Simon Morgan (pictured) has been involved in traffic orders for over 40 years, first in a London local authority and then in developing TRO management software ParkMap at Buchanan Computing, which he chairs. As a traffic orders expert, he questions Wandsworth’s Civil Speed Enforcement plans.
It is highly desirable for authorities to improve compliance with speed limits. They are there primarily for safety, and there is ample evidence that lower vehicle speeds save lives and injuries, and reduce the severity of collisions that do still occur.
Speed limits are created by the relevant authority making a traffic order (known in London as a TMO) under the Road Traffic Regulation Act (RTRA). This primary legislation was passed originally in 1984 but has been amended many times since.
Because the making and enforcement of TMOs is closely governed by this legislation, there is little scope for authorities to find innovative ways to go about these functions.
While there are initiatives aimed at persuading the Government to change the law, speed limits can currently only be enforced by the police, working with the CPS through the magistrates’ court system.
Civil enforcement has been introduced for certain moving traffic offences, such as driving in a bus lane or making a banned turn, but these powers do not cover all moving traffic infringements, with speed limits a notable omission from the list of signs for which civil penalties can be issued.
It is frustrating for authorities to introduce measures for important safety reasons, only to see them widely flouted in areas where the police do not have the necessary resources to undertake regular enforcement. So it is understandable for authorities to look for ways around this. Wandsworth Council appears to have found such a work-around.
It has recently announced that it will be enforcing speed limits on two roads, initially sending a warning letter to drivers detected exceeding the 20mph limit and then issuing a civil penalty for each further infringement.
London Councils has also been involved, but only to create a suitable contravention code and set the penalty level. The organisation has not given a view on this scheme itself, but is supportive of giving local authorities powers to enforce 20mph limits.
However, the powers which Wandsworth proposes to use present, in my opinion, two major legal obstacles, either of which could cause the scheme the be declared unenforceable and potentially lead to the council refunding penalties already paid.
The legislation which the council is relying upon is specific to London: the London Local Authorities and Transport for London Act 2003. Section 4(16) of this allows for civil enforcement of a TMO made under either of Sections 6 or 9 of the RTRA.
RTRA Section 6 is not relevant, because its subsection 5 says ‘no order under this section shall contain any provision for regulating the speed of vehicles on roads’. Section 9 is about experimental orders, that can exist for a maximum of 18 months ‘for the purposes of carrying out an experimental scheme of traffic control’, so that doesn’t seem to help either.
Nevertheless, Wandsworth has made an experimental speed limit order for the roads in question, even though they both already had permanent 20mph speed limits. This would seem to be contrary to the permitted purpose of an experimental order, which can only be to try out something different.
A further objection to relying on RTRA Section 9 is that it surely cannot have been Parliament’s intention to allow a speed limit order to be enforced under civil powers only for 18 months, with it reverting to criminal enforcement thereafter.
The only sensible way to read the reference to experimental orders in the London legislation is that it is intended to cover experimental implementations of the TMOs covered by Section 6, not types of order from other parts of the Act. And indeed this Act of 2003 only allows civil enforcement if it is for a ‘relevant traffic control’, which it defines by indirect reference to a list of traffic signs in its Schedule 3. The speed limit sign is not included there.
My conclusion is that, commendable as it is to seek greater compliance with speed limits, this enforcement method is bound to fail once challenged by a knowledgeable motorist.
Right of reply
Wandsworth provided the following quote in response:
Wandsworth Council’s cabinet member for transport, Clare Fraser, said: 'We welcome recognition of the clear safety benefits for our local communities that we are seeking to achieve through this speed enforcement trial.
'In just 52 days of monitoring, the two roads chosen for this trial had shown alarming rates of speeding - a staggering 56,955 violations were recorded where drivers disregarded the 20mph limit and were travelling over 24mph. This is unacceptable.
'We have a duty of care to our residents and the public so we are using all the powers at our disposal to crack down and make our borough a safer place. Therefore we are using existing London legislation to enforce 20mph by issuing penalty charges, an approach which has been reinforced by two legal reviews and we believe would stand up to challenge.
'Since the pilot scheme began we have already seen a 1mph drop in average speeds on one of the target roads. This is welcome news and a really positive indication that greater awareness can lead to safer driving in our residential areas.'
