The DGT cameras that monitor the continuous line in Madrid have been fining illegally since 2025

Dvuelta, a firm dedicated to the defense of drivers, has won 392 administrative appeals against fines imposed by the General Directorate of Traffic (DGT) with the cameras that monitor the continuous line at the entrances to Madrid, since they came into operation in November 2025. In all of these cases, Traffic has decided to archive the procedure by admitting that the operation used does not comply with the provisions of the legislation. For Dvuelta, the system does not meet the guarantees required by the Law and should not continue fining anyone, at least until the irregularities with which it is operating are corrected.

Weeks ago, the case of a motorist who had won an appeal for a fine imposed in January 2025 was also known.

Where are they located

The cameras are installed at four points on the highways entering the capital, all in a descending direction (towards Madrid). Specifically, on the A-1, at kilometer point 15.9, in Alcobendas; on the A2, at km 11.8 in the area of ​​Barajas; on the A6, at km 20.2 in the municipality of Las Rozas and at km 16.9 of the A42, in Getafe.

The complaint notification always includes the same fact: "Failure to respect a continuous longitudinal mark, without justified cause. Infraction captured by a control camera." The penalty is 200 euros and to detect it, the DGT uses two cameras with license plate recognition. One is placed at the beginning of the lane protected with a solid line and another at the end.

The complaint arises from crossing both readings: if in the first photo the car appears outside the lane protected by the solid line and in the next one inside it, the system concludes that the vehicle has crossed the line. What it does not provide is the image of that moment, as it should happen. When the complaint rests on an image capture system, it is mandatory that there be photographic evidence in which, in this case, the vehicle can be seen stepping on the continuous longitudinal line.

No photo or notice of the control

Dvuelta has verified, file after file, that this photograph does not exist. Two license plate captures at different points do not prove where, when or why the maneuver occurred, nor if there was a cause to justify it, since there is a technical means (photography) that could prove the commission of the infraction, so the presumption of innocence prevails.

Furthermore, the files do not include the identification plate of the camera, as required by law. Citizens have the right to be informed of the installation of traffic video surveillance cameras, and video surveillance areas must be marked with signs warning of their presence.