Welcome to Netrider ... Connecting Riders!

Interested in talking motorbikes with a terrific community of riders?
Signup (it's quick and free) to join the discussions and access the full suite of tools and information that Netrider has to offer.

Safety cameras signage NSW

Discussion in 'Politics, Laws, Government & Insurance' started by waedwe, Jan 13, 2010.

  1. As many people will be aware nsw has now introduced safety cameras, which are red light and speed cameras combined, the question i am raising is, When you approach a fixed speed camera in NSW there are 3 big warning signs advising you of speed cameras ahead like these from the rta website
    Now they have installed the safety cameras though they have just 1 little sign advising a safety camera is ahead, how is this possible, does a name change make a camera that measures speed and hands out infringements no longer a speed camera and immune from laws covering there signage.
    And no i havent been pinged by 1 just wondering if anyone knows the answer.
    I have in my search noticed on another forum a person wrote querying this and was told safety cameras had no legal requirement to be signposted at all so i am writing my own questionng letter to the rta also.

  2. For technical safety camera inquiries phone 131 782 or email Camera_Enforcement@rta.nsw.gov.au or write to Roads and Traffic Authority, PO Box 973, Parramatta CBD NSW 2124.
    using that email link i have sent my question off. of course asking it from a safety point of view hoping to get a response and being fobbed off for accusing them of blatant revenue raising. also aren't they meant to label clearly red light cameras seems to eb a stealthy way of removing warnings and collecting more $$$$$
  3. "the man" conveniently forgets to legislate for the signage

    should have asked them for the legislation
  4. When writing letters to government departmens and public servants, try and get them to lie to you - or ask questions in a way that would make them uncomfortable to answer truthfully.
    If they mislead you, they are in breach of the Public Services Act, and you can then report them to the Ombudsman.

    Public Service Act 1995
    General rules of conduct
  5. If it's the thread I'm thinking of, it was in regards to Victoria, where there are no requirements to divulge the presence of speed cameras.
  6. Red light cameras already have one warning sign ("RED LIGHT CAMERA AHEAD") on each road approaching the intersection - for example see Pacific Hwy & Mowbray Rd Chatswood.

    Given that the overwhelming majority of these cameras are replacing existing red light cameras and the fact that they operate as red light cameras the RTA can probably weasel their way out of having to provide any more signs than are necessary to replace the existing warning signs.
  7. You won't know how much to slow down to as the new Safety Camera signs don't even give an indication of the speed limit for that particular camera! I'm sure most of us tend to forget speed limits unless they are posted up frequently.

    I can see an increase in rear-enders as people slow down more than they have to in a shorter length of road. Then insurance premiums and greenslips will go up. We're all screwed.
  8. The red light camera on the cnr of pennant hills rd and beecroft rd is a dual camera now.
    Speed limit is 70 km/h, and yes the speed camera part works.
    Saw the reflection of the flash on the back of a 4wd :LOL:
  9. I wouldnt be surprised if a good lawyer can argue they need three signs
  10. FYI, I emailed the Compliance and Enforcement Branch of the Roads and Traffic Authority raising your same concerns. The bottom line is signage is not a legal requirement. In Vic they have a policy of not warning drivers of upcoming cameras preferring to keep drivers on edge all the time. That was quoted from a VIC roads spokesman in the papers recently.

    I asked:


    I was researching the instance of Safety Cameras whereby red light cameras also double as fixed speed cameras.

    The following site ( http://www.rta.nsw.gov.au/roadsafety/downloads/2005_05_speedcamera_evaluation.pdf ) says:

    Each fixed digital speed camera has three large prominently placed signs on both approaches informing motorists that the camera is in operation. As a motorist approaches the camera the sign messages are firstly, Speed cameras 24 hours, secondly, Speed camera ahead, and thirdly, Heavy fines, loss of licence and each sign incorporates a regulatory speed limit display (the limit in digits surrounded by a red circle).'

    However, information on Safety Cameras ( http://www.rta.nsw.gov.au/roadsafety/speedandspeedcameras/safetycameras/index.html ) say 'All intersections with safety cameras installed will be signposted with the new safety camera sign.'

    So, does this mean that there will be just the 1 safety camera sign where Safety Cameras exist and the existence of the previously mentioned 3 warning signs will no longer apply.

    Safety is important and there is no arguing about that, however, a consistency in signage should apply if we are to avoid making it just another revenue exercise.

    I look forward to your reply.

    Dear Mr Chapman

    They repled:

    Thank you for your email dated 3 January 2010 regarding the new Safety Cameras.

    In June 2009, the then Minister for Roads Michael Daley, introduced changes to the Road Transport (Safety and Traffic Management) Act 1999 to improve safety on rural and urban roads throughout New South Wales. The changes include the replacement of wet-film red light cameras with new digital red light and speed capable technology. These new digital red light/speed capable cameras are called Safety Cameras.

