Sneakiest road camera revealed

David Ottewell and Deborah Linton

November 27, 2007

| Submit Comments | Comments (67) | Previous | Next

IS this the sneakiest camera in Britain?

Installed three weeks ago on the East Lancs Road near Salford, it will soon begin snapping motorists who jump red lights, seven days a week, 24 hours a day.

The camera - obscured by a huge road sign - is a new digital model and updates a previous camera that council chiefs say has been in place for 17 years.

But fuming motorists told the M.E.N. they hadn't noticed a camera there before - and said putting it behind a road sign was 'unfair'.

Salford council said the camera - on the A580 at its junction with the A572 Worsley Road - had to be close to the junction, and the sign had to be a certain size. That meant there was no alternative to putting the camera behind the sign, they said.

Under current government rules, a red-light camera DOES NOT have to be clearly visible to the motorist. A camera that checks for speeding DOES.

The council stressed that there were warning signs on the East Lancs Road alerting drivers to the camera's presence.

Coun Derek Antrobus said the camera was 'an important safety measure for pedestrians and motorists who use the busy junction'.

"It's also used as an enforcement tool to prosecute motorists who jeopardise the safety of others by running a red light," he said.

A spokesman for Greater Manchester Casualty Reduction Partnership said the camera was due to be commissioned in the `very near future' but they were working with Salford council to see if it could be made 'more visible'.

He added: "We are working together to reduce road casualties caused by red-light running and will continue to do all we can to physically make all our safety camera sites fully visible, where this is possible."

Rules

Shibu Thomas, owner of Power Petrol Station at the A580/A572 junction, said: "I'd never noticed it and none of my customers have ever said anything. We play by the rules by driving within the limit, so the council should, too."

Motorist Pat Tatum of Swinton, who was using the road to collect her grandchildren from school, said: "I'm not a dangerous driver, but I like to know where cameras are.

"I'm a law abiding citizen. It's not fair to conceal a camera."

Noel Rock, 66, from Eccles, said: "I spotted this a couple of months ago and it's about time something was done about it."

Mr Rock, a delivery driver who uses the road every day, added: "It shouldn't be hidden. They're trying to make victims out of motorists."

June Prescott, 41, of Worsley Road, who uses the A580 to get to work, said: "It's out of order. I only noticed it from the other side of the road. Like most drivers, I'm not perfect all the time, but at least I try to abide by the law."

And Joan Walsh, 65, who lives off the East Lancs Road, said: "It's sneaky.

"We use this road a lot. I'm a safe driver so I wouldn't want to think I'm being caught out."

Sean Corker, spokesman for the Association of British Drivers, said: "Cameras are supposed to be a deterrent.

"That was the reason given for bringing them in.

"If people go about hiding them then they can't act as a deterrent. They just become another way of raising revenue."

What do you think? Have your say.

| Submit Comments | Comments (67) | Previous | Next

Showing comments 1 to 25 and replies | View All

Pie in the Sky, Manchester (27/11/2007 at 07:21)

Got a feeling that the lads in Salford will soon see this camera off to it's grave.

john hewitt (27/11/2007 at 07:29)

Here's one for all those outraged people, don't run red lights. If you don't do it anyway why worry if there is a camera. Oh, and yes I have been hit by some idiot who was in a bit of a rush and took a chance.

Dabtab, Tyldesley (27/11/2007 at 07:58)

This is also a speed camera! why else would you have extra markings after the lights! They are springing up at different locations so be aware.

Rimsky (27/11/2007 at 08:12)

If you are worried about this camera, do not jump red lights. Simple.

Womble, Westhoughton (27/11/2007 at 08:15)

A traffic light camera is far more important than a speed camera - jumping a red light is more likely to cause an accident than speeding. I don't care whether this camera is hidden or not. If people don't endanger themselves and others by jumping red lights, then they have nothing to worry about.

Bill, Kiriat Motzkin (27/11/2007 at 08:21)

That's terrible. Hiding a camera away like that and making people think about rules, the lives of others and their driving standards. Tut, tut, tut.
Anyone who is bothered about it can't drive properly.

mybritain.wordpress.com (27/11/2007 at 08:28)

Don't people make you laugh?

This camera catches people who jump red lights. That is a very dangerous and life threatening thing to do and more and more people seem to be 'risking' going through on red.

It doesn't matter if this camera is hidden or not as it catches people who put people's lives at risk.

I do not see the issue. There are warning signs about the camera and then there is a big red light to stop you going through!

The comments by these motorists are ridiculous, if you jump a red, expect a flash.

Alan Fleming (27/11/2007 at 08:42)

Were this a speed camera, then I'd be the first to complain. But it's not. It's to stop people cutting the red light. There's no reason at all to drive so unsafely as to cut a red - you can't know what's coming the other way. I've no sympathy at all for people (including bicyclists!) who do it. There's no need at all.

