Thank you for your column. Much needed. May I make a pertinent point about speed humps? It is not their height that is the problem, it is the ramp angle. The law covering their usage is quite vague as to the allowable rate of ascent and descent. To reach the 100mm target it uses a lead-in of 80cm then shock is much less than if a lead-in of 50cm is used. Both are lawful under the current regulations, as would be a lead-in of 100cm, with quite different stresses being imposed on our vehicles, I am currently having a go at Geoff Hoon over the bloody things, raising the fact that Section 58 of the Highways Act 1980 states that "The highway must not be dangerous to traffic.” A recent High Court case between a cyclist and Berkshire County Council ruled in favour of the cyclist, stating "That Local Councils have a duty to the public to ensure roads are correctly maintained in order to avoid accidents.” More work for lawyers, I think, with the traffic engineers licking their lips over the possibility of a much wider use to enforce the 20 mph zone envisaged by the money makers?