/ Motoring

UK to adopt speed limiting tech: do you support it?

The Department for Transport has today said that speed limiting tech, which will become mandatory for all vehicles sold in Europe from 2022, will apply to the UK. Do you support it?

New rules have been provisionally agreed by the EU that will see the introduction of GPS/Intelligent Speed Assistance (ISA) technology that can send the local speed limit to a car’s dashboard to help enforce speed limits. ISA uses speed sign-recognition video cameras to do this.

From 2022, this will apply to the UK. And yes, that’s despite Brexit.

It’s worth noting that this won’t be an enforcement; the driver will be able to override the system by pressing the accelerator. Think of it more as a supportive guide – manoeuvres such as overtaking shouldn’t be affected.

Been hit with an undeserved speeding ticket? Here’s what to do

Are speed limiters a good idea?

Motoring rules, regulation and etiquette always generate a lot of discussion here on Which? Conversation, and it’s no different at Which? HQ itself, so I asked the rest of our Convo team for their views. Here are their takes:

“Have you ever driven on a motorway at 86mph in a Smart car? This is the speed my car was limited to and, frankly, I would never have wanted to go any faster. In fact, I don’t think I needed to go any faster.

332 people died on UK roads in 2017 because of someone either breaking the speed limit of being judged to be driving too fast for the conditions. Is getting somewhere a tiny bit faster really worth it?

It can be so easy to break the speed limit on the motorway.  I had a five-year break from driving recently. When I got back behind the wheel I had got over the ‘need to speed’. But that’s the thing – unless you are an emergency service you don’t need to speed. You just want to”

“I welcome safer roads and I’m keen to see ways in which technology will help us get there. I do not, however, welcome systems that might confuse the driver or limit their ability to make choices to navigate the road ahead.

I have an older car where on occasion (and sometimes by accident) I make use of the speed limiter. This has enabled me to reduce the risk of fines from temporary roadworks and average speed checks, but has done nothing to reduce the danger from the traffic around me (many of whom aren’t using limiters).

Many people treat driving as a right – a casual task that requires no thought – and their driving certainly reflects this. Would it really do any good to introduce another system that the driver doesn’t have to give their full attention to?

Driving is a huge responsibility – you, as a human, bear responsibility for all of the life around you. I think if we truly want safer roads, the solution is holding the people responsible to account, and not looking to the tech to solve this for us.

Or, you know, just more frequent and more reliable public transport at an affordable cost. Were this available, I’d happily recycle the car”

So now you have Jon and Abby’s views, what are yours? Do you support the introduction of speed limiting technology? Do you think this is the answer for safer roads?

Let us know your thoughts on the changes and we’ll feature your comments alongside Jon and Abby’s.

Comments

There are of course always pros and cons for subjects as these and can obviously see that speed limiters could save some lives,but don’t think this is the best use of technology for road safety.
After driving for 45 years, the technology I would welcome to be fitted to all vehicles,that in mind would contribute more to road safety also making driving less stressful would be
A distance limiter, automatically keeping a safe distance from the vehicle in front,not just an audible warning but a control system of engine and braking to make it impossible to be too close,varying the distances with speed.I know this technology does already exist, but believe this should be the compulsory system in preference to a speed limiter and fitted to all new vehicles.
Although I always try to achieve this myself it is never possible, as soon as I leave a decent gap in front someone always fills it.
On the rare occasions when out in busy traffic and there is decent space in front and behind, this makes driving much less stressful and safer for me, and surely others too, especially when navigating unfamiliar areas, always having that decent vehicle spacing and actually being able to see the markings on the road surface having this information and space to change lanes safely, not to mention the safe braking distances that would limit or even virtually eliminate multiply vehicle shunts, all this would in my mind be a significant step forward in road safety.

I want a car that does what I want it to do when I want it to do it. I want to be fully in control of the vehicle at all times and that includes changing gear. If I chose to break the law, that’s my problem, I get the fine, not the car. I want to drive responsibly and get cross when I slip up. I don’t need others to modify the car or the road system. When I can no longer drive safely, I shall stop. I hope to have enough common sense to know when that is.

Mike says:
27 March 2019

My car is fitted with ACC and Road-sign Recognition and it is very annoying when travelling down the A3 in SW London at 50 MPH and it picks up on 30 MPH side road sign and sends out all flashing warnings and tries to slow down to 30.
If this is rolled out across all vehicles the the tech needs serious upgrading and testing.

