Norwich’s most notorious speed trap caught more motorists in the first nine months of this year than in the whole of last year - despite speed limit signs being moved to give drivers more warning.

To send a link to this page to a friend, you must be logged in.

The speed camera on the city-bound side of Dereham Road was set-off 2,485 times from January to September, compared to 2,319 times in 2011 when it was the second most triggered camera in Norwich.

With speeding fines costing £60, the camera, near the junction with Norwich Road in Costessey, would have raked in around £150,000 so far this year.

Today, one councillor said the camera was in the “wrong” position.

In August it caught 360 people, according to the figures obtained through the Freedom of Information Act.

And the constant rise in motorists being caught – up 54pc from 2009 – has continued despite a 30mph warning sign being moved further away from the camera to warn drivers, coming into Norwich.

The move came in the wake of a court case in February 2011 when BMW driver Barry Egerton took his speeding fine to Norwich Magistrates’ Court, protesting that the 30mph sign leading up to the camera was “all but invisible”.

The 78-year-old of Eden Close, Thorpe St Andrew, also protested that the there were 12 signs and lampposts around the camera, partially obscuring it from sight.

Mr Egerton lost the case, but insisted the sign had to be moved.

He said: “The 30mph sign was located in a cluttered filling station forecourt surrounded by bright multi-coloured lights, effectively camouflaging the sign only 20 metres from traffic lights.”

Norfolk County councillor for Costessey, Tim East, said the camera was in an “entirely inappropriate” place.

“Speed cameras should be put in place to improve road safety, not to catch people out,” he said. “If the camera is catching a lot of people then the deterrent is not working.”

Police targeted speeding on Dereham Road as an accident blackspot, after figures showed its accident rate was three times the national average.

A Norfolk Constabulary spokesman said: “Norfolk officers work with partners to use a variety of methods to reduce speeding and the number of casualties on Norfolk roads and safety cameras are just one tool that are used.

“Safety camera sites are identified through detailed analysis of collision history or as a result of community concerns.

“The money obtained is used to fund the work of the Safety Camera Partnership and road safety initiatives involving the education of target groups such as young drivers and motorcyclists with the aim of reducing the number of collisions on the county’s roads.”

•What do you think of speed cameras? Write to Evening News Letters, Prospect House, Rouen Road, Norwich, NR1 1RE or email eveningnewsletters@archant.co.uk

•Do you have a story about Costessey for the Evening News? Contact reporter Tom Bristow on 01603772313.

42 comments

  • For a change I agree with Tim East, the camera is in the wrong place, if any where it should be further towards the Gurney road junction.I was under the impression that speed camera's were only supposed to be positioned with in a certain distance of where there had been multiple serious or fatal accidents, as far as I know the nearest fatal accident was inbetween the garage and Gurney road a fare way from where it is now positioned. like another poster has said there are many false readings I have seen the camera flashing at stationary vehicles before now. it's a wonder anyone gets to 30mph at that point most of the time you can barely move. It's time that usless bus lane was done away with it might ease the traffic jams somewhat.I noticed that they suddenly changed that to operate 24 hrs now instead of just rush hour I suppose that was done to catch a few more motorists out . lets face it at the end of any month you can hardly move on the Dereham road with the amount of coppers tax collectors drifting about trying to fill the coffers.

    Report this comment

    BNP4GB

    Saturday, November 3, 2012

  • Harry Rabinowitz*** “ The law is there to make money,as with speeding fines it's a nice little earner for the government...." ***. How many more times are you going to repeat this rubbish ? Speeding fines make virtually no money for the government and none for the police either. And as it hasn't sunk in yet.....a fine is NOT a tax . A tax is a compulsory charge levied by a government. A fine is self imposed , voluntary and easily avoided by obeying the law. So a fine is not a tax. Gedddittt ? And speeding motorists kill and seriously injure many hundreds each year.....and the law is there to maintain , encourage and enforce standards of behaviour in society .

    Report this comment

    LARSON.E. WHIPSNADE

    Sunday, November 4, 2012

  • Urbancommander ***Plod would have you believe it's all down to speed which causes accidents***. Nonsense...they say nothing of the sort. The evidence that exceeding the speed limit increases the risk and severity of accidents is well documented and beyond serious dispute. The fact that other factors than excess speed cause accidents is not a rational argument for not enforcing speed limits. What is " frankly offensive " is your previously expressed glee at the criminal vandalism of speed cameras ( now removed by the moderator ) and your complete contempt for the next of kin of the many hundreds of people killed and seriously injured by speeding motorists each year.

