as i am somebody who received a parking ticket for parking for one minute in a place i shouldnt have been, i am so pleased these people have been let off these ridiculus tickets.. the person who said it is all about money/revenue, never a truer word spoken, its not about safety and nobody has the money for these tickets.

I'm heartened to see so many people on here are now seeing this vile organisation for what it is! This was never about safety, as many have said, it was about revenue. The placement of the vans says all you need to know about that. Paul M. In the tragic accident you cite, where was the camera van? Was it in the village? No, I expect it was out on the open road where higher speeds are perfectly safe. In the UK, the authorities have been obsessed with speed limit enforcement for many years, and depite the claims of the camera partnerships, deaths and serious injuries have continued to fall on the nation's roads at about the asme rate as they have since the last war. Even around the country when many cameras were turned off last year, we didn't see the "predicted carnage" that many would have had us believe and yet SOME people still seem to think they do a good job?! When the authorities failed to see the expected improvements in accident statistics, they started reducing speed limits all over the place. A typical case of "the medicine isn't working - double the dose"! Tellme Paul M. Have you ever driven along a rod that used to have a National Speed Limit and now has a 40 limit? Might you have done more than 40 along it in the past before the speed limit was reduced? If so, do you accept that you were driving dangerously all that time?

The speedo in a car is an indication of speed and not an exact measuring device and is not calibrated,that is why the police allowed 10% error ie 33 mph in 30 mph zone 77 mph on the motorway,the safety vans stick bang on to what there machine says 31mph in a 30 zone you are speeding ,notice how the camera van on london road is only intersted in the people coming into carlisle slowing down from 50mph to 30 mph,a road that used to be 60 limit going to 40 mph and not the people howling up london road this includes the buses using the bus lane who regular overtake cars that are sticking to the limit

PaulM "And yet drivers still speed through the village." So the vans are a pointless exercise then. If they've been in existence for several years now and people still speed through a known accident spot they are clearly in the wrong place on motorway bridges and dual carriageways which is the point you did not address.

You see the difference between a van catching a speeding motorist a someone in a police car is the police officer on the spot can then check for other issues previously listed.

Yes PaulM you really really really are missing the point, i suggest you watch this little clip from the link below, its Good old Jeremy Clarkson not everyone's cup of tea but i think this video explains all, the speed limits in the country are old out dated and sitting on a non accident blackspot catching 33000 cars in a year is simply money making, as they call themselves or should i say hide behind the banner of the Cumbria safety camera partnership then its about time they started doing there job and and making our villages and towns safe not sitting on motorway bridges catching the odd car that strays over our outdated speed limits, as Clarkson points out the highway code is outdated as are the speed limits set in 1965 using 1965 technology http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KGkKDaYd3Mo

I wish Paul M was correct in what he says but it has always seemed to me that rather than target the high risk boy racer types who drive at truly excessive speeds in the evenings, the camera van operators target daytime high volume soft targets driving marginally over the limit on stretches of road where there are none of the risks Paul refers to, and where you really have to concentrate to avoid going over the limit. You can't blame people for coming to their own conclusions that raising cash is more important than reducing casualties.

PaulM - You are (deliberately?) missing the point. People here are not complaining about camera vans being placed in villages, but those strategically placed on the M6 and A66 in particular.

The current motorway speed limit was introduced in 1965. It hasn't been the appropriate limit for decades. While it was enforced by real police officers, they simply chose to ignore sensible driving at up to low 80s mph. Now it is enforced by a security guard in a van who has no interest in aspects other than speed. The majority of cars quite sensibly travel above 70mph on a clear motorway, so this is like shooting fish in a barrel. The motorway network are the safest roads we have so why trap there? MONEY!

Oh dear Speed Camerasoverthetop!
Why on earth do you want to know where the speed cameras are?The only possible purpose is because you wish to be able to do whatever speed you like in defiance of the law and safety and be warned before the police detect what you are doing.
Warning signs for speed cameras are largely redundant and always unnecessary.

PaulM, I'd agree with you IF the vans spent more time in built up areas than on open stretches. But they don't and that's where your argument falls down. Most posters would have no issue over the importance of deterring speeders and catching them but it's the locations that they question. I travel quite a lot (70 miles commute per day for work) and very rarely have I seen a speed camera van in a built up area other than occasionally on London Rd near the Dhaka, but never any further into the city. However I see them almost daily on motorway bridges.

As a business owner I know that I would be prosecuted for allowing a vehicle to be used without correct legal documentation - whether I 'forgot' or not. In this case, the person responsible for such a crass oversight should be disciplined. Accountability runs both ways, receiving a speeding ticket has a punitive effect for years in insurance premiums, it's no small deal. The officers responsible should be named publicly at least.