Also most GPS/Satnav devices do not regularly update and often show incorrect speed limits and also show vehicles driving through fields that have been dual carriageways for 4 years.

This is a fair point and know exactly where you are talking about. I have been down that road many times and wondered why on earth my car was telling me off for speeding!

With this technology we are taking away drivers ability to control the car so I am dead set against it.

I do abide by speed limits but I choose to do this, I do not want it forced upon me. I would welcome a system to help me where the driver has the choice to use it or not.

For example in a 50 zone on the motorway I use cruise control to make sure I stay without a ticket. My choice.

Vicki says:
29 March 2019

It’s another E.U. farce! Stupid idea. Health and safety would be a issue. Also allowing computers to Manoeuvre the Vehicle is just insane what happens if it gets a virus what happens if there is an EMP. come on guys think properly, think outside the box for once I spend of your rights. Your not robots yet!!!

Vicki says:
29 March 2019

Phone error; Stand up for (see point, even my phone understand dictation)

Thanks for the comment Vicki. To be clear, this technology would not actually maneuver the vehicle on behalf of the driver (those would be self-driving cars), only serve as a speed regulator.

Friendly reminder to all: vulgar language isn’t welcomed as per our community guidelines. We’ve edited this out of the above comment.

Although not ideal, I’m pretty sure I’ve read that the driver will be able to disable the feature with the press of a button, similar to the current ability to disable the ‘Stop/Start’ engine feature. However, just like the ‘Stop/Start’ feature, it will be automatically enabled on each fresh start of the engine after turning off and on the ignition.

David Salway says:
2 April 2019

I agree,the problem with the new breed of car is that they are full of technology seeking answers to problems that do not exist .My car has a screen which allows me to do all sorts of unnecessary things and could be a serious distraction.I do not need all the rubbish it provides and prefer to use my own intelligence.Speed is not a problem,inappropriate speed is.Also lack of education is and no amount of technology will curb the problem of stupid driving and drivers not paying enough attention to road conditions.

From my involvement with Motorcycle Action Group and its European counterpart (FEMA) I know that certain elements have been pining for controls like this since a few decades ago.

I can see some benefits if this kind of system were to be released as a driver aid, but I can also imagine a lot of problems if it is forced onto everyone.

In particular, I don’t like the idea of any autocratic bureaucrats being able to dictate in advance how a vehicle should be driven, in the absence of specific real time local knowledge of road conditions.

Aarom says:
27 March 2019

It’s ridiculous. It’s about self control, driving is all about making your own choices. Humans are slowly becoming useless. On occasion breaking the speed limit is acceptable such as overtaking another slower moving veichile. This limiter will make people complacent and cause more accidents. The UK has some of the safest roads anywhere in the world. It’s bother example of governments controlling people People need responsibility for their own life satisfaction. I hate this new world of limitations treating everyone as an idiot.

chris cook says:
27 March 2019

They already have these for HGVs…and they don’t always work well. they certainly don’t work well on a motorway when you come upon a sudden hazard and the only way you can get out of it is to put the boot down for a second or two and get round it. HGV drivers have more common sense than any gizmo

Phil says:
27 March 2019

Which is why you frequently see one lorry attempting to overtake another with a 0.5 mph speed advantage and the other driver resolutely refusing to give way. A real pain if you’re stuck behind them on a dual carriageway.

Reading around it you will be able to go over if you floor it to over take safely. That was my concern as well until I saw that measure.

Abby, doesn’t that mean those intent on speeding will just ‘floor it’ all the time? Or is it time limited ie you can only accelerate for 10 seconds. Seems fraught with risks. If you are taking evading action because you are overtaking a lorry that starts moving out because he hasn’t seen you, then your car suddenly slows down just as you are flooring it to get clear of him, it could cause accidents as it is taking control away from the driver.

Brian Parker says:
27 March 2019

I’ve got a speed limiter on my van which thankfully I can turn off, I have used it in a average speed zone but anywhere else would in my opinion is dangerous and would cause more accidents

Phil says:
27 March 2019

The company I work for has 70 mph speed limiters on all its vans and they each have a GPS tracker which will e-mail the manager responsible if the vehicle exceeds say a 30 mph limit for more than 7 seconds. The vehicle can also be tracked so no sneaking off to the pub or doing the shopping in works time.