    Report this comment

    LARSON.E. WHIPSNADE

    Sunday, November 4, 2012

  • Harry raises a very valid point. What these cash cow cameras don't take into account is all the other risks to road safety which are NOT all based on excess speed. How many cars with illegal tyres drive past cameras, how many drunks or drug impaired drivers, how many without insurance, how many with un corrected impaired sight or simply tired? Plod would have you believe it's all down to speed which causes accidents. While I agree it may be in some instances, to promote these cameras on safety and the vans who sit by the roadside and call themselves road safety personnel is frankly offensive. If safety was the main concern, start doing more safety related checks and stop misusing safety as a catch all for greed.

    Report this comment

    Urbancommander

    Sunday, November 4, 2012

  • We were appalled by your Saturday front page story "the camera every driver dreads". We found it offensive and upsetting that you would defend the kind of anti-social yobs who put lives at risk. They may COMPLAIN about being prosecuted. That's good. Being prosecuted is MEANT to be unpleasant - to discourage law-breaking. Not so long ago the Evening News was reporting the tragedy of the little boy, aged 5, killed crossing the road in Bowthorpe. Sad to see you change sides and now be on the wrong side. We won't be buying the Evening News any more. Lets face it : bright yellow box, road marking, warning sign. Anyone who's still over the limit is TOO STUPID to be on the road at all ! No one forces them to break the law. If they choose to do so they must take the consequences. In what way do drivers have a "right" to put other people's lives at risk?

    Report this comment

    Tom Shaw

    Monday, November 5, 2012

  • If the powers that be, decided to plonk one of those cameras that record naughty drivers in the 24 hour bus lane, the 3rd world debt would be cleared within weeks...side note - slow down when approaching the yellow cash cow, then speed up when clear of the white lines...simples, works for me!!!!

    Report this comment

    nrg

    Monday, November 5, 2012

  • Surely the law is so skewed in favour of the ignorant that if someone with any sense was caught speeding using one of these things they deserve to be taxed for being stupid. As you might have guessed I have never been caught. I fear that if 2000 people genuinely get caught because they did not see a big yellow box flying in the sky how many accidents are there waiting to happen but luckily do not?

    Report this comment

    George Ezekial

    Wednesday, November 7, 2012

  • Larson, not a speed denier at all, I drive at or below the limits set taking into account times when less speed may be appropriate. Like most drivers I'm keen to obtain the best mpg and I'm also keen on maintaining the safety of my family, others around me and my clean licence. I agree with you that all offences should be treated the same, but efforts need to me made to enforce standards across the board not just speed. Also, there are better ways to enforce speed than a fixed zone camera which speeding drivers merely slow down for, average speed technology has come a long way recently. I don't see anyone denying speeding is an anti social offence - it is. But it's not the only cause of accidents by a long way.

    Report this comment

    Urbancommander

    Sunday, November 4, 2012

  • 30mph is the national urban speed limit. I guess speeding drivers don't like getting caught?! looks to me that the safety camera is doing a good job..

    Report this comment

    itsme73

    Saturday, November 3, 2012

  • Maurice Gatsonides who invented these devices deplored the extent they have been used as a revenue raiser.It has always been in the interest of those in authority to perpetuate the myth that they somehow prevent accidents,thus legitmising picking motorists pockets for minor speed limit infringements.

    Report this comment

    Harry Rabinowitz

    Saturday, November 3, 2012

  • Maurice Gatsonides who invented these devices deplored the extent they have been used as a revenue raiser.It has always been in the interest of those in authority to perpetuate the myth that they somehow prevent accidents,thus legitmising picking motorists pockets for minor speed limit infringements.

    Report this comment

    Harry Rabinowitz

    Saturday, November 3, 2012

  • If the cameras were doing their job then the numbers being caught should be reducing not increasing. They also don't catch the drunk and unisured and unregistered vehicle owners. Larson, you seem very emotional about this. Most accidents occur at low speed, otherwise Motorways and the like would be bloodbaths! Speed is a factor, and when there is an accident due to speed it is generally worst. Professor Richard Allsop of University College London proved that in 2007 just £4 out of every £60 raised in speed camera penalties was net income to the Treasury and there was no surplus for local authorities or the police.... He has forgoten to mention that the revenue rules for 2012 are not the same as they were in 2007. Most is now going to Police coffers which is why some counties turned them off. The Council picked up the cost to run them whilst the Police pocketed the revenue...

