|
|
Post by chipbutty on Apr 22, 2017 11:02:00 GMT
Given all the current noise on all the various news and social internet platforms, all I can see if fake news and bullshit driven misunderstanding. However - I'm going to test my logic and see if I am right. The way the new bands for fines have been announced in the press suggests that: 1) Fines will be applied for being 1 mph over the speed limit 2) All fines will now be based on income escalators up to a pre-determined ceiling. As a result - it is reported that doing 31 mph in a 30 will equal a fine of 50% of your weekly wage (up to the maximum). But - this cannot be correct and I believe the fines only apply if you receive a court judgement - and you only get one of those if you have hugely exceeded the limit and/or are contesting the NIP in the first instance. I think the following rules still apply :  So - if you take motorway speeding as the example : < 86 mph = speed awareness (if available) < 95 mph = FPN - 3 points and £100 fine > 95 mph = Court summons - where they will apply the new bandings to determine your fine. What is being reported is that from April 24th - if you get tagged doing 71 mph - you will be fined 50% of your weekly pay (which I believe to be wrong). Thoughts ? |
|
|
|
Post by chipbutty on Apr 22, 2017 12:12:53 GMT
and the first post under that article says it's incorrect.
The EVO article talks about the courts making the decision - but that would mean every single NIP ends up in court - which would swamp the courts.
There must be limits before court proceedings which are handled via speed awareness or a standard fixed penalty notice. Even if the FPN had a percentage of weekly earnings based fine, who is going to be collecting that information, validating it and then calculating every individual fine?, because that's a lot of extra work that would need to be resourced
|
|
|
|
Post by LandieMark on Apr 22, 2017 12:36:15 GMT
The new rules only apply if it goes to court. There is a massive thread on PH Speed, Plod and the Law Forum.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 22, 2017 16:09:32 GMT
!
|
|
|
|
Post by PG on Apr 22, 2017 20:23:43 GMT
I agree. As I see it, band A can still result in a speed awareness course. Bands B an C = trouble..... |
|
|
|
Post by chipbutty on Apr 22, 2017 20:31:09 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Roadsterstu on Apr 23, 2017 9:38:35 GMT
I will see what the road safety unit at work can tell me.
|
|
|
|
Post by PG on Apr 23, 2017 9:44:11 GMT
The while thing about income related fines annoys me. Because as usual, whilst I am sure that morally people may see it as "fair" - earn more, get fined more, it never works like that? The low lifes pay little or nothing as they never pay, for the the uber-rich it is capped. Step forward the usual cash cow again - the middle classes.  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 23, 2017 12:52:13 GMT
I agree with that. The flip side, though, is that a one-size-fits-all fine is far less of a deterrent for (say) a footballer than Joe Soap. Jail time hurts all equally, but fines don't. If you are looking to change behaviour...
|
|
|
|
Post by Stuntman on Apr 23, 2017 16:34:01 GMT
I agree with that. The flip side, though, is that a one-size-fits-all fine is far less of a deterrent for (say) a footballer than Joe Soap. Jail time hurts all equally, but fines don't. If you are looking to change behaviour... I disagree entirely. In fact, if we're going down the route of having different monetary fines for the same offence depending on your income (what about assets, by the by?), we should also have different jail terms for the same offence depending on your employment status and perhaps the amount of income tax you pay. Jail time doesn't hurt a habitual criminal, or indeed someone whose housing costs are paid fully or partly by the state in the same way as it would an employed person who gets no help from the state. I don't think there would be much, if any, public appetite for a difference in approach to jail time, so I don't see why the fines should be means tested with such a large range of outcomes in absolute terms. I understand the point about fines as a percentage of income being more of a deterrent if you have more income but I don't agree out of sheer principle. It is unfair. The cost of things (both good and bad things) in life is generally independent of your income or assets. People say "if you can't do the time, don't do the crime". Why not "if you can't pay the fine..."?  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 24, 2017 7:53:20 GMT
I'd already said that I agreed with PG, but some valid points.
The taxation system is geared to deal with all, those who are asset-rich as well as income-rich, so a fine system would have to address that too. Starting to feel as though it would be unworkably complex. And I was thinking in narrow terms about jail time affecting all - limiting what I thought to the working population. But yes, habitual crooks and the retired would not suffer in the same way.