Tim says:
29 March 2019

In your opinion, more accidents would be caused if people had to go slower? That seems to fly in the face of all the data, doesn’t it?

If the speed limit is going to be determined by GPS, then the vehicle’s speed must likewise be determined by GPS. GPS does not only give one’s location but also one’s speed.

Car speedometers are usually inaccurate, nearly always over-reading, because as tyres wear, they take more revolutions to travel the same distance and therefore give the speedometer an inaccurately-high reading. Added to this, many manufacturers deliberately design their speedometers to over-read within the 10% legal tolerance. I’m fed up with being stuck behind drivers at 63mph, who clearly believe they are driving at the speed limit of 70mph because that’s what their speedometer says.

Speedometers need to continue to be linked to wheel revolutions, because otherwise they wouldn’t work in tunnels etc, but speedometers should automatically recalibrate using a GPS signal whenever it is available to ensure that they are always 100% accurate when tyres wear. It’s very simple technology to implement.

It will be interesting to see if the technology will be sufficiently improved in three years.

Phil says:
30 March 2019

In an idle moment I did work out the effect tyre wear has on speedometer accuracy and it’s negligible.

Speedometers are allowed to read 110% of actual speed + 6.25mph but must never read less than the actual speed. It means that a car travelling at 40 mph might have a speedometer that reads just over 50 mph. Compared to the GPS reading on the SatNav and Dashcam my own car’s speedometer is reasonably accurate at 30 MPH but gets progressively worse, at 80 MPH I’m actually only doing 70 MPH.

On this subject the motoring “expert” on one newspaper once advised a reader that a speedometer would be more accurate than GPS because “GPS only measures in 2 dimensions”!

I expect that, to keep costs down, speedometers are only as accurate and as cheap and simple as they need to be for the relevant regulations.

Meanwhile, cars themselves are getting horribly complicated. When I was waiting in service reception, while my 13yr old Note had her service and MoT, I couldn’t help overhearing conversations about “software updates” for cars. I wonder if we’ll ever see a Convo about manufacturers not providing software updates for older models?

Geoffrey Blackbird says:
27 March 2019

Think they will pass it what about all the money they get off the speeding fines they get Some councils will say they are bankrupt

Ruth Kosminsky says:
27 March 2019

As an endangered species; a pedestrian. I fully support anything; that can reduce the stupidity of the dangerous and reckless driving, that I have been forced to experiance whilst legally being on the pavement. Or correctly crossing at the traffic lights and have drivers revving their engines; because in their “humble opinion.” I’m holding them up for a good five {5.} seconds. They are not joking- if it was legal, to mow-down pedestrians, because they are there… I would not be here to tell the tale. For me, people who deliberately speed are self-centred *idiots.* I hope that they are sent to jail for driving at 32 mph down a 30 mph Road. And that in all seriousness; they throw away the keys.

I disagree. Speed on its own is not dangerous. Other actions by drivers are dangerous, but they’re subjective, so speed is often used as an easy objective way to catch drivers. Last year I drove at 140mph on a public road. It was not dangerous. I wanted to go 10mphh faster at my car’s top speed of 150mph, but it didn’t feel safe to go any faster.

Speed limits on public roads exist for a purpose – to enable other road users including pedestrians, cyclists, equestrians, etc. to use the roads safely within the limits of visibility taking account of bends, contours, and junctions. It is not only necessary for drivers to feel safe at excess speed but for the other road users to feel safe.

Another important consideration is closing speed. If two vehicles approach each other at speeds above 80 mph a collision would have a much greater impact not only on the vehicles and people directly involved but on other vehicles on the road at the time and on adjacent property. This might be mitigated where there is a dual carriageway and other design features that reduce the risk of collisions [e.g. on motorways] but loss of control at high speed can still be extremely dangerous. Good drivers can assess the risks and drive accordingly but not all drivers are good and all road users are entitled to expect that other traffic will be obeying the speed limits.

John, your second paragraph is spot-on, in particular “Good drivers can assess the risks and drive accordingly but not all drivers are good and all road users are entitled to expect that other traffic will be obeying the speed limits“. The resulting problem is that low speed limits are imposed equally upon all drivers, good and bad, with the result that skilful drivers will feel frustrated and therefore not have confidence in the limits.

