"Communications" with John Gray at the DfT

I have included the DfT on my complaint emails and have occasionally had responses from John Gray, Speed Policy, Road User Safety Division, Department for Transport. Naturally the few things he has said have been unprofessional, irrelevant, and totally disconnected from reality.

But in this last exchange, incredibly, he ends by saying he’s “not interested”!!!

Received from John Gray, 14th March:

"Please remove me from your circulation list. The matters you raise are for the relevant local authority."

My reply:

Dear Mr Gray,

I repeat yet again some questions directed to YOU that YOU have not responded to, relevant to this (sent on the 26th Jan):

Dear Mr Gray,

I was of course expecting you would just bounce it back to the local authorities. You seem to be saying that the only purpose for DfT is to provide a bit of guidance and it doesn't matter at all if it's all ignored. What on earth is the point in that? Who is responsible for seeing that what we actually end up with is right? What happens if the local authorities get it completely wrong and refuse to communicate or solve the problems? Why does the DfT not care about things going wrong in local authorities?

It is no surprise, with this level of disinterest and incompetence, that despite rocketing financial performance of "safety partnerships" road accidents are still much more frequent than they should be.

I'm sorry but your response is entirely inadequate. Please try to listen to the points being made and answer them properly, and explain who's responsibility it is to solve the problems I keep on informing you about, as I say, I and the public are fed up with all this nonsense and I WILL raise complaints wherever they are deserved.

As soon as this nonsense stops I will politely thank all involved and you won't hear from me again.

Received back from Mr Gray:

I am not interested. You have had numerous detailed responses from this Department over the past six-plus years. Please remove me from your circulation list.

My reply:

Dear Mr Gray,

Thanks for confirming your lack of interest in road safety, speed and safety enforcement methods, (although I was never in any doubt). You have communicated more than others who should have, but you've only really said 2 things:

- cameras are not used by local authorities to make money (although I have put plenty of evidence in front of you to show that they are, which you have ignored)

- cameras are for local authorities to decide on (which if entirely true, makes as much of a mockery of the DfT as you have).

You've refused to answer a great many direct questions, just like our local "authorities", and "safety" partnerships, presumably as it is not possible to answer them without confirming the nonsense we have now.

I remind you just last week I and my children were nearly hit outside a school by a white van that came round a corner at 45+ and I see events like this many times a week. While this continues, and I see no proper road policing, and vast numbers of safe drivers being put to serious cost and inconvenience due to enforcements designed to make money, and councils even now continuing with spending precious resources on speed cameras I will not hesitate in the slightest to continue my protest.

Thanks also for confirming that I should make a formal complaint about you and your astonishing admission that you don't even care about any of this, although it's a long way down my priority list so it might take a while for me to do.