Refund Of Macclesfield Mill Lane RED Light Camera Convictions

Refund Of Macclesfield Mill Lane RED Light Camera Convictions

0 have signed. Let’s get to 2,500!
At 2,500 signatures, this petition is more likely to get picked up by local news! E-petitions started this petition to Her Majesty the Queen Elizabeth (Her Majesty the Queen, Buckingham palace, London, SW1A 1AA) (Her Majesty the Queen, Buckingham palace, London, SW1A 1AA) and

To The Houses of Parliament & other decision makers for Refund Of the Macclesfield Mill Lane RED Light Camera

Most recent investigation measurements Video evidence.

 The investigation research and case topic about the Macclesfield RED light camera is on the main petitions information site >

Macclesfield traffic light camera investigations

Macclesfield traffic light camera investigations

The Main findings were that:
1. The Stop line is incorrect size and too similar to a different type of stop line. (stop then give way line) it is by law an obstruction in the road. (330-350mm instead of the required 200 or 300mm) (Stop/give way is 400mm)

2. The Triangle traffic light warning sign is not the correct distance, earlier down the road. Where the Speed camera enforcement sign is, a few sets of traffic lights earlier.

3. The 40mph signs to indicate change speed limit to approaching traffic are within the 30mph Traffic regulation order area of the cameras 2nd photograph zone. The signs are not aligned straight, are below the minimum wear and too faded off. Also a traffic light is placed in front of them, obscuring the view of the sign/s. Rendering them not visible to assimilate on approach.

4. The Traffic light camera is installed on a curved, bent road.. when it should be straight for 40 meters so that lorrys can enter the magnetic field that lies under the road ,in a straight line, so that the detection time is accurate to the decimal of a second. (which the equipment is set up to be accurate to) because Different size and metal weight of vehicles react to the magnetic field at different delayed times and you need it to be accurate so you can work out what the vehicle distance was when the amber light was displayed. For critical legislative defence and prosecution purposes, to give evidence of if that type of vehicle at that speed could or could not be stopped in time on approach course. Or even if the driver saw the light at the second decimal that it turned to amber in order to react in the 3 seconds it had to stop the vehicle. (see highway code safe stopping distances (previously emergency stopping distances)

5. Various other issues with distracting advertising & oversized destination sign boards, and the timing of approach changes earlier down the road at slow speeds (under 25mph). Also The OGD over ground detectors linked to the change sequence initiation, and distance covered for speed limit at different road sections and in different lanes over average.

What is this petition for? and Why Should you sign this Petition?

Ok... so... Does that matter? Why does it matter? If you have not read the main page and watched the links there including the other petitions, please do. Otherwise.. here is why you should sign!

Road Signs & Markings need to be placed correctly in order to give drivers adequate warning of directions that need to be followed. Also they need to be in place to prescriptive requirements and configurations to give legal EFFECT to any regulation that has been placed. Or else by law, it does not even require it to be OBSERVED in the first place. Which translated to this: That if the Council and Police cannot be bothered to go out of the way to ensure that the road signage & directions are as legally required, then the drivers by law do not have to bother to go out of their way to ensure that they have notived and complied with any signs, including consolidating any uncertainty of if the speed limit on the road is even correct, or in error.. or if they have correctly evaluated the speed limit themselves based on other similar roads that they drive on that are the exact same profile and width, and length, with the same safety features. (consistency in roads is a legal duty of the government to ensure)

These Road signs & Markings must be placed & maintained. The devices installed by the police cannot be used as evidence to prosecute any driver, if the Road markings and signs are not correct as prescribed by the Department of Transports manual chapter books. The agreement and legislation concerning the use of the equipment is governed by these conditions of use of home office approved devices.

I have found that, for reasons yet unknown (i say deceptive purposes, which i am trying to prove), road signs and markings have been placed incorrectly and not maintained at road sites, that are at places where money has been spent to place enforcement cameras & equipment. But not spent on making certain the road signage is correct & in good condition. This is the case at the Macclesfield RED light Traffic light camera at the Silk road Mill lane junction, Macclesfield. Where the Traffic Light camera/speed camera has not been legaly enforceable for about 7 years. This is just one example of Many. And drivers have been prosecuted unlawfully by the Police directed & Led prosecutions also collaborated with the CPS.
Thus I request that all authorities concerned work together to "Correct" these "errors" in Law enforcement that have been allowed to continue against misled drivers. & for the Police, Crown Prosecution service & Courts to work together quickly to refund money to drivers & remove Points & disqualifications from Driving Licences, as soon as possible. So that Drivers are not further Punnished, when in Law no Offences have been made by the Drivers at the Traffic Light camera site. There have been cases already where refunds have been automatically given, such as the A65 Rawdon speed cameras in Leeds and the M42/M40 motorway near Birmingham. Yet the truth has not been made public that these type of sites are everywhere and specially designed & placed. And the connection between them is co-ordinated and in fact a police & Highways government buisness strategy.

