Tougher Road Traffic Laws In France.

[mikethebike]

Hi all

I have a Tom Tom 910 satnav with a subscription for camera alerts and was sent yesterday an email to update my camera alerts on Tom Tom Home. This I did and the French camera alerts were removed from my device.

[Keithl]

Derek Uzzell - 2012-01-09 9:47 AM

We shall not be going to France until March, by which time (hopefully) the legality, or otherwise, of Choice 1 will have been resolved. If it turns out that simply deselecting the alerts option is not legally acceptable to the French authorities, then I'll download the 30-day free trial just before we travel. As we won't be abroad for more than a fortnight, that should provide conformity for the March trip and I'll think about the £4.99 download later.

 

Derek,

 

I think you will find that the 30 day free trial only applies to NEW devices and means it is valid for updates within 30 days from the date of purchase.

 

So if you already own a Tom Tom then you will need to purchase the £4.99 option as the 30 day free trial will unfortunately not be an option. This will buy you the latest download at that date with no future updates.

 

Hope this makes sense and clarifies the situation.

 

PS I have recently bought a new Tom Tom and took advantage of the 30 day update.

 

Keith.

[Derek Uzzell]

Keithl - 2012-01-09 7:21 PM

 

Derek Uzzell - 2012-01-09 9:47 AM

We shall not be going to France until March, by which time (hopefully) the legality, or otherwise, of Choice 1 will have been resolved. If it turns out that simply deselecting the alerts option is not legally acceptable to the French authorities, then I'll download the 30-day free trial just before we travel. As we won't be abroad for more than a fortnight, that should provide conformity for the March trip and I'll think about the £4.99 download later.

 

Derek,

 

I think you will find that the 30 day free trial only applies to NEW devices and means it is valid for updates within 30 days from the date of purchase.

 

So if you already own a Tom Tom then you will need to purchase the £4.99 option as the 30 day free trial will unfortunately not be an option. This will buy you the latest download at that date with no future updates.

 

Hope this makes sense and clarifies the situation.

 

PS I have recently bought a new Tom Tom and took advantage of the 30 day update.

 

Keith.

 

Yes, but I don't own a Tom-Tom!

 

What you say may well be true for a Garmin sat-nav too, though the Garmin webpages seem to suggest otherwise. Garmin seems to be saying (as far as I can make out) that any sat-nav device that's capable of being updated (ie. from Model 1000 onwards) to conform to the French 'Danger Zones' protocol can be, either via a subscription or via a 30-day trial.

 

Have a look at the following

 

https://buy.garmin.com/shop/shop.do?pID=68100&pvID=68810

 

http://static.garmincdn.com/shared/fr/custom/100pourcentlegal/FAQ_Decret_Radars_Garmin_04_01_12.pdf

 

I'm not particularly interested in Garmin's updating process, as much as anything because I'd find out when I tried to download the 30-day trial update whether I would be allowed to do it or not. I'm much more concerned about whether or not Garmin's advice is correct that

 

"Une désactivation en quelques secondes de la base radars, sans avoir à connecter son GPS à un ordinateur, qui rend le GPS immédiatement conforme à la nouvelle réglementation"

 

genuinely does make the device conformant to the revised French regulations.

 

If it does, then that suits me fine, as I can just deselect my Nuvi 1340's safety-camera alerts option before I begin to drive in France and be confident that I'm not risking prosecution. If it doesn't, then I'm going to have to do something about it and (as things stand) that would mean following the procedure I mentioned earlier and that you've quoted.

 

 

[kingsgraphic]

...or we could just do without speed camera warnings by driving within the speed limit. Then all this fairly pointless banter about who's doing what etc becomes.....well, pointless. I can remember a time when we had no GPS, no mobile 'phones, no in-car entertainment, and things were just fine. Gadgets! Who needs 'em....

[Rayjsj]

kingsgraphic - 2012-01-13 10:05 AM

 

...or we could just do without speed camera warnings by driving within the speed limit. Then all this fairly pointless banter about who's doing what etc becomes.....well, pointless. I can remember a time when we had no GPS, no mobile 'phones, no in-car entertainment, and things were just fine. Gadgets! Who needs 'em....