It is a tricky one – I know I wrote my piece in a very hardline way but my thoughts are more nuanced. Most drivers are good but I have seen so much dangerous driving that I do believe something needs to be done.

For me there is also something in the fact that we are just getting more and more used to speed and essentially this is just getting us somewhere a bit faster. If you are doing a 100 mile journey it only saves you ten minutes if you do 80 compared with 70.

I drove 150 miles yesterday and experienced some of the worst driving I have seen for years, with tailgating, aggressive driving and cars overtaking on the nearside, obviously intent on reaching their destination as soon as possible. Fortunately, many of the drivers were behaving sensibly. My return journey will be in the evening when the roads are quieter.

The roads are for everyone, good and bad, skilled and less skilled, so we need to drive on the basis that however good we are (or think we are), it is someone less good who is likely to cause us a problem. If you want to do 140mph then go on a track day.

Look at the stopping distance increase when driving a little above a speed limit and the energy that remains in your car when you hit a child who has unexpectedly appeared. Granted, accidents will always happen but observing speed limits will help reduce them, and there severity.

I don’t want control of my car to be totally taken over because, as has been pointed out, an unexpected incident can require exceptional action. Assistance in keeping to the limit would be good enough.

NFH comments that the “resulting problem is that low speed limits are imposed equally upon all drivers, good and bad . . . “. I don’t quite understand why that is a problem.

In calculating the likely time a journey will take one has to consider the kind of road standard, weather conditions, traffic congestion, daytime or night-time, and other factors. I don’t believe the opportunity to drive at an excess speed for a portion of the journey should be part of that calculation. In my opinion, fully skilled drivers do not get frustrated and certainly do not take risks with public safety.

The speed limits are only low in relation to the capacity of a tiny minority of cars, and speed relative to car or driver potential is not a good basis for setting limits. The characteristics of the road and the sort of use that is made of it are the guiding principles.

BTW – I did not mark down NFH’s comment and have neutralised the ‘thumbs down’.

Tim says:
29 March 2019

“Most drivers are good”. Statistically, only half of them are, surely?

More than half of drivers think they are good drivers – I’ve not seen anyone on this forum admitting to being a below average driver yet, have you?

Tim says:
29 March 2019

” The resulting problem is that low speed limits are imposed equally upon all drivers, good and bad, with the result that skilful drivers will feel frustrated and therefore not have confidence in the limits.”

The beauty of enforcement is that no-one cares whether you have confidence in the limits. That’s what they are, and your car will drive to them. It’s farcical that you think we should have some form of differential speed limits for good or bad drivers – this isn’t F1!

GMann says:
30 March 2019

The writer omitted to say that the speed quoted was attained outside the UK where it is legally permitted to do so.

I use the speed limiter on my car routinely; easy to change on the steering wheel. One danger is to rely on it too much; if you’ve forgotten to reset it after reversing, for example.

We seem to have too many changes of speed limits, often over short distances; prominently displaying the current speed limit in a head-up display is very effective.

Those who ignore speed limits will still override any system.

Malcolm, I totally agree with you about too many changes of speed limits. But this problem isn’t too bad in the UK. In France, for example, turn off the motorway and the slip road will often have 3 or 4 descending speed limits, some of which would be appropriate only for driving a double-decker bus in snow.

@malcolm-r Those who ignore speed limits will still override any system.

This is so true. For a long time there are going to be a mixture of cars on the roads for one thing and people will find a way around it.

allen williams says:
28 March 2019

It is an EU Regulation, therefore I oppose it.

Allen. your comment appears to be based on a spiteful ideology, not on the merit of the legislation. Do you similarly oppose a ban on card surcharges (since 13th January 2018), mobile roaming surcharges (since 15th June 2017), compensation for delayed flights, and a requirement for published prices to be “the total price of the goods or services inclusive of taxes“, all of which derive from EU legislation?

I expect that you similarly perceive that all EU legislation is imposed by the EU upon the UK, whereas the reality is that a lot of EU legislation, particularly the best consumer legislation in which the UK is very strong, is imposed by the UK upon the rest of the EU.

Your second paragraph, NFH, is a point that few people in the UK have properly recognised.

I am hoping that outside the EU we shall continue to make progress in consumer protection and enhancement of rights and that we shall continue to be influential on other states in Europe and around the world.