I have Evidence to support my claims.

Here, A local council website confirms that unlawful road signs (and markings) are an obstruction to driving in the road. They Are illegal and must be reported. (Wakefield Council)

The measurements and investigations of the Macclesfield RED light camera, confirming that there is multiple examples of unlawfull road signage at the camera site.

An example of a correctly prescribed and lawfully placed road marking to enforce a traffic light camera, in the same Cheshire police jurisdiction as the Macclesfield camera. To compare to the video evidence of the incorrect, unlawfull signs and markings.

A conversation, of many similar ones, with Local Council Management contractors, who are qualified in the Road markings and placement manuals. Who can give Professional witness evidence in a Court. They confirm my reading & interpretation of the Road signs manual & Law is correct. To add to other confirmations of BBC5 live, newspaper and council website evidence that i have been correct in my evaluations & measurements.

A example of a virtual legal representative, to the Courts complaints departments and the Police, Council and CPS on behalf of all drivers.

On my information site, in the Macclesfield topic there, I also go through a learning journey where i find that the device is not accurate for measuring the speed of different types of vehicle profiles. And the equipment has been designed in law to only obtain evidence for prosecution and ommit evidence that would give clarity to the events or reveal the equipments inaccuracys. Also the critical defence evidence would be before the photographs were even taken. Thus the evidence proves nothing in relation to the law, other than a very un-usefull photograph set that has little way of being confirmed for any proper measurement purposes. And is Tailored to execute a swift and solid prosecution case only. Not establish true facts and circumstances.

I have reason to believe that the reasons behind the road signage not being lawfully correct, is two fold. Firstly, it misleads drivers by not being adequate. Thus the police & council obtain more convictions & revenue from the cameras.
Secondly, if any police, lawyers or esteemed persons are caught by the camera, it gives them points of law to argue over in defence. Unfortunately this defence is on the most part, closed off to the general public, so that only qualified persons are allowed to use the defence, while other drivers are obstructed from using it at early stages of the proceedings were the police would usually be required to investigate. (this has been replaced by the fast track system) because of the reason of unprescribed road signs being the fault None of the drivers by law could have been convicted. A rare circumstance where a magistrates decision making jurisdiction is reduced. In fact the entire case is non prosecutable from its initiation. as the evidence was never viable for use by the police. And all persons were under legal obligation to reveal the true legal status of the road markings and signage at every stage.

This is only one example of an entire network of similar locations across the nation. Where speed limits and traffic lights have been designed & placed "inconsistently" on purpose so that drivers travelling around are presented with a new trick or con.. for each county or police constabulary that they drive through. Thus each Chief Police officer is his own "Highway man" of his own countys road jurisdictions. Earning himself reward and promotion for his hunting traps. & all Courts and Solicitors answer only to his authority. As if he were Lord of the County. The police and courts have Vehemently denied these claims and have obstructed all challenges against their organised collaborated strategys. The defence solicitors have also been working for gain and proffit from this system, playing for that team rather than a true representation of defence for the general public.
Multiple cases have been reaped out of cases where only one case would have been sufficient. And in many cases disqualified drivers who were prosecuted at sites where road signage was incorrect... have been made to pay high fees at Crown courts to defend their driving licences, when the Crown court could not hear appeal cases. Because only a magistrates court could hear cases. Yet they refused to correct mountains of accumulated error and complaint, which would effect ongoing cases rendering those not even viable for hearing due to "ongoing matter" concerns in connection.

If you sign this petition, it will not only be helping drivers who have been unlawfully convicted at Macclesfield. It will help put pressure on the Police & Courts to refund drivers who have been unlawfully convicted at other roads in other counties by other police forces all over the country. Many have been refunded in a few cases, proving that it is possible and real. Only that the Police & government do not want to reveal the true extent of the moral blunder, due to risk of rioting and political consequences. Even though the county cannot move forward without these socio-psychological behavior administrative conduct issues being confronted.

Why is it important to sign?

Even if you do not think that the road signs are important, or if you think the drivers still deserve punnishment for the driving events...
we cannot have the Highways & Police staff placing and operating unlawful signs. Also, they have been lying. In truth this is much more than a petition about road signs. It is the tip of the iceberg to initiate a better more honest and fair society. And that cannot be achieved without acceptig there are dishonest people in government who have taken advantage of the general public when they had positions of trust and responsibility.

We do not want dishonest police, councilors and Mps. It sets a bad example to the public and we do not want to promote dishonesty and lying to society. The signs are supposed to be 'as prescribed' for a reason. Because the original designer of the road sign system worked out a reaction and psychology time and system for correct response time and safety. Thus we need to follow the law and manuals properly.
Otherwise Change the laws, and if they have not been followed, it needs to be acknowledged by the government officially. Not evaded..
The government know about this scandal and it is their fault. Changing legislation will not help, if it is the legislation that the police are not following correctly in the first place.

