You'll have to take my word for it, or not, whichever suits you. Meanwhile, the search for the oh-so-elusive proof of a conviction for 31 in a 30 goes on.......or not, I gave it up an age ago!I'm sure that Milleplod has proof "that no-one in Derbyshire, South Yorks or Notts has ever had a ticket for 31 in a 30" and is just biding his time before hitting us with it.
Otherwise by his own reasoning that statement can't be true.
I was told on a speed awareness course some 2yrs ago that no allowance over the limit is in force (33mph in a 30 was my crime)
Ahh my sac was 7 years ago so perhaps this has changed. Also I think different police authorities adopt different stances rather than there being a fixed national position. Originally it was , I think, set that way to allow for inaccuracy of speedometers and tyre weare variatons. But I guess everything is far more accurate these days... back to 70 it is then.I was told the same on the SAC that I attended.
What is important, however, is the column of device tolerance figures in the table above. All the police need to do to convict you for speeding is prove beyond reasonable doubt that you have exceeded the speed limit. However, given that the speed guns used by the police have a tolerance of +/- 2mph (or +/- 3% for speeds over 66mph), it is doubtful that they would be able to convince a court that a recorded speed of 31mph (for example) is a truly accurate reading: the driver in this example could actually have been driving at 29mph, which is clearly within the speed limit.
The speed guns used nowadays are laser based and far more accurate than of old. Plus, a 31mph offence is unlikely to get to court unless contested. Most would just pay the fixed penalty.Just thought this may be of interest. It's dated August 30th 2020
What is the "10%+2" rule and what does it mean? - Road Law Barristers
And this one from September 2020.
Speeding fines - how much you have to pay | RAC Drive
Both respectable sites.
Interestingly, the first site has this paragraph -