But whilst I agree in principle that it is wrong, I don't see how else you might increase deterrence for those for whom a £100 fine is small change. Any ideas?
|
|
|
|
Post by Roadsterstu on Apr 24, 2017 8:28:06 GMT
I can't see how it can be any different, really, but I do fully agree with PG's view. At either end of the scale there will be those for whom this matters not a jot.
Ultimately, from what I have read, only if you are wildly over the limit will the fines go above the previous 3 points/100 quid combo deal.
Plenty clearly do, though - 2 streets on my patch have recently had monitoring equipment in place, each for 2 weeks. Bith are 30mph residential streets. Highest on one was 56, on the other 71. And the vast bulk are in the 40-45 range. Frustratingly, can we get the camera van there? Can we fuck. "Not suitable" they say. Yet last week I passed it on a 40mph dual carriageway with few houses at 8pm....
|
|
|
|
Post by Bob Sacamano v2.0 on Apr 24, 2017 8:47:17 GMT
I can't see how it can be any different, really, but I do fully agree with PG's view. At either end of the scale there will be those for whom this matters not a jot. Ultimately, from what I have read, only if you are wildly over the limit will the fines go above the previous 3 points/100 quid combo deal. Plenty clearly do, though - 2 streets on my patch have recently had monitoring equipment in place, each for 2 weeks. Bith are 30mph residential streets. Highest on one was 56, on the other 71. And the vast bulk are in the 40-45 range. Frustratingly, can we get the camera van there? Can we fuck. "Not suitable" they say. Yet last week I passed it on a 40mph dual carriageway with few houses at 8pm.... They will make far more money catching people going over the limit in a 40mph dual carriageway where most people will expect it to be a 50mph limit at least. Catching the odd idiot doing well over the limit in a 30mph, while correctly targeting those who are a danger on the roads, would bring in less money. Plus 8pm is overtime... As always, if in doubt, follow the money. |
|
|
|
Post by johnc on Apr 24, 2017 9:25:41 GMT
Does anyone else find all this rigid rule making depressing.
British rule of law has always been based on reasonableness and having strict "1mph over the limit and your a gonner" is not the British way.
I agree with PG too in that the middle class will just get another kicking and tales of Policemen being human and reasonable will be something you tell to grandchildren about the good old days. I think I have told this before but a friend of mine used to have an Intergra Type R. He was followed at "reasonable" speed on a dual carriageway by a Traffic Volvo T5 and was eventually pulled over. The Policeman praised my friend on his good lane discipline but suggested that he was perhaps going a bit fast. He then said that he couldn't keep up going through a sequence of bends at which point my friend perhaps made a mistake by saying "but you're driving a Volvo". A short conversation later my friend got a ticking off, 3 points and a modest fine but if truth be told it could have been much worse. The human element resulted in a reasonable outcome whereas looking things up on a table will never take all the factors in to account.
Having driven on the M25 last week with all the gantries with cameras and variable speed limits which change (one changed from 60 to 50 literally as I passed under it) almost continually, I can see a lot of people getting caught and feeling hard done to. Someone's salary is not an indication of the amount of spare cash they have and penalties calculated this way could cause considerably more hardship for someone earning £100K than the fine levied on someone earning £25K, just because of individual circumstances.
Does anyone in the M25 area have any idea why there are always one or two cars which pass everyone at 80+ whilst everyone else is crawling along at the indicated 50mph limit. Do they think they have a cloak of invisibility? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 24, 2017 9:34:07 GMT
Does anyone in the M25 area have any idea why there are always one or two cars which pass everyone at 80+ whilst everyone else is crawling along at the indicated 50mph limit. Do they think they have a cloak of invisibility?
I think the same thing when traversing the 'Gantryland' stretch of the M1.