 

And we all drove with the 'wind in our face' and goggles on,

Most of these 'New' French laws make perfect sense (i DID say MOST !) How on EARTH do they intend to ENFORCE this 'Sat-Nav' law, will they just stop ALL foreign reg. vehicles ?? and then scroll through the Sat-Nav to see if the 'Camera sites' are on there ? or will they just confiscate them ALL.

And as for the 'Breathalyzer kit' !!! that just flaggergasts me, do we need one Each ! and special ones for the Children ? If French drivers drive when drunk, lock them up, and take away their licences for two years minimum. and enforce a 'Zero tolerance' alchohol limit. NOT impose a stupid law on, non drinking drivers......why ? (Gallic Shrug !!) *-) Ray

[plumbersvan]

:-S In France its forbiden to drink drive AND ENFORCED ive seen many controls :-S

 

In the contryside the Mayor deputy mayor will drink a glass of white wine at 7am 8-) I saw that while buying cheese,they offered me a glass which i refused.In Switzerland it was the same,there the cheese is better as they make local cheese not euro rule cheese,they also drink wine but dont offer any to visiters

 

Drink and work is rather more wide spread than the hungarian 4 foot 9 dictator srkosy imagins

 

At 9am i saw a mayor drinking a second glass of red wine while carving another slice of roast for breakfast 8-) Its tradition.If anyone leaves their village they may well be controled,and after around 20.00

 

The Gendarms told me they must respect this tradition or work in conflict with locals :-S

 

For good or bad life outside French towns is far safer,even now i parked on a parking with the nearest house about 1 km away,and a 6km bike ride to the post(for wi-fi) I wonderful veiw fresh air.

 

no drunken drivers but quite a few that have had a glass of wine with their lunch(i saw i was invited :-D ) :-D

[euroserv]

kingsgraphic - 2012-01-13 10:05 AM

 

...or we could just do without speed camera warnings by driving within the speed limit. Then all this fairly pointless banter about who's doing what etc becomes.....well, pointless. I can remember a time when we had no GPS, no mobile 'phones, no in-car entertainment, and things were just fine. Gadgets! Who needs 'em....

 

Quite true, but (and I have been accused of wearing rose-tinted glasses on occasion) as I remember it; in the 'old' days if you did get caught speeding it was by a policeman who would be very stern with you, would try to educate you about the errors of your ways and would be just as likely to let you off with a bollocking than to 'report' you for the offence and start off a court process or fixed penalty. He would have been lurking in a favourite spot which was prone to speeding drivers and saved his organisation a lot of fuel and time by being where the problems were likely to be.

 

That is all well and good but if you were just a visitor to the area and did not know that you were in an accident blackspot or even just somewhere where speed 'creeps up' on you then it would have been very useful to have that information available; perhaps as a roadside warning, and that too did exist in the good old days.

 

Now regarding fixed speed cameras in the UK; there are strict criteria regarding fatal accidents that govern the position of the devices and they are preceeded by speed warnings and camera signs so they should not be a problem to anyone that is observant and driving within the law. Mobile cameras are much more cynical and while there will still be speed and camera warnings around they are often in places that would not immediately look 'hazardous' and are probably there because of the sucesss rate for prosecutions! Again; not a problem at all for the speed aware, safe and considerate driver.

 

In France though this is quite different. In my experience most cameras are in locations that are notorious for speed. There is not really anything to suggest that there are lots of accidents there but clearly there is an excellent opportunity to pick off a few speeding motorists without the need for a police officer to be in attendance. This is policing at it's most lazy and cynical, and the banning of motorists from having information about these blackspots is purely a measure to prevent the loss of revenue. Perversely though, (and I love this bit) a Police officer WILL have to be present and patroliing in order to check that people are not using these devices. This will have the effect of keeping drivers' on their toes' and alert them to the possibility of incurring a speeding fine. Just like the old days; a bit of proper policing will actually have the effect of ruducing accidents and reducing speed while also reducing the amount of revenue obtained from the speeders.

 

The only downside to this is that while they are checking your vehicle for devices, they will be checking very thoroughly for absolutely everything else so that they do not waste their time and get their E135 one way or another.

 

It's not good news either way but I strongly suspect that the Police will have more than enough to do with prosecuting the typically awful French drivers in their barely roadworthy vehicles without pawing over a few gin palaces from the UK. None of you are in a hurry anyway from what I have read here so why is anyone worried?

 

Nick

 

[Derek Uzzell]

I'm led to believe that French traffic police are currently not empowered to enter a vehicle merely to check the conformity of an equipment regarding "Article R413-15 du code de la route", though (apparently) Customs Officers would have the right to do so.

[eljay]

re the breathalyser kits:-

 

For information. I had a look at the packaging of the "Éthylotest" kits in our local Intermarché today and they have a very limited shelf life. Those on display were only valid until 03/2012. Incidentally, they were marked as "Made in South Africa", but all the information on the package was in French.

 

Price - 3€ for a packet of two

 

[Derek Uzzell]

The shelf-life of breathalysers varies, but the normal expectation for 'single use' products seems to be at least 2 years from date of manufacture.

 

This example has a 2-year life:

 

http://www.techni-contact.com/produits/1730-16191202-ethylotest.html#product-desc

 

Whereas this (USA) product is said to have an unlimited shelf life:

 

http://www.breathalyzeralcoholtester.com/breathscan-disposable-breathalyzer-31.html

 

(Just one more thing that will need to be addressed in the fine detail of the forthcoming French ethylotest regulations.)

[RogerC]

When you look in depth at the rules and regulations 'strangling' freedom of movement if you abide by everything why does anyone bother going to France? It seems to me that there are so many rules and regs that even the most carefully researched traveller can still be caught out.

[Brian Kirby]

RogerC - 2012-01-16 12:09 PM

 

When you look in depth at the rules and regulations 'strangling' freedom of movement if you abide by everything why does anyone bother going to France? It seems to me that there are so many rules and regs that even the most carefully researched traveller can still be caught out.

Hopelessly egoistical of me I know, but I reckon if the French can cope, so can I. So OK, you stay here, and I'll go! :-)

 

All countries are different, and have different rules. One just has to recognise and understand the differences to avoid trouble. The rest of Europe drives on the right. Some, but not all, require (non-dazzling) lights during daylight. Most require a high viz vest to be worn if on the road. Speed limits are in KPH, not MPH. There are still instances of "priority on the right" in some towns. Many require a first aid kit to be carried. A spare vehicle lamp kit is advisable for France. Warning triangle to be carried (two for Spain). Bikes on racks require 600mm sq warning red on white diagonal stripe with corner reflectors sign. To this is now added a breath test kit for France. Most of the above are common sense, the rest vary as one crosses borders.

 

Why one goes, is for the benefits to be gained by visiting other countries. But, you don't have to! :-D

[Patricia]

ChrisB - 2012-01-06 9:24 AM

 

Patricia - 2012-01-06 12:09 AM

 

I have just updated my TomTom and both the French and Spanish fixed camera locations have disappeared.

 

On my new Garmin (and on the website downloads) the French "Safety Camera" POIs have been replaced by "Danger Zones". How these compare with the original speed camera POIs I have no way of knowing.

 

It looks as though TomTom may take a similar route:

http://uk.support.tomtom.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/5560/?locale=en_GB

"We are working on a new service for France that warns you about danger zones instead of speed cameras. To keep up-to-date with the latest news about this new service go to FAQ Is the TomTom Speed Camera service legal?, subscribe to this page by clicking the Notify me link at the end of the page. We'll send you a mail when more information is available."

 

First of all my apologies for my mistake as my fixed camera locations have patently not disappeared. They did on the update page and the ones already installed were working throughout the journey through France last weekend. I will certainly have to make sure that I delete them before the return journey as my Franch neighbours are insistent that the police are on the ball with this.

 

Yes, they are going to remove all signage about the cameras anywhere near them but will have danger zones marked. Apparently there are many more of these than cameras and the consensus is that if we have the danger zones installed they will drive us mad as they will bleep almost continuously.

 

Few of my neighbours have knowledge about the soon to be required alcohol testers but all considered it a stupid idea.

 

Another proposal is that firms will be obliged to switch off illuminated signs at night to save electricity which seems a sensible idea and I think that thieves will be particularly pleased. In addition the suggestion is to switch off motorway lights which to me seems a backward step.

[Rayjsj]

Brian Kirby - 2012-01-16 1:15 PM

 

RogerC - 2012-01-16 12:09 PM

 

When you look in depth at the rules and regulations 'strangling' freedom of movement if you abide by everything why does anyone bother going to France? It seems to me that there are so many rules and regs that even the most carefully researched traveller can still be caught out.

Hopelessly egoistical of me I know, but I reckon if the French can cope, so can I. So OK, you stay here, and I'll go! :-)

 

All countries are different, and have different rules. One just has to recognise and understand the differences to avoid trouble. The rest of Europe drives on the right. Some, but not all, require (non-dazzling) lights during daylight. Most require a high viz vest to be worn if on the road. Speed limits are in KPH, not MPH. There are still instances of "priority on the right" in some towns. Many require a first aid kit to be carried. A spare vehicle lamp kit is advisable for France. Warning triangle to be carried (two for Spain). Bikes on racks require 600mm sq warning red on white diagonal stripe with corner reflectors sign. To this is now added a breath test kit for France. Most of the above are common sense, the rest vary as one crosses borders.

 

Why one goes, is for the benefits to be gained by visiting other countries. But, you don't have to! :-D

 

This year I WAS thinking of Touring France/Portugal/Spain, mainly to follow 'the Wellington trail' from Portugal through Mid Spain (Talevera, Cuidad Rodrigueo,Badajoz etc.,) and into France over the Pyrenees. But, all of the 'Updates' on 'new' Mad laws, in France, unmanned Toll Roads in Portugal, Spanish 'Bandits', and different 'Umwelt' zones requiring registering here and there, I thought 'Sod it'. too much hassle. So, I am going Back to the Hebrides, and hoping for better weather than last year, I don't need a passport, neither does the dog, they speak english(or Gaelic) there are NO speed cameras, and you would be very,very unlucky to even see a policeman let alone get 'hassled' by one.

And they 'Welcome' (Failt) Tourists, rather than try to 'Fine' them. ;-) Ray

[RogerC]

Brian Kirby - 2012-01-16 1:15 PM

 

RogerC - 2012-01-16 12:09 PM

 

When you look in depth at the rules and regulations 'strangling' freedom of movement if you abide by everything why does anyone bother going to France? It seems to me that there are so many rules and regs that even the most carefully researched traveller can still be caught out.

Hopelessly egoistical of me I know, but I reckon if the French can cope, so can I. So OK, you stay here, and I'll go! :-)

 

All countries are different, and have different rules. One just has to recognise and understand the differences to avoid trouble. The rest of Europe drives on the right. Some, but not all, require (non-dazzling) lights during daylight. Most require a high viz vest to be worn if on the road. Speed limits are in KPH, not MPH. There are still instances of "priority on the right" in some towns. Many require a first aid kit to be carried. A spare vehicle lamp kit is advisable for France. Warning triangle to be carried (two for Spain). Bikes on racks require 600mm sq warning red on white diagonal stripe with corner reflectors sign. To this is now added a breath test kit for France. Most of the above are common sense, the rest vary as one crosses borders.

 

Why one goes, is for the benefits to be gained by visiting other countries. But, you don't have to! :-D

 

I appreciate your comments Brian (though I'm not so thick that I don't know about driving on the 'wrong' side of the road and kph etc) but why oh why does it take so much 'hoop jumping' to go and visit these places? France requires this, Spain requires that, Germany requires the other, you can't tow a car in Spain etc etc....LEZ's popping up all over the place which will catch the unaware..... It seems there are so many 'gotcha' laws etc that unless you are prepared to spend a lot of time and money getting prepared you stand a very big chance of being 'nabbed' and fined big time. Even then it seems there is still a high probability of missing something and getting 'pulled' regardless of how carefully you plan......so I for one will be seeing a lot more of our lovely land instead.

[Brian Kirby]

RogerC - 2012-01-24 2:05 PM........................I appreciate your comments Brian (though I'm not so thick that I don't know about driving on the 'wrong' side of the road and kph etc) but why oh why does it take so much 'hoop jumping' to go and visit these places? France requires this, Spain requires that, Germany requires the other, you can't tow a car in Spain etc etc....LEZ's popping up all over the place which will catch the unaware..... It seems there are so many 'gotcha' laws etc that unless you are prepared to spend a lot of time and money getting prepared you stand a very big chance of being 'nabbed' and fined big time. Even then it seems there is still a high probability of missing something and getting 'pulled' regardless of how carefully you plan......so I for one will be seeing a lot more of our lovely land instead.

No implication of mental incapacity was intended Roger, so I hope it didn't come across that way! It was a bit tongue-in-cheek, but only insofar as it is, on the whole, IMO, much simpler now than it used to be pre EEC. The yellow headlamp converters for France have gone, for a start. Most of the other things only need to be complied with once, and we have not yet reached the point at which things required by one country have to be removed to enter another. The only tricky issue seems to me at present to be the LEZs, and one only needs to tackle these country by country: so tedious, but manageable, if one wants to go. Out van is street legal pretty much across Europe as it stands, saving only LEZ clearances for bits of Italy - we've had our German green sticker for two years. I carry two warning triangles to keep the Spanish happy. I have spare lamps for lights. If DRLs are required, one drives on dipped beam. So, just a bit to do to check before one departs, but not really, IMO, that onerous, and still well worth the effort for the experiences.

[RogerC]

No offence taken Brian. I think for the time being though we will be seeing more of our Sceptred Isle. Having spent most of the last 30+ years globe-trotting there's an awful lot of these Islands I still have not seen to bother too much about foreign climes and all that that entails.

[Guest JudgeMental]

You dont need to fabricate nonsensical excuses in your own mind for not going abroad...just do what you want for goodness sake

 

We have LEZ zones here, and they are spreading to other city's and rightly so as well..... The speeding issue...does it really apply to motorhomers? I think not. Most motorhomers prefer the non toll route option anyway.

 

I live in England very happily, but have no wish to holiday here for more then an occasional weekend, if we have the time its away south for some decent weather! 8-)

[RogerC]

JudgeMental - 2012-01-24 3:06 PM

 

You dont need to fabricate nonsensical excuses in your own mind for not going abroad...just do what you want for goodness sake

 

We have LEZ zones here, and they are spreading to other city's and rightly so as well..... The speeding issue...does it really apply to motorhomers? I think not. Most motorhomers prefer the non toll route option anyway.

 

I live in England very happily, but have no wish to holiday here for more then an occasional weekend, if we have the time its away south for some decent weather! 8-)

 

Judge....who is fabricating nonsense?

 

Regarding your other points:

 

LEZ as you so rightly state are spreading. I don't agree with your comment 'rightly so' given that there are many motorhome owners in London now faced with either a bill for £thousands to make their 'road legal' vehicles LEZ compliant or facing paying £hundreds/thousands in non compliance fees or ultimately selling their vehicle if the previous two options are not financially viable.

IMO there should be an exemption for those motorhomes/vehicles already in legal ownership within these areas and only make the imposition of the LEZ rules applicable to vehicles going into new ownership as of a predetermined date.

Also with the spread of LEZ there is a growing possibility of those unenlightened motorhome owners facing fines through inadvertently entering said zones.

 

Speed and speed cameras should be of concern to all road users. It is all too easy to exceed (unwittingly) a speed limit (particularly in built up areas) where the roads are busy and you need your eyes on the road and not focused on the speedo. You can't be looking in two places at once ergo (IMO) speed camera warnings on Satnavs are an excellent safety aid especially to those unfamiliar with their surroundings. However if as is suspected in some quarters of society the cameras are there simply to generate revenue by catching the unwary then warning of said cameras will hit revenue and must be banned.

 

I fully agree on the non toll route option unless your destination is paramount and making progress is more important than tolls or sight seeing on route. In which case it's a price to be paid for getting to your destination that much faster.

[nowtelse2do]

Can anyone tell me and justify the extortionist cost of traveling on French motorways. Most of them have been built with EU subsidies, which means we (UK) have already shared in the cost's of these roads. I don't mind the other EU countries methods of charging (Austria apart over 3.5 tonne) but I regard the French system as sheer theft.

 

Dave

[Derek Uzzell]

Is that the case?

 

My understanding was that the building of French toll-autoroutes (like French toll-bridges) was financed by private companies who then collected toll-revenues for a fixed period (say 20 years) after which the autoroute/bridge passed into state ownership when tolls would be removed.

 

We once had lunch with an enginner working on a new autoroute and that's what he told us. And it's certainly true that some bridges that were 'tolled' no longer are.

[Dave225]

Sounds like the argument used for the Forth Road Bridge. Built in 1964 tolls were 'justified' to pay the costs. However when these were completed 25 years later the tolls remained 'to pay for maintenance'. A lot of 'maintenance' involved building new extensive barriers to collect the tolls and pay management of same. Finally the excuse was 'to pay for a 2nd crossing'. Basically it was a tax raising activity.

 

It took the SNP Government to come to power and remove all tolls in Scotland, possibly one of their better actions.

[Brian Kirby]

Derek Uzzell - 2012-01-24 7:06 PM

 

Is that the case?

 

My understanding was that the building of French toll-autoroutes (like French toll-bridges) was financed by private companies who then collected toll-revenues for a fixed period (say 20 years) after which the autoroute/bridge passed into state ownership when tolls would be removed.

 

We once had lunch with an enginner working on a new autoroute and that's what he told us. And it's certainly true that some bridges that were 'tolled' no longer are.

As a generalisation, I believe this is correct - though I wouldn't be surprised if some of the non-toll stretches, built to benefit economically disadvantaged areas, might have had Eurogrants. However, that apart, the main reason the toll autoroutes are so relatively costly must surely be that there is no road tax of any sort in France, meaning that, if I have correctly understood what was done, the full cost of finance, construction, and maintenance, falls on the operating companies, and so, with additions for profit, on the tolls. They are expensive, but they are generally well constructed and very well maintained and planted. Despite all that they are interminably boring, whether toll or not, so I avoid all of them as much as possible! In a motorhome, the advantage in time over the ordinary two lane roads is not that great, so unless by-passing larger towns or pushed for time, we mainly use the far pleasanter, emptier, and not that much slower, D roads. :-)

[Derek Uzzell]

The cost of French autoroute tolls, or how autoroutes are funded, or the pros and cons of autoroute usage by motorcaravanners, have, of course, no direct relevance to this thread, But the funding of the Millau Viaduct project may be of interest:

 

"Costs and Resources

The bridge's construction cost up to €394 million, with a toll plaza 6 km north of the viaduct costing an additional €20 million. The builders, Eiffage, financed the construction in return for a concession to collect the tolls for 75 years, until 2080. However, if the concession is very profitable, the French government can assume control of the bridge in 2044." (Source Wikipedia)

 

Whether or not auroroute tolls are extortionate, and however construction-funding has been obtained, it's peculiar logic to suggest that this should much concern UK motorcaravanners who might wish to travel on those toll-roads. Most vehicles using autoroutes will be French and, if anyone should be grieved by 'rip off' toll-charges, it should be those French motorists, not Brits holidaying in motorhomes who have no compulsion to travel on autoroutes.

 

Linking French autoroute tolls to EU funding and then to UK motorists is non-sense (note the hyphen). It's like suggesting that, as many people enjoy drinking alchohol and alchohol is a poison, many people must enjoy drinking poison - it just does not compute.

[spospe]

Dave225 - 2012-01-24 7:19 PM

 

It took the SNP Government to come to power and remove all tolls in Scotland, possibly one of their better actions.

 

Where is the money coming from for maintenance and upgrade then?