John, I fear that if Brexit goes ahead, then the EEA will lose out on a lot of new consumer legislation originating from the UK. Having said that, I notice that Australia is a world leader in some areas of consumer legislation, particularly concerning drip pricing (misleading indication of price through exclusion from headline prices of unavoidable surcharges that are incrementally added during a purchase process).

I’m not too keen on having more technology that helps remove responsibility for safe driving from the driver. We have clear rules and associated laws intended to promote safe driving, but with little enforcement, inconsiderate drivers often do what they want. As others have said, changing speed limits can be a challenge but clear signage would take care of that problem.

I suspect this is simply an example of tiptoeing around the real issue: driver competence. Perhaps what’s needed is a change in the testing requirements, so that all drivers have to undertake training for and pass the IAM advanced test. I did mine one year after my normal test and it made a huge difference. I’ve also put our sons through it but perhaps, instead of introducing new tweaks, that is what we should be doing.

The situation in Northern Ireland is very telling. For a year after you pass you test you are not allowed to drive over 45mph. Including motorways. After that year you can drive at speed but have never been taught to. There are many factors to why NI has the highest accident rate in the UK but I am sure this is a part of it. https://www.nidirect.gov.uk/articles/ni-road-safety-partnership

The driving test in England now includes a section of two-lane or three-lane dual-carriageway driving on A roads where the speed limit is 70 mph, all counties now having such roads and test centres having been relocated to be close enough to include it in the test.

I was taught to drive up to the limit which makes for more consistency in traffic conditions and safer motoring.

To ensure adequate visibility of the signs, some speed limit reductions are in advance of where they actually need to be. This is a practical necessity and it means, for example, that a section of 30 mph road extends further than we might like but the limits cannot be different on each side of the road. Being in the correct gear assists compliant driving especially at the lower limits.

Where we live all the local roads are having the speed limit reduced to 20 mph and this will extend over the entire built-up area apart from A roads and through traffic routes where ensuring conformity with the existing 30 mph limit has been difficult enough. The lower limit will improve highway safety for all users at little inconvenience to drivers. Whether everyone will drive in second gear remains to be seen.

10 m/h speed limits would further improve the safety of children, as would banning cars totally. 🙁 . However, a blanket 20 m/h limit in all built-up areas is, to my mind, going too far. I’d support such a limit near schools and places where many children roam freely at particular times of the day. However they are so frequently ignored in the very few that exist on village roads in our part of the world that I’d suggest they are inappropriate generally. As are speed chicanes and humps; most just speed up between obstacles. I think speed indication signs are a very effective reminder when you enter a new zone.

There is a 20 mph limit near many schools. I think it is more effective to impose this when necessary rather than 24/7. The flashing orange lights that can be switched on when needed are a better solution, in my view.

The new 20 mph zones in our area will not involve humps, chicanes, or other obstacles but there might be “entry features and speed tables in certain locations”. Compliance will be encouraged by small repeater speed limit signs and large roundels on the carriageway.

The blanket speed limit over a sizeable area is intended to avoid frequent changes in speed limits and reinforce a consistent safety attitude. The Norwich highway authorities have spent millions on new cycling initiatives and pedestrian safety improvements and feel that a general slowing down of motorised traffic is now necessary to ensure that those on foot and on bicycles will feel safer and to encourage more people to travel that way. There is no doubt that walking and cycling have increased considerably where the improvements have been carried out so moderating motorised traffic speeds is a good idea. There seems to be general public support for it and it is being highlighted in local election leaflets.

They’re not being implemented properly around here, however. The start point of the 20mph limit is signed but they’ve forgotten the exit point and haven’t considered the side roads, so it’s a mess at the moment. The irony is that where it’s been implemented at all you’d have to try very hard to reach 20mph, never mind stay beneath it.

There is such a system near to where I live where several schools are in a network of roads. The signs at the start of the section have a note that the 20 limit applies only when the lights are flashing. A problem is that the section does not have signs when you leave to say that the limit is now 30. My car has a system to alert me to speed limits and it keeps telling me that I am in a 20 limit even though I am not! It is several miles before I reach a point where there is a speed limit sign to put things back to normal.

Terrence says:
29 March 2019

ABSOLUTE LUNACY!! Has anyone looked at the health impact? I’ve read on several sites these new devices emit high radio frequencies. I fear the risk of cancer and nobody in the EU is answering!

Jonesy says:
29 March 2019

The EU equivalent of a nagging fish-wife. How very dare they!