|
|
|
|
Post by Roadsterstu on Apr 24, 2017 9:45:18 GMT
I can't see how it can be any different, really, but I do fully agree with PG's view. At either end of the scale there will be those for whom this matters not a jot. Ultimately, from what I have read, only if you are wildly over the limit will the fines go above the previous 3 points/100 quid combo deal. Plenty clearly do, though - 2 streets on my patch have recently had monitoring equipment in place, each for 2 weeks. Bith are 30mph residential streets. Highest on one was 56, on the other 71. And the vast bulk are in the 40-45 range. Frustratingly, can we get the camera van there? Can we fuck. "Not suitable" they say. Yet last week I passed it on a 40mph dual carriageway with few houses at 8pm.... They will make far more money catching people going over the limit in a 40mph dual carriageway where most people will expect it to be a 50mph limit at least. Catching the odd idiot doing well over the limit in a 30mph, while correctly targeting those who are a danger on the roads, would bring in less money. Plus 8pm is overtime... As always, if in doubt, follow the money. Yes, true, sadly. It was particularly cringeworthy driving past that van in a marked police car. Genuinely embarrassing. |
|
|
|
Post by Roadsterstu on Apr 24, 2017 9:51:59 GMT
Does anyone else find all this rigid rule making depressing.
British rule of law has always been based on reasonableness and having strict "1mph over the limit and your a gonner" is not the British way.
I agree with PG too in that the middle class will just get another kicking and tales of Policemen being human and reasonable will be something you tell to grandchildren about the good old days. I think I have told this before but a friend of mine used to have an Intergra Type R. He was followed at "reasonable" speed on a dual carriageway by a Traffic Volvo T5 and was eventually pulled over. The Policeman praised my friend on his good lane discipline but suggested that he was perhaps going a bit fast. He then said that he couldn't keep up going through a sequence of bends at which point my friend perhaps made a mistake by saying "but you're driving a Volvo". A short conversation later my friend got a ticking off, 3 points and a modest fine but if truth be told it could have been much worse. The human element resulted in a reasonable outcome whereas looking things up on a table will never take all the factors in to account.
Having driven on the M25 last week with all the gantries with cameras and variable speed limits which change (one changed from 60 to 50 literally as I passed under it) almost continually, I can see a lot of people getting caught and feeling hard done to. Someone's salary is not an indication of the amount of spare cash they have and penalties calculated this way could cause considerably more hardship for someone earning £100K than the fine levied on someone earning £25K, just because of individual circumstances.
Does anyone in the M25 area have any idea why there are always one or two cars which pass everyone at 80+ whilst everyone else is crawling along at the indicated 50mph limit. Do they think they have a cloak of invisibility? There absolutely will not be a "1mph over the limit and you're a gonner" approach. Firstly, there needs to be a margin of error and secondly it would overburden the system. The same margins are still likely to apply. As for those drivers rattling through the average speed camera sections they either don't understand the term "average speed" or the car is registered to someone else. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 24, 2017 10:12:47 GMT
I think the same thing when traversing the 'Gantryland' stretch of the M1.
From what I understand, not all the gantries have camera's on them - this is certainly true of the M25. I've done a quick-brake on the M1 before as the limit on the gantry dropped from 60mph to 50mph just on arriving at it, I mentioned this on the old forum and was advised, undoubtedly correctly, there is a time delay before he new limit is enforced; however, my argument with anyone who rear-ended me that I was obeying the prevailing limit; from memory I was in lane 3 and immediately became a mobile road-block - it didn't really feel very clever or indeed 'smart'.
You can clearly see which ones are camera-d up, but people do seem to ignore them too.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bob Sacamano v2.0 on Apr 24, 2017 10:45:39 GMT
I have my first speed awareness course on Wednesday morning. If I cease to post after that it's probably because I'm locked up. It's an early start as well so I'm really going to have to hammer it to get there on time.
|
|
|
|
Post by racingteatray on Apr 24, 2017 11:06:26 GMT
From what I understand, not all the gantries have camera's on them - this is certainly true of the M25. I've done a quick-brake on the M1 before as the limit on the gantry dropped from 60mph to 50mph just on arriving at it, I mentioned this on the old forum and was advised, undoubtedly correctly, there is a time delay before he new limit is enforced; however, my argument with anyone who rear-ended me that I was obeying the prevailing limit; from memory I was in lane 3 and immediately became a mobile road-block - it didn't really feel very clever or indeed 'smart'.
You can clearly see which ones are camera-d up, but people do seem to ignore them too.
