Traffic information about the A20 Sidcup Road 50mph zone in January 2024

Freedom of information request reference no: 01.FOI.24.035968

I note you seek access to the following information:

A20 Sidcup Road 600 drivers fined for speeding in fake 50mph zone (January 2024) impacted the enforcement of the 40mph average speed limit” and, if different:

1) Why the location of the 50mph sign would not have impacted the enforcement
2) The date the speed limit was reduced to 40mph
3) The date the fake sign was removed
4) The date the speed limit was reinstated to 70mph – if this has occurred

of the 600 VRMs involved how many received:

5) A fine notification at the location between the date the limit was reduced (‘3’ above)
6) A fine notification at the location after the speed limit was reinstated (‘5’ above)
7) More than one fine at the location whilst the false sign was in place (24 January 2024 until its removal)
8) Since a month before the date the speed limit was reduced to 40mph, on a day-by-day basis, the number of fines issued at the location
9) Any system in place that identifies unusual patterns in ticket/fine/NIP issuance
10) Whether, since the speed limit was reduced, and of the VRMs the subject of a fine notification were registered to police vehicles and if so
11) The speed they recorded.

Decision

I have today decided to disclose some of the requested information. Some data has been withheld as it is exempt from disclosure and therefore this response serves as a Refusal Notice under Section 17 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (the Act) by virtue of the following exemptions:

Section 31(1)(a)(b) – Law Enforcement

Reason for decision

Section 31 Exemption has been utilised in relation to Q’s. 5 to 11. This is because the MPS believes that releasing details of specific fines issued would provide those with criminal intent with information that could be used to undermine law enforcement and endanger members of the public, which cannot be in the public interest.

A Freedom of Information Request is not a private request. Any information released to one individual must be released to anyone who requests it and this information is also published via the Met’s Publication Scheme and therefore available in the public domain.

Section 31(1)(a)(b) – Law Enforcement Speed safety cameras help the police and local authorities to be proactive in identifying areas of speed risks across London. They are used to effectively manage and enforce speed limits in an effort to prevent speed-related deaths and serious injuries on our roads.

It would not be in the public interest to release of details in relation to fines on specific roads as this would provide those with intent, e.g., speeding motorists, with intelligence on the effectiveness of speed cameras which could be used to evade law enforcement.

As articulated above, a Freedom of Information Request is not a private request. Any information released to one individual must be released to anyone who requests it and this information is also published via the Met’s Publication Scheme and therefore available in the public domain.

It cannot be in the public interest to disclose information which would compromise the effective delivery of operational law enforcement and endanger members of the public.

Disclosing the information requested would provide those with intent with invaluable police intelligence to evade speed cameras which are designed for road safety. This would place communities at risk by rendering speed enforcement cameras useless, thereby undermining law enforcement. This could result in more resources being required to keep our roads and communities safe, which is not in the public interest.

I consider that the benefit that would result from the information being disclosed does not outweigh the considerations favouring non-disclosure.

We believe that disclosing NIP’s/Fines data at the location requested would compromise the effectiveness of speed cameras.

Public safety is of paramount importance and any information which would undermine policing tactics and place members of the public at risk is not in the public interest.

This decision is based on the understanding that the public interest is not what interests the public, but what would be of greater good to the community as a whole.

Disclosure

Q1 - Why the location of the 50mph sign would not have impacted the enforcement

The unauthorised 50 mph speed limit sign affected a small proportion of the average speed link which did not invalidate the enforcement. If a vehicle travelled at the stipulated speed limit of 40 mph and 50 mph for the small proportion of the link, it would not have committed an offence. On the enforced baseline of 40 mph, 78% is covered with adequate 40 mph signs, the last 22% would have been affected by the unauthorised 50 mph sign.

Q2 - The date the speed limit was reduced to 40mph

The speed limit was reduced to 40mph on 18 October 2023.

Q3 - The date the fake sign was removed

The 50mph speed limit sign was removed on 25 January 2024 and replaced with a 40mph speed limit sign.

Q4 - The date the speed limit was reinstated to 70mph – if this has occurred

With reference to the date that the speed limit was reinstated to 70mph, please note that this information is not held by the MPS, but by TFL. Please contact TFL - Freedom of Information Request directly for this information.