    The RTA commenced the progressive activation of the Safety Cameras on 18 December 2009. Warning letters will be generated for a short period at all new camera installation sites. The grace period has been established to encourage motorists to slow down and comply with traffic light rules, prior to infringements being enforced.

    Please be advised that 'Safety Camera Ahead' advisory signage is not a legal requirement in NSW however a single sign is located on each road approaching the intersection.

    For further information on Safety Cameras, please log onto the RTA website on http://whome.rta.nsw.gov.au/roadsafety/speedandspeedcameras/safetycameras/index.html.

    All fines from traffic and road safety offences are collected by NSW Treasury and redistributed into a range of community facilities including schools, hospitals and transport, including road funding. As such, funds being collected from the community are returned to the community.

    We trust this information is of assistance.

    Compliance and Enforcement Branch
    Roads and Traffic Authority
  11. i wonder though what a lawyer would make of the no legal requirement for a safety camera sign when they are required at speed cameras, surely it still is a speed camera if it can give speeding tickets
  12. as I said
    unless there is no legal requirement on having the signs, they are just a 'guideline' or rta initiative.
  13. I'd definitely be consulting a lawyer if i had a fine from 1 i thought wasn't adequately signposted
  14. I guess it would come down to 'past practice' whereby we have become accustomed to or have a valid expectation that we would see 3 signs prior to a speed camera. Whether it is a legal requirement or not to display the signs, it seems to be a NSW policy that we have them vs Vic Roads, which does not. It is about that Australian way of life. It's called fairness and the motorist/riders deserves some.

    Why sneak these Safety Cameras in? How many people here knew about them before this topic. I didn't. How hard would it be to mail an information leaflet to all registered vehicle owners. Or a significant TV campaign. Who here remembers a series of TV segments many years ago called 'So you think your'e a good driver?' which pointed out many basic road rules like how to act within a roundabout etc etc.
  15. Personally, I'm not a huge fan of this idea. Its not that I necessarily disagree with the concept, but I do think this has the potential to cause some accidents. When approaching an orange light at a safety camera intersection, a motorist may be put in an awkward position - risk being hit with a speeding fine/or a red light fine for proceeding or undertake a hard stop.

    Of course, generally the warning you get from an orange light is sufficient to stop safely but that doesn't really take the exceptions into account. Such as inclement weather, debris or oil on the road, or a down hill slope with a B double close behind you. Personally, I feel that on a less than ideal road surface its safer to increase my speed by ~15 km/h and pass through the lights than it is to attempt to stop - especially if I'm on the bike or have a big arse truck behind me.

    Naturally, you could appeal any fines on these grounds, but I doubt you'd get far... and it would be a lengthy and costly process if it went to court.
  16. If you setup your brake on approach to every intersection, engaging only the brake light but not the brakes themselves, as you were told in LAMS school, whilst maintaining the appropriate buffer, with appropriate throttle for the situation, then you will never:

    a) Be hit from behind, except by someone demonstrating such gross negligence in their driving that they didn't see you not only light up your brake lights but also slow down - a very unlikely situation.
    b) Need a reason to SPEED through an intersection with yellow lights nor SPEED to approach a green light.

    If you follow these rules I can't see how you could ever approach a green light and do nothing worse than roll off the throttle through a green that just turned orange within the 3-5m that you get in the 1 or so seconds of orange light.

    Do you not allow a buffer zone?

    Do you not ride an appropriate speed when approaching a light that you KNOW may turn orange, for which you have NO EXCUSE when it happens? Everyone knows green-orange and can predict it reasonably?

    Are you ignoring your LAMS training?

    Are you not looking out for your safety by being prepared to brake with appropriate distance to stop?

    If you answered yes to any of the bold parts then this fine will only sting those exhibiting stupidity and neglect for their safety and the safety of other road users. Put away the ego of getting through a light, sacrifice 3 minutes and you may live life without a fine, demerits and, importantly, remain in one piece.
  17. creating a buffer and setting up your brakes is all well and good, but the driver behind exhibiting gross negligence either through impatience or incompetence is a way too regurlar occurence nowadays, search for the rear ended survey by rob on here, many people doing the right thing get nailed
  18. True. Every time I approach an intersection and it has gone amber, I look behind and quite often see someone who, from how close they are, is obviously expecting me to speed up so that they can speed up and get through. It is too much of a risk braking and stopping when that happens.

    [aside] I think that +15 km/h to get through isn't needed. If you need to increase your speed by 15 km/h then you could have stopped. +5 km/h is usually enough if you think it might be iffy between amber and red when you cross the line of the intersection. Your chances of getting pinged for that are pretty low.
  19. Now don't go getting all sensible and stuff.
  20. Terribly sorry about that iBast. I must have been deprived of sugar at the time of posting. Rest assured that I'm back to my normal, childish and irresponsible self.

    But these things are already in VIC, are they not? Do any Victorians know if there was an increase in rear ending at these intersections? Would be interesting to know..