CCTV Spy Cars on Lordship Lane

[kford]

Spy cars aren't emergency vehicles so they have no reason to leave their engines running.

[ruffers]

Saffron Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> ruffers Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > bobbsy Wrote:

> >

> --------------------------------------------------

>

> > -----

> > > ed_pete, I don't agree with the CCTV cars,

> and

> > I

> > > nickname them spy cars. Per Ruskin above, I

> do

> > > agree that bus-lanes need to be kept clear,

> but

> > > would prefer obvious enforcement with tickets

> > > written and placed at the time of the offence

> > > rather than stealth enforcement with

> > infringement

> > > notices through the mail at a later date.

> >

> > Why?

>

>

>

> Because real people can exercise discretion and

> interact with actual other real people?

True, but would they catch as many people in bus lanes?

[tiddles]

There was a camera car sitting on lordship lane at ten past nine this morning with his engine running monitoring the bus lane. I asked him why the engine was running and he said the equipment might stop, but he was running a low emission car so it didn't matter. I don't mind emergency vehicles so much, but not non essentials. If that stretch of bus lane is felt to be badly abused, then shove a camera on a pole.

[bobbsy]

Completely agree tiddles, camera on pole if its a strip of the bus lane that is regularly congested by cars/vans using the bus lane.

No excuse for engine running.

[redpost]

ah, so much righteous indignation from car users, how dare anyone else except themselves produce emissions

[Salsaboy]

I assume that you don't use any form of transport that has an internal combustion engine? Not even for the food you buy in shops or the delivery of goods you own, clothes you wear etc etc.

redpost Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> ah, so much righteous indignation from car users,

> how dare anyone else except themselves produce

> emissions

[ruffers]

If a camera is stuck on a pole people then I'd be willing to bet people learn it's there, behave for that stretch, and then just go back in the bus lane. They certainly do for speed cameras.

The idea of the cctv car seems to me to be to catch lots of people, keep them on their toes as they could get caught anywhere, and thus leave the lane freer for buses. This is a good thing surely?

The whole engine running thing is a sideshow. We've had it explained the engine is running to power the equipment, and even then a Smart car is going to have to run for a good while to match the emmissions of a bus stuck for even a minute behind a car that shouldn't be in a bus lane I'd have thought.

[bobbsy]

I cycle

[bobbsy]

I don't agree Ruffers - I don't see many cars using the bus lanes down Lordship Lane, so I don't feel they need stealth policing. I am convinced the CCTV cars are there for parking infringements, and this is straight after the government has issued guidance to stop using parking as a revenue raiser. That's my main issue with them.

[ruffers]

Sounds like they're doing the job on the bus lanes then ;-) Once the parkers get the message they can go home!

[bobbsy]

Perhaps you're right.

[DulwichFox]

You can create any new laws and then fine people who break them.

We seem to be a nation of fining people and the motorist is one of the easiest targets.

I believe (just my personal PoV) that parking restrictions are as much to blame

for businesses failing as are high rent prices.

DulwichFox

[Earl Aelfheah]

I'm fairly sure that those cars are used for policing parking. They're often parked outside Heber School in the mornings - no bus lanes there.

[kford]

They really are used mainly for parking, in bus lanes, on double-yellows, outside schools, in restricted bays. They'll be looking for vans loading on LL in the bus lane, of which there are many on a weekday.

They can film people driving in bus lanes, but it's harder to convict as the perpetrator has to be filmed driving past the sign at the start of the bus lane and has to be seen driving for more than 10m inside the white lines of the lane. Otherwise it's not a sound conviction.

[Saffron]

ruffers Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> If a camera is stuck on a pole people then I'd be

> willing to bet people learn it's there, behave for

> that stretch, and then just go back in the bus

> lane. They certainly do for speed cameras.

>

> The idea of the cctv car seems to me to be to

> catch lots of people, keep them on their toes as

> they could get caught anywhere, and thus leave the

> lane freer for buses. This is a good thing

> surely?

>

Hmm perhaps one gains a different perspective if caught out unfairly by an automated system?

DH and I once accidentally pulled into a poorly signed bus lane in Richmond when an ambulance came up rapidly behind us. We were ticketed by the automated system which didn't show the ambulance. We contested that the lane was poorly signed, and that we weren't blocking buses given the scenario. Contest was denied and we were charged the full amount. It was a lot of money for us. I was a student and DH had just started his own business.

More isn't always better, is it?

[ruffers]

Sorry to be black and white here, but my understanding of the Highway Code is that you committed the offence and were fined. How is it unfair?

[Mugglesworth]

It can be the case that a manic siren blaring behind you will force you into a panic manoeuvre. Many have learnt to their cost that, although emergency vehicles are allowed in practice to break highway laws when responding to an emergency, vehicles of the general public assisting the progress of emergency vehicles are not granted such latitude. Give way if safe to do so but do not run red lights, enter blocked junction boxes or pull into bus lanes to get out of the way. Let the driver of the emergency vehicle take those options if he/she deems it safe to do so.