Falsified road survey results

[quintain]

In England if a housing developer is required by the local highways authority to carry out a road traffic speed survey on a 30mph road over a 7 day period to determine the speed of vehicles using the road.
If the survey results ultimately were to show an average speed of 37mph or less a 60m safety site line is required, however; if the results show that the average speed is 38mph or higher a 120m safety site line is required.
If a presently unknown person during the survey placed false signs i.e. "slow down-tree felling in progress" at the survey point when no tree felling is scheduled or occurs.
The survey is subsequently submitted by the developer to the highway’s authority showing an average speed of 37mph, the highways authority acknowledges that the ‘slow down etc signs’ affected the results but still accepts 60m safety site lines. N.B. the development could not be built if 120m site lines were required.

If it could be proven the developer was either aware or even involved in the survey probable manipulation could he be considered as acting fraudulently within the Fraud Act 2006.

[islandgirl]

Well the developer is involved as he is paying for the survey. Can you prove that the sign was put there by the developer or someone connected to them. This whole type of issue is so frustrating. Locally a survey was carried out of traffic volume and accepted though it bore no resemblance to the volume seen in "real life"

[des8]

I think you will find that the local authority sets its own parameters for deciding on the sight lines required for individual cases.
This is generally done with reference to Design Bulletin 32 and the guide Places, Streets and Movements, but these are only guides
The LA here have taken into account the "slow" sign and have decided a 60m sightline is adequate, and regretfully (going by past experience) you won't change that decision.

And (as an aside) why are sightlines given in metres, when all UK road measurements should be imperial?

[quintain]

ISLANDGIRL...Thank you for your response.
I do not know the persons who placed the signs.
A neighbour stated he recognised the person who placed the signs.
I am trying to persuade my Local Authority Legal department to pursue these possibly manipulated submitted survey results, however the LA legal dept have no wish to do so.
The LA appear to accept that officially submitted and undoubtedly manipulated results can be used in determining road safety matters.
Dependent on this conversation I am hopeful I can approach my LA again and require them to request that Police investigate an offence against the Fraud 2006 Act.

[quintain]

I think you will find that the local authority sets its own parameters for deciding on the sight lines required for individual cases.
This is generally done with reference to Design Bulletin 32 and the guide Places, Streets and Movements, but these are only guides
The LA here have taken into account the "slow" sign and have decided a 60m sightline is adequate, and regretfully (going by past experience) you won't change that decision.

And (as an aside) why are sightlines given in metres, when all UK road measurements should be imperial?

Hi DES8
Thank you, I am starting to understand your words [ (going by past experience) you won't change that decision.] However; in this case the LA & Highways Auth required another applicant that 120m site lines were required for an entrance opposite this one. The 60m site lines are on the inner section of a bend giving limited visibility, indeed a maximum of 60m only is possible, whereas the 120m requirement was on the outer section giving greater vision of the same bend.