G Ford says:
29 March 2019

I welcome the idea that idiots who do not think speed limits do not apply to them will be forced to have to override a system and therefore will have no defence when charged with speeding. My concern is with how the system will identify the speed limit, speed signs currently appear without any warning I do not want my car to suddenly decelerate, money would need to be spent on signs which slow the vehicle down on a less sudden way.

I assume some sort of GPS system would apply which could gradually step down the speed but the transition period before all cars were fitted could be interesting.

Potholes will do the job and save a lot of money. 🙁

Definitely on some roads round here. I can’t find any attribution to the term pothole or pot- hole, or where this originated. Someone has given it a scientific name ” cueva subterránea” and it is also applied to the excoriation of limestone by water and debris. Its causes are clearly understood, the repairs are not so clear cut. Cavers also go pot-holing entering the systems from a hole in the surface and dropping down to the cave below.

Something positive could come out of well implemented speed-limiting technologies.

As an IAM and police-trained driver, I try to respect the speed limits set on any particular road. Not because my own driving skills are poor; they are measurably much better than average. I do it because all road users are entitled to have their expectations met about the speed that other vehicles might be travelling at on a particular stretch of road.

How many times and how cautiously does someone need to check when emerging from a blind junction? How much time should they allow to see their children safely across the road? Can they overtake that string of parked cars without being forced into a tiny gap by someone approaching at speed from the other direction?

Lower speed limits can also be set to reduce road noise and vehicle pollution for nearby residents. Those who think speed limits are simply about road safety and argue one way or another on that basis alone, aren’t in possession of all the facts necessary to have a sensible debate.

However, it should be apparent that many roads have an arbitrary speed limit set on the (correct) assumption that 30 mph means some drivers will drive at 40 mph, 40 mph means traffic averaging up to 50 mph, and so on. We could probably justify increasing motorway speed limits to 80 mph, if it didn’t mean some drivers would then push that to 100 mph as their “normal” speed.

So as a careful and skilled driver who also respects the speed limits, I am constantly being penalized by so-called skilled drivers who don’t respect speed limits, and the plain idiotic drivers who join them in the belief that speed limits don’t apply to them either.

If speed-limiting technologies were to ensure that everybody (regardless of skill or stupidity) drove at no more than 30 mph in a 30 mph zone, there is a chance that some of these arbitrary limits could be revised upwards. There would also be more scope for variable speed limits on many roads, determined by time of day, visibility, traffic congestion, etc. Maybe then we could all get to our destinations a little faster (at least on average) and in greater safety too, instead of the “full speed ahead and the devil take the hindmost” approach advocated my many motorists.

One of my motorcycling buddies was a former police instructor. He usually seemed to “respect” speed limits by only exceeding them by another +10 mph. Of course, he could also go much faster than that, with high levels of skill and still great margins of safety.

In Germany, I’ve seen that folk don’t “respect” speed limits – instead they actually comply with them. I wonder if that is a trade off that comes from having no speed limits on some autobahns?

One of the problems with speed limits is that they are applied without any reference to the public, other than a short newspaper notice shortly before they are put in place. Many of them seem, to the road user, to be unnecessary, even if they are legitimate for reasons that can not be immediately understood. It is impossible to sign the reasons on the road, since such signs could not be read by passing motorists and more icons would lead to more poles and roadside clutter. We rely on each local authority to decide where to apply limits. They do, and roads that have been de-restricted or given a forty limit for decades are suddenly reduced and similarly many thirty limits suddenly become twenty after a life time without change. The trend is always down and to some it appears to be a vendetta against the motorist, who is always in the wrong and a danger to everyone. Inside a car, crawling at twenty for miles on end, seems to be very slow, when in the golden days there were thirties and forties and that was it and life went on. We also have the beginning of the phenomenon of speed restrictions to reduce pollution on roads that are otherwise “safe”. Journey times are lengthening and general road speeds are now considerably slower than they were. Derbyshire has a blanket fifty on many of its Peak District roads. (driving on them one can see why!) The point of this diatribe is that those who disobey the speed limits don’t believe they are necessary, they want to go about their delivery and business journeys quickly and they don’t see that fast driving is a problem, when they have been driving for years without hitting anything. Those of us who like to stick to the law, get passed regularly and tailgated. Though we check our speed and do as we are told there is an element of frustration when we engage second gear yet again and grind along.