    Report this comment

    Andy T

    Monday, November 5, 2012

  • Urbancommander ** " Larson, I don't see anybody here showing contempt for the deceased.." **. Well let me remind you.....earlier on you posted a comment ( now correctly removed by the moderator ) in which you glorified in the criminal destruction of speed cameras ending with the phrase " Power to the People ". Ignoring the fact that most people firmly support the use of cameras , many are placed where there have been fatal or very serious accidents. If i was the next of kin of one of those victims i would indeed find your delight in the destruction of the camera at that particular accident spot utterly contemptible and an insult. Not funny like you obviously do.

    Report this comment

    LARSON.E. WHIPSNADE

    Monday, November 5, 2012

  • *** "The Council picked up the cost to run them whilst the Police pocketed the revenue.. " ***. The police do not keep the money from fines. End of.

    Report this comment

    LARSON.E. WHIPSNADE

    Monday, November 5, 2012

  • perhaps they should focus on catching drivers who use the bus lane to jump the queues? Or to catch those who block the junction by ignoring the clearly marked yellow boxes? Here is an idea....perhaps they should get rid of the bus lane completely on Dereham Road which would allow the traffic in an incredibly heavily congested area to become free flowing which would in turn stop people speeding out of frustration at having sat on the Dereham Road for anywhere between 25-45minutes during peak times. Now they have agreed the building of an additional 70 houses in Costessey the problem is just going to increase with the potential for an extra 140 cars a day adding to the already gridlocked and heavily congested junction. The bus lane is a complete waste of space causing misery, anger and frustration to so many which in turn causes speeding.

    Report this comment

    graze69

    Sunday, November 4, 2012

  • *** "there are other significant safety issues yet these remain unchallenged as speed is a fairly easy target "***. And that is just another speed deniers myth. Never watch any of the mass of police documentary programmes on TV ? Police Interceptors...Motorway Cops and the rest ?. The traffic police spend the the majority of their time doing exactly what you claim they don't do...catching the uninsured and banned , the drunk and the drugged etc. The speed deniers stance is based entirely on myths that have been demolished time and time again , saloon bar gossip , statistics that have been worked out on the back of a beer mat ( see crank outfit Safespeed here ) and a complete contempt for the next of kin of the many hundreds of people who have been killed or seriously injured by speeding motorists each year.

    Report this comment

    LARSON.E. WHIPSNADE

    Sunday, November 4, 2012

  • Power to the people indeed.... to the next of kin of the many hundreds of people killed and seriously injured by speeding motorists each year. Let's hope you swell their ranks soon...its what you deserve after that stupid comment.

    Report this comment

    LARSON.E. WHIPSNADE

    Sunday, November 4, 2012

  • *** " usually it's black and charred around the edges where it's been set light to. Power to the people! "***. I see this website blocks out comments from sensible people but allows unhindered posts from half wits who support and encourage criminal behaviour. Power to the people indeed...especially the next of kin of the many hundreds of people killed and seriously injured by speeding idiots each year. Speed kills...cameras work...the evidence for both statements is overwhelming and conclusive.

    Report this comment

    LARSON.E. WHIPSNADE

    Sunday, November 4, 2012

  • There is a big difference between proven fact and statistics, which, as we all know can be manipulated to practically any extent. I'm interested in the report you make reference to, I'm keen to learn how the author of this report was able to predict the number of potential deaths mentioned. Many years ago Hampshire police undertook operation ring of steel, basically an effort (which was effective) at reducing drugs getting into the area. It too had significant impact on reducing drug drivers and as such was of benefit also to road safety. It was a proactive, effective measure which had benefits on many levels. The point remains we are constantly fed propaganda about speed. There is a bigger picture, there are other significant safety issues yet these remain unchallenged as speed is a fairly easy target. I don't condone speeding, but I also don't condone the other risks that also contribute to accidents which are overlooked.

    Report this comment

    Urbancommander

    Sunday, November 4, 2012

  • Larson, I don't see anybody here showing contempt for the deceased. This is a comments forum and is open to anyone who wishes to comment. Just because the thoughts of others do not meet with your own views does not make them wholly wrong or you completely correct. Everyone has a right to an opinion and it would certainly seem from others who have posted that there is some variation in feeling towards speed cameras. Does the fact I drive a German car also mean I am showing contempt towards the brave souls who fought for our country? No, I don't think so. Contempt is a big word Larson. I'm very surprised you didn't compete for the police commissioners role - or maybe you already have? No there is a thought indeed.

