I got caught by a speed camera on the state road between Como and Lecco at the end of September, doing like 62 km/h in a 50 zone. The thing is, the speed limit sign was covered by tree branches and you couldn't see it well because of the rain. Can I appeal or do I have to pay the 173 euros?
The visibility of the sign is indeed an important element for challenging the fine, but you should know that it's not automatic to win the appeal just because of that. The law provides that the speed limit must be clearly posted, and if the sign was really covered by branches or made illegible by rain, you have a good chance of filing an appeal. However, the burden of proof falls on you: you'll need to prove that at that moment and in those conditions the sign wasn't visible. Photos of the location, witnesses, or even just a detailed account of how things were at the end of September could help.
The appeal must be filed within 60 days of receiving the fine notice, directed either to the prefect or to the justice of the peace (it depends on the amount and your province's local laws). It's worth getting help from a lawyer specializing in traffic law or at least consulting one to understand what the right course of action is in your specific case, because procedures vary. 173 euros isn't a small amount, and if you have serious reasons to contest it, it's worth trying instead of paying right away.
The weak point of your position is that 62 in a 50 is still a real violation, even if it's not serious. If the sign really wasn't visible, the appeal could result in the fine being cancelled, but it's not guaranteed: judges evaluate cases individually. If instead the sign was simply difficult to read but technically there, the appeal is riskier.
Your appeal will work if you can prove that the sign was actually illegible when you passed it. Just saying "rain and branches" isn't enough - you need to document everything: photos of the sign covered by thick branches (better if you take them right away, go back to the spot), witnesses if possible, and most importantly a technical expert report. This is the key point: an expert report (which costs around 300-500 euros) is what makes the difference in front of a judge. Without concrete evidence, the "I couldn't see it" defense doesn't hold up well.
What you should do is file an appeal within 60 days of the fine notification to the local police office or the prefect. In your appeal attach the photos, describe the weather conditions at the end of September and the state of the sign. If the mayor of the municipality didn't keep the signage in good condition, that's their problem, not yours, but you have to prove it.
Honestly, doing 62 in a 50 zone, you were caught red-handed. There's always a tolerance margin on these devices (like 5 km/h), but you're over it. Don't try to say you didn't see the speed limit to get yourself off the hook: the court only listens if you actually have proof that the sign was hidden, not just "hard to see." If you have the evidence, the appeal is worth it. Otherwise accept it and next time keep your foot lighter on the pedal.
I once got pulled over on the way back from a trip to Trentino because I couldn't see a speed limit sign clearly right after a curve with thick vegetation, and that's when I realized how tricky this whole thing is. In your specific situation it could have some merit, but not just because the sign was covered - like the others said, that's not automatic. What really matters is that you can prove it with concrete evidence, not just your account of it today.
The critical point is documenting the actual state of the sign when you passed the speed camera. If you go back to the area and photograph the sign still partially obscured by branches (or even just show the vegetation situation), that's evidence. Rain alone doesn't hold up much, because the judge will think "well if it was raining, maybe it was raining when you drove by, maybe it wasn't," but branches physically covering the signal - that's different. Get photos, maybe talk to someone local who can confirm the sign is chronically in that condition, and especially check if you have dash cam footage from that day - that would be worth its weight in gold.
For the appeal itself, you need to file it within 60 days of the fine being served, and if you haven't already you should get moving. Explicitly mention the poor visibility due to physical obstructions, then see how it goes. A lawyer who handles these local appeals could tell you in two minutes whether you actually have a shot at this.
The thing is, 62 in a 50 zone isn't that far over the limit, but it's still a violation. To actually contest the sign's visibility you need to prove it with something concrete, not just your version of events. Photos taken afterwards don't count for much because they could've been taken in different conditions. But here's something nobody mentions: check if that stretch had optical traffic calming (those white stripes on the road that slow you down visually). If the sign was covered AND there wasn't even that, that's a strong point for your appeal. Plus, verify whether that sign had been reported before as damaged or hidden to the municipality or province - sometimes those records exist.
For the actual appeal, document everything now: go back there if you can when the sun's out and when it's raining, photograph the sign from the same spot you saw it from in your car, ask the municipality for a visibility assessment without putting yourself in the middle (they're obligated to run certain checks). If you find witnesses who regularly drove that route, even better. And here's a practical tip: request a copy of the traffic camera photo from the violations office - if the photo of your license plate is blurry or unclear, that alone is grounds for dismissal on technical grounds.
But be realistic: if you were really doing 62 and not 50, going for a visibility appeal is uphill. It works better if you were clocked at like 51 or 52 and the sign really wasn't visible.
Technically you have a chance, but it's more complicated than you think. Illegible signage can be grounds for appeal, but you need to get to court with concrete evidence: photos of the sign covered by branches at that exact moment, witnesses, maybe even a technical assessment proving it was actually impossible to see it from that distance. If you go back there today and take a photo, that won't help much because conditions could be completely different from late September.
The advice is to file an administrative appeal with whatever you have, even if it's not much. Worst case scenario you pay anyway, but at least you try. If you decide to go to court instead, you need to be prepared to spend money on a possible technical consultation, and at that point it depends whether you think it's worth it for 173 euros.
Photos taken the same day or shortly after are crucial, but honestly the most important thing is that you go check if the sign is still in the same condition, because if they've cleaned it up and fixed it in the meantime, it becomes much harder to prove it was illegible when you drove past. Bring your smartphone and document everything you see, maybe even with the date showing.
Log into answer.
