limit*.

Why, may you ask? Because first of all, 20mph LIMITS on the most part I would consider too slow. I have only three, maybe four times, come across a particular stretch of road that travelling faster than 20mph would be a danger to other road users. Weirdly enough they're all shared spaces, where actually I would consider doing perhaps 15mph or less, if required.

What should be used more often would be time-dependant speed limits, so, outside a school during peak hours - 20mph would be used, other times 30mph would be used as a limit.

Additionally I fear that in a (large, might I add) minority of cases 20mph limits are not installed for safety, but for political reasons.

So, no wonder that a large proportion of the populous exceed 20mph limits; a sizeable number of them are not fit for purpose and thus ruins the principle.
David Weston, Corby

Agree (14) | Disagree (4)
+10

Going on from your history lesson Andrew, there was such a mind blowing period of death and mayhem on our roads when the speed limit of 20 in towns was repealed due to drivers holding it in contempt that in 1934 a new 30 mph speed limit was introduced in towns and villages and cities that had street lighting, but not in rural non lit areas. That limit fared better than the old 20 mph limit and was not held in such disregard and has stayed with us ever since. That speed limit only applied to small vehicles and the speed limits for heavier ones still remained lower for the sake of safety.
Bob Craven Lancs

Agree (3) | Disagree (1)
+2

A high level of non-compliance should come to no-one as a surprise. Such was the low regard in which the 1903 20 miles/hr speed limit held, that speed limits were abolished altogether in 1931 (I understand).

If speed limit and driving environment don't appear to the (normal) driver to make sense, then drivers need the support of Intelligent Speed Assistance (ISA) if the speed limit is to work. Quite why our caring governments haven't been "raising awareness" of ISA and haven't already put in place the means to implement it is something of a puzzle. Surely, there's a moral imperative to be addressed, urgently.
Andrew Fraser

Agree (1) | Disagree (3)
-2

I think Rod King might have a point about this not being representative, all the roads in Bristol tested by the local paper had non-compliance rates of over 90%.
Alex Hosking

Agree (4) | Disagree (1)
+3

If all drivers are driving at the speed they feel safe driving, as Alex suggests, we're in trouble! Many do of course, but too many don't and even if everyone did, it doesn't explain such a variance by drivers in the chosen 'safe speed' for exactly the same given circumstances. These people supposedly have trained for and passed the same driving test as everyone else, but post-test their incentive and motivation to drive correctly is abandoned.

Incidentally Alex, could you identify the 30mph road in Yate where the average is 38mph? I'm intrigued as to what this road may look like!
Hugh Jones, Cheshire

Agree (3) | Disagree (2)
+1

How are you suppposed to single out nutters who drive like idiots with that level of non-compliance. I think 25mph speed limits should be allowed and speed limits should be based on the 85th percentile. People drive the speed they feel safe driving, and speed limits should be based on this or the road needs redesigning.

Case in point in Yate there is a road with a 40mph limit lined with repeaters to remind people and the average speed is 31mph, another road elsewhere in Yate with a 30mph limit has an average speed of 38mph, that's a variance from the average to the actual of 17mph from -9 to +8, that should tell you something about how effective speed limits are.
Alex Hosking

Agree (8) | Disagree (4)
+4

The posted speed limits are the law (advisory ones apart), so what would there be to ban? Discretion to what degree to enforce the law does rest with the police which they exercise in all manner of sensible ways every day. Many of us juggle capacity against need in our jobs, the police are no different in that respect although the effects may be more obvious. If you want more vigorous enforcement, employ more police. If the government won't pay for that then we live with what we have.
Pat, Wales

Agree (6) | Disagree (0)
+6

With limited manpower, intelligence-led enforcement may be the only way i.e. if the general public or residents can supply times and Reg Nos of serial offenders to the police, that may be better than the police simply waiting, (although with the high number of offenders in 20s, the wait won't be that long!).