    Report this comment

    Urbancommander

    Monday, November 5, 2012

  • Harry Rabinowitz.....speed cameras do prevent accidents...the evidence that they do is extensive and overwhelming. Prof Allsop's report, prepared for the RAC Foundation, found that 800 more people would be killed or seriously injured each year on Britain's roads if all fixed and mobile speed cameras were removed. His report also said that in 2007 just £4 out of every £60 raised in speed camera penalties was net income to the Treasury and there was no surplus for local authorities or the police . So they hardly raise any money and its about time you learnt the difference between a tax and a fine.

    Report this comment

    LARSON.E. WHIPSNADE

    Saturday, November 3, 2012

  • ***" Plod would have you believe it's all down to speed which causes accident "***. The police say nothing of the sort. Just because there are other causes than speed which cause accidents is not a reason for not enforcing speed limits . Exceeding the speed limit is dangerous , increases the risk of accidents and their severity and speed cameras have been shown by peer reviewed research to reduce accident rates. Speed kills ...its a fact...so get over it .

    Report this comment

    LARSON.E. WHIPSNADE

    Sunday, November 4, 2012

  • Nick South....congrats. on posting the most stupid comment of the year so far. I am not and never have been Spindrift . A fine is not a tax. A tax is a compulsory charge levied by a government....a fine is self imposed , voluntary and easily avoided by obeying the law. So a fine is not a tax. I know this is difficult for you but try and keep up. Is your helmet on too tight ..restricting the blood flow to your brain ?. I am delighted to hear you travel at 140mph as we need more organ donors , but no one will be wanting your brain.

    Report this comment

    LARSON.E. WHIPSNADE

    Tuesday, November 6, 2012

  • I am most certainly not Norton, Spindrift

    Report this comment

    Nick South

    Wednesday, November 7, 2012

  • I think you might find a lot of these "caught" on camera were emergency vehicles on emergency calls. Especially ambulances from the longwater ambulance base.

    Report this comment

    Rolf

    Saturday, November 3, 2012

  • Rolf the next time you have to phone 999 for an ambulance or fire engine remember to ask them to keep below 30 mph !

    Report this comment

    Bruce87

    Saturday, November 3, 2012

  • How can a speed camera be notorious? Surely it's the idiots that can't observe speed limits?

    Report this comment

    First&Last

    Saturday, November 3, 2012

  • If it really is a safety camera rather than a revenue generator why don't they install a speed activated warning sign to show people they are breaking the limit before they reach the camera (like the one just before the camera in Drayton). That is used extensively in Southend, hence the notice on the back of the cameras 'No excuse you've been warned' !

    Report this comment

    Meadowboy

    Sunday, November 4, 2012

  • I came past the camera this afternon. If you respect the 30mph speed limit which starts before the filling station and do not increase speed there is no reason why you should get caught by the camera. Simples. I must admit I think it is just there to catch people and not for safety reasons. But it is a speed camera.

    Report this comment

    Christopher Neave

    Sunday, November 4, 2012

  • Maurice Gatsonides who invented these devices deplored the extent they have been used as a revenue raiser.It has always been in the interest of those in authority to perpetuate the myth that they somehow prevent accidents,thus legitmising picking motorists pockets for minor speed limit infringements.

    Report this comment

    Harry Rabinowitz

    Saturday, November 3, 2012

  • " Cash cows" ?" Revenue generators" ? Speeding offences soared by 400 per cent when a Oxfordshire county council switched off its safety cameras...so they work then. And Professor Richard Allsop of University College London proved that in 2007 just £4 out of every £60 raised in speed camera penalties was net income to the Treasury and there was no surplus for local authorities or the police. So they hardly make any money then. And his report also showed that without speed cameras there would be an extra 800 deaths and serious injuries each year....but don't let these proven facts alter your opinions boys.

    Report this comment

    LARSON.E. WHIPSNADE

    Sunday, November 4, 2012

  • I have never been past that camera travelling more than about 3 MPH, in fact more than often I am parked on top of the road marking there for several minutes. I can only think that those that have been caught must have been travelling during the night or in the wee small hours of the morning.

    Report this comment

    D. ROSS

    Saturday, November 3, 2012

  • " nick south ".....that motor bike you drive around at 140mph....is it by any chance a ....Norton ?