The police are trying to make people think that the road signs are not that important, or only important if its a school photography PR stunt. when they know all too well that psychology governs driver reaction and actions. The police is built of police presence and psychology.. the uniform, horses, and reward system. The police cannot face the public with this level of corruption, as the police is built on heroic rewards. Unfortunately the rewards have taken presidence over truth and honesty conduct & behavoir policy. And they have not protected the system. Only themselves.

For example, Andrew Jones MP has now tried to remove the requirement to have two terminal signs to inform you of a change in the speed limit. And has removed the requirement to place repeater signs. (even though the TSRDG is not the sign configuration of placement manual as that is the Traffic signs manual chapter 3) This is very dangerous to the average driver, who relied on these signs to be subconsciously informed and updated with important guidance for driving. Especially with inconsistent speed limits.

Andrew, now is trying to make people believe the signs are not needed. While intending escaping present & Future liability for prosecutions. Although there is a doomsday book backlog of illegal & unlawful prosecutions against the Honest Working Driver, Which has been the fuel for expanding the Governments speed camera network. Andrew Jones does not want to pay for the maintenance and upkeep of road signs. & is claiming that they are "clutter". This intends to get Andrew Jones & Pat Macloughlin out of legal responsibility for past prosecutions where road signs have been put wrong on purpose on Department of Transport roads.
Yet he is contradicting that action, by placing "More" clutter, gantry's and signs on motorways, which confuse drivers even more. And he is removing the greatest road safety asset feature of the United Kingdom - The Hard Shoulder, so that he can operate his 40mph speed cameras, when Heavy Goods Vehicles then have to break down on dangerous lanes which are immediately in use, instead of being safely out of the way.

A Road tax increase could render enforcement cameras extinct, by merit of road safety features that are not associated in any way with crime and punishment. This would, reduce the polices role, along with fair wages almost remove the polices role completely.. other than reducing them to be a covert undercover online "social nanny" voieur network, when they cannot even be trusted to do their existing job honestly. They are the last people we want to be given control of cameras and computer surveillance equipment.

The deficit cannot be controlled by fines to drivers. It is the Ministers vocational imaginations that bleeds the country's funds dry. Millennium domes and toll roads. Dangerous movie screen advertising boards that distract drivers, while others are banned for simply holding mobile phones, yet in America it an everyday skill. The government plays dangerous safety games between its departments that conflict in law and safety. It is believed that Andrew Jones is not fit for purpose as a Minister. Because he cannot understand that it is the public road users themselves who should decide which roads get built and changed, not a hand full of MPs whos real intent is not safety at all, but simply continuation of an "Adult playset" which if made truly save and convenient would bore the Mp's to death. Except when they are following young secreatrial staff around of duty who they can employ to use as defence in the defunkt government complaints departments that are instead there to defend against complaints..

Here is the Legislation for the Driving Offences. Not that I have Substituted the word speed, with the words 'movement and motion'. Because in the Dictionary it states that the word speed means to move, and or to start moving or stop moving. Thus I believe that the legislation covers traffic light/speed camera combination devices, as well as just speed cameras. Because there is still a limit of movement or motion to be observed when a red light or amber sign sign shows. Such as the speed limit at the stop line is 0 mph. Unless you believe you cannot stop safely in time, in which case an amber light is to be treated as if it were a green light. There is also new legislation in the 1991 road traffic act, where the law states a road musy comply with the Home office approval regulations for the devices. And those rules state that to use the device to obtain viable evidence, the road signs and markings must comply with the TSRGD and traffic signs manuals. I have linked to online copys of the manuals in .pdf files on the main webpage, if you scroll down you will see pictures of the manuals that you can click on.

1)For the purpose of securing that adequate (and lawfull) guidance is given to drivers of motor vehicles as to whether any, (by law) and if so what, limit of movement or motion is to be observed on any road, it shall be the duty of the Secretary of State, in the case of a road for which he is the traffic authority, to erect and maintain to the standard stated in those manuals the traffic signs and place the markings in such positions as may be (is) prescriptively requisite for that purpose.
(2)In the case of any other road, it is the duty of the local traffic authority
(a)to erect and maintain traffic signs in such positions (configurations) as may be (is) requisite in order to give effect to general or other directions (in law) given by the Secretary of State for the purpose mentioned in subsection (1) above, and
(b)to alter or be required to remove (illegal) traffic signs as may be requisite in order to give effect (or remove obstruction) to such directions, either in consequence of the making of an order by the Secretary of State or otherwise.


For more information visit the information site at & Sign other petitions at

Thank you.

0 have signed. Let’s get to 2,500!
At 2,500 signatures, this petition is more likely to get picked up by local news!