Alternatively, discreet radar speed recorders with date and time stamped speeds over a few days would work, although probably more useful in 30s and above, where there are proportionally less speeders.
Hugh Jones, Cheshire

Agree (3) | Disagree (8)
-5

Why should a driver obey the legal speed limit when the old ACPO now called the NPCC when in 2012 told us all that we can speed and get away with speeds of 35/46/57/68/ and 79 mph without fear of prosecution.

I drive by my speedo and understand that it is about 2 mph fast ie. showing 30 but I have no problem by doing only 28 mph. Unlike many who end up tailgating me. The drivers who are using the police as an excuse to break the law.

It was a bad decision on the part of the Chief Police Officers to say that an allowance of 10% plus 2 mph was to be used. In Germany and elsewhere in Europe and other places abroad the limit is 2 mph so anyone who speeds by more than that 2 mph above their speed limit could be reported.

Now that seems sensible to me and let's do away with the tolerance that the NPCC have made available to all. I understand that some Constabularies no longer will tolerate that allowance and that is a good thing. It should be banned nationwide.
Bob Craven Lancs

Agree (6) | Disagree (9)
-3

I believe I am correct in saying that there are more 30 speed limits on our roads. We live no such a road. I would say that by far, the majority of drivers pay no regard to required speed limits. I reckon that some drivers are completely unaware of the speed limit.

My question is, if we know that 81% are ignoring the limit, what is being done about it.
We can name local companies to the Police and all they can do is confirm that that they know about them!!!!
Nick Mancey, Cornwall

Agree (4) | Disagree (1)
+3

In order to allow readers to make an objective view of the IAM RoadSmart Press Release we have created a Google Map to show the exact locations of the 9 DfT sites with 20mph limits.

It would be clear to anyone that these locations do not in any way represent the residential and community roads being set in wide-area 20mph limits across the country.

For anyone to suggest that these 9 atypical locations have any bearing on the public acceptance of residential 20mph limits is misleading.

In fact IAM RoadSmart use the term "blanket 20mph" which is itself a misnomer. Most wide-area 20mph schemes would specifically exclude the sites that the DfT have used.

The map may be viewed at:
https://tinyurl.com/DFT20mphATC
Rod King, Cheshire, 20's Plenty for Us

Agree (7) | Disagree (8)
-1

Further to Rod's comment, I would agree, and also point out that in 30 limit roads it is typically NOT 53% exceeding the limit - even 30% would be exceptional.

Fortunately, compliance with speed limits generally is still very much with the majority, but would agree that the 20s are the ones with the least compliance, but that is a poor reflection on people when behind they're wheel, not the speed limits themselves.
Hugh Jones, Cheshire

Agree (5) | Disagree (11)
-6

Oh dear. I will have to get a copy of Statistics for Dummies and send it to IAM RoadSmart.

Had they bothered to read the report they would have found that it was based on just 9 20mph sites across the whole country. Hardly of statistical significance. If they had looked further they would have noted that average speeds on 20mph roads were 6mph or more lower than on 30mph roads.

And if they had looked at the figures for 2015 they would have found that compliance on 20mph roads is in 2016 actually increasing with cars exceeding 25mph dropping by 2% whilst on 30mph roads compliance is decreasing with cars exceeding 35mph increasing by 2%.

All this points towards 20mph limits becoming increasingly understood by the public. It seems the ones most confused are IAM RoadSmart.
Rod King, Cheshire, 20's Plenty for Us

Agree (10) | Disagree (9)
+1

Imagine if this lack of compliance was revealed to be the case in other areas of everyday public safety e.g. rail and air travel, gas and electricity, nuclear power, fire safety etc. There would be a public outcry, endless BBC news coverage, 'questions in the House' and members of the public demanding 'action' accompanied by cries of 'we want answers'. On the other hand, drivers disrespecting laws and threatening the safety of others in their immediate vicinity on a daily basis - that's apparently okay and nothing to get too worked up about, after all, "..we all do it don't we?"
Hugh Jones, Cheshire

Agree (8) | Disagree (6)
+2