Yes, indeed. I tend only to slow down for the relevant gantries but still temper my speed a bit all the same whilst in the relevant sections. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 24, 2017 11:20:36 GMT
I tend to stick cruise at 70 and let it be, but it's only then you see how variable people's speeds are. I do briefly accelerate past those who you gradually gain on, but who then seem to speed up when you are overtaking. I also see plenty who take no account of gradient, so fall from their previous 70 to the low 60s when a hill appears. I know it's of little real consequence, but does necessitate an overtake from those of us not radar-guided.
|
|
|
|
Post by Roadsterstu on Apr 24, 2017 19:51:44 GMT
I have my first speed awareness course on Wednesday morning. If I cease to post after that it's probably because I'm locked up. It's an early start as well so I'm really going to have to hammer it to get there on time. I can't wait for the review! |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 24, 2017 20:28:46 GMT
It all seems a bit pathetic, they are obviously looking to increase revenue from speeding generally. If it is true that going over the posted limit by 1mph I cannot see any hope for logic in law making at all.
|
|
|
|
Post by Roadsterstu on Apr 24, 2017 20:44:34 GMT
It all seems a bit pathetic, they are obviously looking to increase revenue from speeding generally. If it is true that going over the posted limit by 1mph I cannot see any hope for logic in law making at all. It's not true. Nobody but nobody will ever be convicted for doing 1mph over the speed limit. Is 31mph in excess of the 30mph speed limit? Yes. Will anyone be convicted, summonsed to court or even pulled over for going 31mph? No. |
|
|
|
Post by Stuntman on Apr 24, 2017 20:46:40 GMT
I'd already said that I agreed with PG, but some valid points. The taxation system is geared to deal with all, those who are asset-rich as well as income-rich, so a fine system would have to address that too. Starting to feel as though it would be unworkably complex. And I was thinking in narrow terms about jail time affecting all - limiting what I thought to the working population. But yes, habitual crooks and the retired would not suffer in the same way. But whilst I agree in principle that it is wrong, I don't see how else you might increase deterrence for those for whom a £100 fine is small change. Any ideas?I think the deterrence should remain what it always has been - which is disqualification under the totting-up procedure. The fine should be an absolute amount dependent on the severity of the transgression but entirely independent of income. I don't see what's wrong or unfair about that. |
|
|
|
Post by Roadsterstu on Apr 24, 2017 21:04:53 GMT
But then, the points system is currently a farce anyway. There's that many people with way in excess of 12 points who are still able to drive.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 25, 2017 8:04:10 GMT
That's my point. If twelve means twelve, then fair enough. But if you 'need your car to be able to work', it'll boil down to fines anyway.
A strict adherence to the 12 point figure would be a start. If you don't moderate behaviour after 3, 6 or even 9 points, on your own head be it.
(Like I say, I don't agree with earnings-related fines, but the present system doesn't really work.) |
|
|
|
Post by Alex on Apr 25, 2017 20:44:16 GMT
It all seems a bit pathetic, they are obviously looking to increase revenue from speeding generally. If it is true that going over the posted limit by 1mph I cannot see any hope for logic in law making at all. It's not true. Nobody but nobody will ever be convicted for doing 1mph over the speed limit. Is 31mph in excess of the 30mph speed limit? Yes. Will anyone be convicted, summonsed to court or even pulled over for going 31mph? No. What about 67 in a 60? I was keeping to 60ish earlier but pulled out and sped up slightly to pass an old Range Rover doing 55. I then spotted the camera van. I'd already been overtake. By numerous other cars doing 70+ and a few doing 70++ who I'm sure will be getting an unwelcome letter in due course but I'm somewhat concerned I will too despite driving safely. The smart sections of the M1 wind me up no end. Mainly because I've been on a perfectly free flowing stretch when suddenly the limit changes to 50mph because of an 'incident' at which point slowing down from a cruise of 75 to 50 just feels downright dangerous as most other drivers don't. So by obeying the camera controlled limit you become a hazard yourself for a mile or two before the limit changes back to 70 with the so called incident no where to be seen!! |
|
|
|
Post by Roadsterstu on Apr 26, 2017 14:10:19 GMT
I was making the point about being 1mph over the limit, not 7mph. Your answer is (probably) in the table the CB posted at the start of this thread.
|
|
|
|
Post by Alex on Apr 26, 2017 20:40:37 GMT
I was making the point about being 1mph over the limit, not 7mph. Your answer is (probably) in the table the CB posted at the start of this thread. I'm not expecting you to condone my behaviour so I apologise if it came across that way! I should think that an indicated 67 is closer to 64 so hopefully I've not been busted but I won't hold it against you if you think I deserve it |
|
