Drivers fined for speeding on a motorway in Spain are recovering their money after favorable decisions in appeal processes, due to inconsistencies in the local signage. The case occurred on the A7 motorway, in the Cádiz region, where an average speed camera was operating with limits different from those indicated on the road.
According to , the device was part of a set of more than 100 new radars installed by Spanish authorities to combat speeding. The equipment was located between San Roque and Algeciras and began detecting infractions shortly after it went into operation.
The detail that went unnoticed
Although the radar was operational, the problem was not in its technical functioning, but in the information transmitted to drivers. According to the same source, the existing signage indicated a speed limit of 100 km/h, while the radar was set to a maximum of 80 km/h. This difference led to the issuing of several fines to drivers who were traveling within the limit indicated on the road.
Violations were recorded based on the average travel time, calculated based on the lower limit that was not properly signposted. A driver fined twice, for a total of 400 euros, decided to contest the penalties. The driver claimed that the information available at the location did not meet the criteria used by the radar.
Signage analyzed in detail
The situation was subsequently analyzed, including by external entities, who identified flaws in the coherence of the signaling. Several signs were found indicating the limit of 100 km/h, without any reference to the lower value used by the control system.
The same source mentions that the lack of explicit indication of the limit applied by the radar was decisive for the resources presented. The legislation requires that signage be clear and consistent, allowing drivers to understand the rules in force.
Decisions favorable to drivers
Given these inconsistencies, the fines of the drivers who appealed were annulled. The authorities recognized that the lack of correspondence between signaling and inspection compromised the validity of the sanctions. The publication adds that whenever there are flaws in the infrastructure or information provided, there may be grounds to contest penalties. In these cases, compliance with legal standards becomes a determining factor.
It is important to emphasize that the equipment worked correctly from a technical point of view. The problem focused exclusively on the difference between the applied limit and the limit visible to drivers.
Also read:
