Jump to content

Heads up for GPS in Switzerland


AnOther
 Share

Recommended Posts

Did anybody know that Sat Nav devices with camera location databses are BANNED in Switzerland and have been since Jan 10th 2007 [:-))]

I didn't and have driven through there at least 4 times since then with such a GPS.

With the popularity and proliferation of Sat Nav its difficult to see how they could hope to rigourously enforce it though. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="ErnieY"]

Did anybody know that Sat Nav devices with camera location databses are BANNED in Switzerland and have been since Jan 10th 2007 [:-))]

[/quote]

I suppose that if you have the cigarette packet type taped to the screen it could be removed easily enough but what do they do if your vehicle has a factory installed device ? Confiscate the bus and passengers ?

John

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="Sunday Driver"]No problem for all of us here because we all check the local driving rules before going to a foreign country - don't we?......[;-)]

[/quote]

Absolutely, doing my research is how I came upon this little snippet [;-)]

 

Good question John, and just being in possession is a tad draconian to don't you think.

It means if you have a Sat Nav so equipped, which is perfectly legal in most other European countries, you break the law the second you enter Switzerland even if its tucked away in the boot switched off which can't be right and fair especially as, for a great many drivers me included, Switzerland is just another country to be transited on the way to somewhere else.

This is something which demands an EU ruling don't you think ?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="Benjamin"]ps Could you also check on Hungary whilst you're at it?  [:D][/quote]I'm not on a crusade Benjamin [blink] [:)]

I've got a friend in Germany who's making some enquiries and I've asked him to research Austria as well if possible, but as for Hungary, pah [:P]

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="ErnieY"]

I'm not on a crusade Benjamin [blink] [:)]

 

[/quote]

Missed opportunity here Ernie.

You could become the forum guru on European GPS legislation.  [:D]

The trip I describe above is one that we are actually thinking about so the Germany/Austria situation is relevant so thanks in advance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As usual you provide the perfect solution SD [:)] but it fails to take into account human failings don't you think ?

I'm certain that the majority of people who use databases are more concerned with proactively protecting themselves from the consequences of what may amount to no more than a fleeting moments distraction than as a device to systematically flout the law without being detected.

When driving in what may be a new, foreign country with all it's unfamiliar surroundings and busy roads, (with local traffic often habitually exceeding limits), throw in a MPH speedo perhaps and stir in maybe a little tiredness and a fractious child or two etc. etc. etc. and it becomes ever more difficult even for the perfect driver to not accidentally stray over the limit [;-)]

And what of the countries which regularly publish the locations of both fixed and mobile camera installations. As that information is in the public domain it's a very fine distinction between say printing it to refer to on your journey (no reading at the wheel now!) or having a device do it for you.

I believe in UK the ACPO stance on the subject is a positive one is it not and supports the stated object of cameras being to reduce speed, not to catch speeders.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Valid point about human failings....

I suspect that if they were honest, the majority of people would admit to being content to bowl along without too much regard for the speed limit in the knowledge that their GPS will warn them of a radar so they can slow down to avoid being penalised.  Human nature, I reckon.

I think the 'fleeting moment' argument is a weak one, given that the allowances for speedo errors and the built in camera tolerances mean that anyone being flashed for exceeding a 90kph limit would be staring at a speedo which was reading around 100kph at the time.

New country, unfamiliar surroundings, busy roads, indistinct speedo, tiredness, fractious children -  does that not suggest that a lower speed would be a safer option?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="Sunday Driver"]

Valid point about human failings....

I think the 'fleeting moment' argument is a weak one, given that the allowances for speedo errors and the built in camera tolerances mean that anyone being flashed for exceeding a 90kph limit would be staring at a speedo which was reading around 100kph at the time.

N

[/quote]

Much to my shame I was flashed 2 weeks ago, by an unmarked car parked on the verge halfway down a hill. I saw the flash, looked at speed 96kph, (limit 90kph) thought that was ok [:)]. Then last week the papers arrived, clocked at 96kph reduced to 91kph,  45 euros and 1 point [:(]. Plus to add to my shame it was only 3kms from my house[:$]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sounds like rotten luck Paul. Unfortunately it doesn't seem uncommon to hear such accounts of what is effectively a zero tolerance policy.

It's enough to make you wish you had dodgy UK plates on your car instead of having done the right thing [:@]

 

Another perfect solution SD [;-)]

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it's pretty well known that all car speedos over read to certain degree, usually somewhere between 5 and 10%, it is not permissable for them to under read.

For instance, by comparing mine with my Sat Nav and also by means of timed and measured motorway runs (see, you can find things to keep your mind alert on those boring 600km runs from Calais [;-)]) I know my own speedo under reads by 7%.

Saying that he thought he was "OK" at 96 would suggest that Paul was aware of the over read factor and wasn't delibrately speeding. 

Taking the lower figure of 5% over read his indicated 96 represented a true speed of a gnats over 91kph and if that's not a zero tolerance policy I don't know what it.

We must of course, completely discounting the possibility that the speed trap was "accidentally" wrongly set, I'm sure that could never happen, but with no hard evidence to either confim or deny ones actual speed none of us have any defence against any alleged offence.

I would strongly suggest that Paul get his speedo checked out so he knows in future at what speed he is actually travelling.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

    I have just checked speedo against my TomTom gps    speedo  96 kph = gps 94 kph .......... just to muddy the water a little !! I'll try timed distance on motorway later. Its my second ticket in 25yrs but do the crime pay the fine !

I have been told there is a new unmarked car in the area  where it is very difficult to see the flash, and, it is left un-manned so is difficult for passing motorists to warn others. The preferred trap site at the moment is 100m or so inside the village limits, ie the 90 limit becomes 50 and the fine doubles 90 euros, this car must be worth its weight in gold, everyday, or is that cynical

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

{template="widgetContainer" group="global" app="core" params="'footer', 'horizontal'"https://www.frenchentree.com/}
×
×
  • Create New...