I’m the first person to admit that I have made a few quid out of speed cameras over the years. Thanks to these indiscriminate and inefficient metal boxes, I’ve successfully contested speeding charges for innumerable clients.
Some of these cases made the papers because the defendants were high-profile celebrities. But for every A list acquittal, there have been countless law-abiding and hard-working men and women who’ve come to me because they’ve felt aggrieved for marginally exceeding the speed limit.
Yes, the law is the law, but on average, most of the people I defend are no more than five miles per hour over the legally accepted limit.
Now, in the days when you got stopped by the flash of a squad car’s headlights, the genuinely contrite driver could escape with their licence intact. There’s nothing like a stern word from a harsh copper to keep that foot off the gas.
But speed cameras are incapable of discretion and, in many locations, are a haphazard, robotic, roadside menace.
So despite the fact they’ve furnished my pocket with a lucrative source of income, I applaud the government’s plans to slash funding on speed cameras.
Other than their deployment on accident black spots, they hinder rather than help the cause of road safety.
And I don’t for a moment concur with the emotive nonsense pouring from the likes of the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) , who believes the government’s actions will lead to deteriorating driving standards and a reduction in child road-safety programmes.
Don’t they look at the statistics? Speed cameras have triggered at least 28,000 crashes since 2001 – with more than 80 per cent of drivers admitting they are preoccupied with their speedometers rather than the cars in front when they approach a speed camera.
And don’t get me started on those machines that flash up your speed. They simply caution the approaching motorist to drop to a dawdle, then crank up that accelerator as soon as they’re at a decent distance.
The problem is that the last government got greedy. Instead of honouring their original purpose – to encourage drivers to drop their speed in notorious accident black spots – the Treasury started rubbing its grubby hands together and speed cameras started sprouting in the most unnecessary places, such as on the descending hill of a dual carriageway.
The answer therefore is not a blanket cull of speed cameras – saving lives is as vitally important as it ever was – but we need to fillet away the exploitative locations of some cameras, leaving only those positioned on dangerous stretches of road.
In fact, most of my clients tend to unintentionally slip over the limit in the most innocuous of places rather than in accident black spots.
The British motorist has been mugged for far too long and it’s to the coalition government’s credit that they are putting an end to persecuting drivers so swiftly after taking office.
It’s one occasion where speed is indeed to be commended.
A very welcome clampdown on the clampers
And on the subject of maltreated motorists, the government have also shown their teeth by banning cowboy clampers from operating on private land.
For too long, this unregulated bunch of witless hoodlums have been allowed to run fast and loose with the hapless motorist, extorting money from unsuspecting drivers.
Their shifty practices – including ensnaring drivers with tiny signage and exorbitant charges – is nothing short of a disgrace.
Now, however, they’ll be arm-locked by tough penalties, including prison, if they’re found to clamp or tow away a vehicle on private land.
What truly exquisite justice this is.
Soft-in-the-head detractors claim the new rules – which, by the way, were outlawed in Scotland nearly 20 years ago – will just be the green light for selfish drivers to be even more inventive with where they leave their car.
But that’s an easy one to resolve.
If they park on your turf, just block them in (as long as you do it lawfully).
Calling time on parking enforcement companies is another cracking move by a government still being accused of being wet behind the ears after 100 days in charge of running the country.
If this is what happens while Deputy PM Nick Clegg is left minding the shop, imagine what’s in store when the big boss, David Cameron, gets back from his hols.
Tweet
Comments
Login or Register to comment
''I’m the first person to admit that I have made a few quid out of speed cameras over the years. Thanks to these indiscriminate and inefficient metal boxes, I’ve successfully contested speeding charges for innumerable clients. ''
... My hero.
Can someone help me out with this one....we are told that cameras were used to make money for the treasury, but at the same time that they are getting turned off to save money. Which is it, do they make more than they cost or cost more than they make?
Also - Mr Freeman - you state that most of your clients are no more than 5mph over the speed limit. Where do you draw the line? If this is ok, shouldn't the speed limit be set at 5mph more than it is now and then fine anyone doing more? Or would it then be ok to do no more than 5mph over this?
Get rid of the speed cameras and double ANPR cameras to track uninsured drivers etc.
See your kid killed and then see how strongly you care.
Maltreated motorists, don't make me laugh, the world bends over backwards for them. You can't go for a stroll without a car being up your backside.
Nick Free all rich criminals Man. Ha ha!
I live on a reasonable quite street in a 20 MPH zone - in the last two years five cars within 100 metres of my home have been written off. two more were fixed by their owners - They were hit by people who speed - while the mind set is that it is OK to excede the limit - we need deterrents
SO people have accidents as they are looking at their speedometers?
So in other words they only care about their speed near a speedcamera. Not other speed restricted roads?
Say everything really. I manage quite well to keep within 30mph without having accidents and knocking into the car in front throught looking at my speeometer.
Those people who feel the need to keep their eyes glued to their speed dial therefore having an accident need to remember children and adults have been killed on roads through fast drivers.
No need for it. Anyone going over the speed limit needs to be punished.
What a creep.
Speed cameras discriminate perfectly between those that break the speed limit and those that do not. We have in place a speed limit to reduce the number of road fatalities. Sounds rather noble doesn't? This concept must be alien to your type.
"the Treasury started rubbing its grubby hands together " - They're being removed because they cost too much. Jesus, I'd rather head to court with a chimp representing me.
The problem with these clamping scams is that often the land has been purchased with the sole purpose of entrapment of unsuspecting motorists. They are not used as car parks by the owners, nor is there any other pruprose than to make profit from extortion.
But there are places where fines and points should be introduced and enforced and the laws may already be there but rarely used nowadays. Parking on pavements is particularly antisocial if you are disabled, pushing a pram or pulling a shopping trolley and struggling to navigate the PAVEMENTS. Another is parking too close to a junction which often makes it difficult to see hazards when turning if driving or crossing the road if on foot. Blocking somebody's drive is a relatively new offence which I have yet to see enforced. And parking the wrong way at night without lights. We had a 22 hour power cut last week which made it difficult to see in our already dark street but at least in headlights you can see the reflectors at the rear of a car before it's too late.
The government used to have regular public information films during TV commercial breaks including those on anti-social behaviour with a car. Perhaps it's time to dust them off and show them again and make anti-social drivers the pariahs they are.
Like everything the last government did - it was never about tackling the issue - it was about generating income to support a growing public sector and to allow grants to departments who would generate more income.
Tackle the problem - actually punish those who speed excessively. A fine from a robotic process achieves nothing. Many speed cameras have been placed in locations that add no safety aspect, and are simply down to cash generation.
We need to do what the spanish have done target foreign registered cars for speeding etc.where the drivers just tear the tickets up knowing that they will never pay the fine.Where i live in east manchester we have a very large amount of polish registered cars etc...
"You're nicked, senor! Spanish crack down on speeding British drivers with on-the-spot fines"
I thought the MEN got rid of this idiot.
I really really can't stand this man and his ilk.
Where do you draw the line Nick?, as you said people who stray a few mph over the limit are generally likely to get a ticking off by a 'harsh copper' (though I fail to see how they can be harsh if they are choosing not to prosecute!). So when that copper decides that someone was so far in excess of the limit that they deserve to be prosecuted do you still stand there and try to defend them on the most bizarre and far fetched of defences? It's about time that these people took responsibility for their actions. Speeding vehicles and drink drivers kill people, that's a fact. Fines and points on peoples licences are there to act as a deterrent and serve to educate people as to the error of their ways. Your cavalier attitude towards keeping people safe on the roads appalls me, stop portraying yourself as some kind of Robin Hood character, you are not! I'm sure there are many grieving families out there who despise you and what you stand for just as much as I do.
"Yes, the law is the law, but on average, most of the people I defend are no more than five miles per hour over the legally accepted limit"
yes if you look at your case history i can see where you're coming from....
-Andrew Flintoff - doing 87mph (140km/h) in a temporary 50mph (80km/h) zone
-Lee Bowyer - the Crown Prosecution Service initially alleged that Bowyer had been driving at an average 112mph (180km/h) on the A1, peaking at 132mph (212km/h). Freeman negotiated with the CPS at Northumberland court, following irregularities with the road markings, (which were too short, giving a *lower* speed than expected). The West Ham United midfielder pleaded guilty instead to driving at 99mph (159km/h) on the A1. He was banned (as it was his second speeding offence in 3 years) for 42 days and fined £650. It prompted a furious response from road safety charity Brake.
... and the list goes on. Its people like you Mr Freeman who should turn up at someone who is a victim of death by speeding's funeral, flaunt that flash harry grin at the family members and hang your head in shame-you're just another notch of embarrassment to this country.
Trumpton Blackshirt,Tameside wrote:
"See your kid killed and then see how strongly you care.
Maltreated motorists, don't make me laugh, the world bends over backwards for them. You can't go for a stroll without a car being up your backside"
As a non-driver I couldn't agree more.Cars,whilst undoubtedly useful/essential for many,seem to have become a substitute for legs.Last winter's snowfall was an absolute revelation,housebound motorists with their noses pressed up against their windows, waiting for a gritter to pass so that they could leave their houses for essentials.
Society seems to be obssessed with installing electric gates to protect their precious vehicles,widening roads and shrinking footpaths, instead of creating a safer environment for children to play and pedestrians to walk or cycle in.
Reading this column makes me glad I never adopted a self-centred, car-led existence,thereby hopefully maintaining a broader sense of responsibility.
Pedestrians before cars, Mr.Freeman....first, last and always.
God almighty, why oh why do we have the opinion of a vacuous, money driven lawyer inflicted upon us? As if the news isn't bad enough, now this..
I agree the system does need changing, but my point was more aimed at Mr Freeman stating that "most of the people I defend are no more than five miles per hour over the legally accepted limit", when past cases have proven that he is defending idiots who are driving at 87/99mph
The majority of drivers now getting caught are those as Mr Freeman says inadvertantly slpiing over the limit and in any case with 46 years no claims a driver who attains this record must obviously done something right during these many years of safer driving but during the last ten years has picked up 4 speeding tickets. Decent drivers particularly those who are lets say mature question the fact that they were actually speeding. Is it indeed speeding to go through the gears only to be at 37 and then drop back to 30 within 5 seconds. Unfortunately for these unfortunate drivers they have been done within 0.3 of a second. The mobile crews know fully what they are about and position themselves in prime customer raising positions. This organized crime is now enough for all those who do not think they have been in the slightest way to be jepodizing safety is to challenge these acusations and flatly refuse to pay. And I do mean ALL DRIVERS WHO ARE SAFE and by this context I mean ALL DRIVERS WHO DO NOT HAVE ACCIDENTS.