If they were turned off to save costs, then they cannot have been vital for safety. So how do they justify reactivating them?

Edit: The van in the background with 'Thrifty' on it is more than ironic.

Mike R [aka Wyvern46]
Go 530T - unsupported
Go550 Live [not renewed]
Kia In-dash Tomtom

Those mobile vans must be worth their weight in gold. 9 vans, 66,000 per year = approx 7,333 per van per year. At £60 a throw, that's not far short of half a million per van per year. No wonder they can afford a few new bikes at £50,000, with the prospect of them earning their bit too.

Makes you wonder how it was possible to decide the fixed cameras weren't earning their keep - surely a mere 1,000 caught would clear the costs? But wasn't it to do with the money not going to the cameras, but to HM Government?

Dennis

If it tastes good - it's fattening.

Two of them are obesiting!!

'I'm getting a cat flap for my whippet'

Shouldn't that be a flat cap? I know, I know.....that was the whole point of the line - shoot me.

There is no peace in a home where a dinner swells....

Mike R [aka Wyvern46]
Go 530T - unsupported
Go550 Live [not renewed]
Kia In-dash Tomtom

Saw one of these for the first time near Leeds the other day.

Len

The problem with fixed cameras not making any money is every one knows where they are( unless your not local ) and what you will see is every one slow down when they see them then speed off after passing them.

What would really work in the UK is the US cameras that are built into every police car that can be used then there moving,

Take it from me when I was stopped at 42kph in a 40 zone nice police man let me off with a warning, I did not notice the ghost van coming at me was a police van with this equipment.

UK has defiantly gone to the dogs when it comes to speeding and mobile use.

But we all know why and that it's an easy way to raise revenue, that's all cameras are & all they ever will be.

Be alert.. This country needs more lerts.

You could argue it's only easy because too many people break the speed limit, if folks didn't it wouldn't make any money

Normally too you need to be at the limit + 10% + 2mph so it's folks well over the limit, if they backed off a tad revenue would drop and there would be far fewer accidents.

Where there's a will ... there's a way.

No, I disagree.

If you dealt with the idiots who do UNDER the limit and when I say that I mean pillocks who do 40 on a 60 or 70mph dual carriageway/Motorway or 20 in a 30/40 zone, who cause frustration for those who'll do the limit & maybe a tiny bit more, the same as those who do well OTT, then we might get somewhere.

It's the slow ones who're just as dangerous to road users as those who go wayyy too fast.

Also you need to change the rules on mobile phone usage at the wheel, in that instead of just getting a fine for using a handheld mobile you not only get a fine & points for doing so, but you also get some time off the road in the form of a ban of a month or so for a first offence, 6 months for the second, 1 year for the third, get caught a 4th time it becomes a permanent ban from the road.

Anyway I digress, there's a world of difference between doing 40 mph past a school at chuck out or start time & doing 40 mph at 2am, when no one's around or during a school holiday. A police officer should have full discretion on whether to issue a penalty or whether to give you a right b0ll0cking instead.

I was caught doing 40 in a 30 at 2300, all I got was a right b0ll0cking, but some others will just instantly give you an instant fine.

Be alert.. This country needs more lerts.

Well I agree with all you've said. I was just saying that the only reason it's a revenue maker is because folks are over the speed limit

Where there's a will ... there's a way.