Alan Fleming (27/11/2007 at 08:42)

Blue Chris, On The Blue Moon (27/11/2007 at 08:54)

No excuses for red lights so this is ok in my opionion!

edwards (27/11/2007 at 09:03)

how on earth is this a 'safety measure'? please explain. surely it is a tool to provide evidence of drivers running red lights, it doesnt prevent this happening just records it, much like cctv, that didnt lead to a vast reduction in crime did it, just provided footage for stupid tv shows.

Jimc (27/11/2007 at 09:09)

Coun Derek Antrobus said the camera was 'an important safety measure for pedestrians and motorists who use the busy junction'.

What a laod of claptrap, it would be a far safer deterent if it was visable.

Chris, Irlam (27/11/2007 at 09:10)

This is very underhand - no two ways about it. Salford City Council should be ashamed.

wayneold, manc (27/11/2007 at 09:11)

Go through a red light at 50 mph and you should expect a fine and points? Does it matter if you can see the camera?

Dave (27/11/2007 at 09:19)

So, according to motorists, it's not fair to catch people jumping read lights and endengering other people's lives?

Martin Worsley (27/11/2007 at 09:28)

Erm, is it just me or has the MEN answered its own headline? Its not the sneakiest camera because this is a red light camera and therefore does not have to be visible according to the article. The presence of the traffic signals alone means that drivers should not be driving though on red REGARDLESS of whether there is a camera there or not. If this was a speed camera then it WOULD have to be visble under the rules. The woman who commented that she is a safe driver has nothing to worry about because she will never jump the red light.

Deborah (27/11/2007 at 09:31)

Let's see if it's considered sneaky if a red light jumper ploughs into the side of your car!

Octavius Tinsworth Ace (27/11/2007 at 09:34)

There's no excuse for jumping red lights. You're supposed to stop on an amber light unless it's dangerous not to, so how anyone can complain about being caught out jumping a red is beyond me. I've said it many times before: if extra revenue can be generated from people breaking the law that would otherwise be derived from everyone's taxes, that's fine by me.

Andy., Bury (27/11/2007 at 09:43)

"We play by the rules by driving within the limit, so the council should, too."

If you play by the rules why would you be remotely concerned about a speed camera, hidden or not?

Graeme (27/11/2007 at 10:20)

quote from the article: "It shouldn't be hidden. They're trying to make victims out of motorists."

Isn't the whole point of these things reduce people dangerously running through red lights so as to protect them and others on the roads (including people driving, cycling and walking)? I find this quote very distasteful.

non-ManU, Stretford (27/11/2007 at 10:34)

If you go through a red ligt on the railway, otherwise known as a 'signal passed at danger - SPAD' you could be suspended and possible lose your job. Motorists should have the same rules applied - i.e. do a SPAD and you lose your licence and possibly your car. It's time the Health & Safety people removed their safety 'blind spot' as far as roads are concerned and applied air or rail safety regimes to the roads

The Bobelesque (27/11/2007 at 10:57)

Graeme: "Isn't the whole point of these things reduce people dangerously running through red lights so as to protect them and others on the roads (including people driving, cycling and walking)?"

In my opinion, the worst offenders for running red lights are cyclists and pedestrians. Sadly, these are a not recorded on camera for future prosecution. Once again, just the motorist is singked out to pay for their stupidity.

Bicycles are a menace - keep them off the road!

Juan, Bury (27/11/2007 at 11:04)

I find it disturbing that some people can accept this type of camera but not speed cameras. Speed limits are set in an attempt to protect road users whatever category traffic lights are there to protect road users at dangerous junctions. More people are killed or seriously injured on the roads each day than are subject of violent crime. So lets be real about this break the law by speeding, going through red lights, using your phone or whatever offence. Then stop moaning and accept the punishment. If you don't want to, simple don't drive and put everyone else in danger.

Tony Seaton (27/11/2007 at 11:27)

People are offended by this “sneaky camera” because they don’t trust the camera partnership.
It also issues the same penalty if you mis-judge the lights by a fraction of a second or totally ignore them. 50MPH traffic lights should have an additional second on amber for safety but DfT refuse to budge. I am convinced that large traffic light junctions also confuse motorists and the accidents are not related to red light jumping but confused motorists turning right at the wrong moment.
However the camera partnership haven’t got a confused motorist camera in their wepons chest so they put a red light cam in instead.

Jimc (27/11/2007 at 11:33)

While i whole heartedly agree, that no driver should run a red light, it was proven that when speed cameras were made visable, speeding offences actually fell.

()

Report

News