    Report this comment

    LARSON.E. WHIPSNADE

    Wednesday, November 7, 2012

  • *** " There is a big difference between proven fact and statistics, which, as we all know can be manipulated to practically any extent ***". Ah....the usual bleat of the speed denier....any evidence proving that driving above the speed limit increases the risk of accidents and their severity is dismissed as statistical manipulation. This despite the fact that much of it is based around basic laws of motion and elementary physics which are beyond dispute..and the fact it is published in serious peer reviewed academic journals. The fact that factors other than excess speed cause accidents is not a logical argument for not enforcing speed limits.. it is an argument for enforcing the same levels of enforcement to all motoring offences. But most speed deniers don't want the road traffic laws enforced anyway and look upon such laws as an assault on their civil liberty to drive anyhow they like.

    Report this comment

    LARSON.E. WHIPSNADE

    Sunday, November 4, 2012

  • It is a busy road in a residential area with several major junctions. Why would you want to be travelling faster than 30mph? Drivers should not be breaking the speed limit. If you get caught, tough. If the fines help improve council services including road safety then great.

    Report this comment

    Fred

    Saturday, November 3, 2012

  • itsme73 makes a valid point. Speed limits exist for a reason. Remove the camera and more will speed. It is not clear, however, if the numbers caught include ambulances and paramedic vehicles which are presumably 'exempted.' Like all statistics the bare figures can often be misleading. Not sure what Tim East's angle is.

    Report this comment

    TheEastAnglian

    Saturday, November 3, 2012

  • What a very stupid headline. I'm a driver and I don't dread law enforcement. Speeding drivers kill, they injure and maim thousands, would the Evening News say measures to catch paedophiles ought to be "dreaded"? This paper is endorsing criminal behaviour and pandering to the anti-social idiots who use public roads as their own racetrack.

    Report this comment

    Stan Bowles

    Thursday, November 8, 2012

  • ….Of course what that road needs is a bypass-a relief road from A47 to the Airport

    Report this comment

    Joe Rome

    Saturday, November 3, 2012

  • "We were appalled by your Saturday front page story "the camera every driver dreads". We found it offensive and upsetting that you would defend the kind of anti-social yobs who put lives at risk. They may COMPLAIN about being prosecuted. That's good. Being prosecuted is MEANT to be unpleasant - to discourage law-breaking. Not so long ago the Evening News was reporting the tragedy of the little boy, aged 5, killed crossing the road in Bowthorpe. Sad to see you change sides and now be on the wrong side. We won't be buying the Evening News any more. Lets face it : bright yellow box, road marking, warning sign. Anyone who's still over the limit is TOO STUPID to be on the road at all ! No one forces them to break the law. If they choose to do so they must take the consequences. In what way do drivers have a "right" to put other people's lives at risk?" Well said, agree 100%

    Report this comment

    Stan Bowles

    Thursday, November 8, 2012

  • *** " There is a big difference between proven fact and statistics, which, as we all know can be manipulated to practically any extent ***". Ah....the usual bleat of the speed denier....any evidence proving that driving above the speed limit increases the risk of accidents and their severity is dismissed as statistical manipulation. This despite the fact that much of it is based around basic laws of motion and elementary physics which are beyond dispute..and the fact it is published in serious peer reviewed academic journals. The fact that factors other than excess speed cause accidents is not a logical argument for not enforcing speed limits.. it is an argument for enforcing the same levels of enforcement to all motoring offences. But most speed deniers don't want the road traffic laws enforced anyway and look upon such laws as an assault on their civil liberty to drive anyhow they like.

    Report this comment

    LARSON.E. WHIPSNADE

    Sunday, November 4, 2012

  • I have never been past that camera travelling more than about 3 MPH, in fact more than often I am parked on top of the road marking there for several minutes. I can only think that those that have been caught must have been travelling during the night or in the wee small hours of the morning.

    Report this comment

    D. ROSS

    Saturday, November 3, 2012

  • 99 percent of the time that road is queued back solid with traffic. I don't know how anyone would manage to break 5mph let alone 30mph. I would bet at least half of those caught are emergency vehicles.

    Report this comment

    fryboy

    Saturday, November 3, 2012

The views expressed in the above comments do not necessarily reflect the views of this site

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

Homes24
Jobs24
Drive24
LocalSearch24
MyDate24
MyPhotos24
FamilyNotices24
Weddingsite

loading...

Classifieds, browse or search them online now

The Canary magazine
Order your copy of The Canary magazine

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT