Speeding Offences

[Butts]

My son has just received his penalty for driving at 41mph in a 30mph limit - £100 Fine and 3 Points on his Licence.

A number of years ago I was in receipt of 3 Points and a £60 Fine for a similar offence.

It strikes me this is a bit like being sent to Prison (the points) and getting a Fine simultaneously.

If it's not a revenue raising exercise should it not just be one or the other - not a double whammy ?

 

[Royston Vasey]

My son has just received his penalty for driving at 41mph in a 30mph limit - £100 Fine and 3 Points on his Licence.

A number of years ago I was in receipt of 3 Points and a £60 Fine for a similar offence.

It strikes me this is a bit like being sent to Prison (the points) and getting a Fine simultaneously.

If it's not a revenue raising exercise should it not just be one or the other - not a double whammy ?

Half expecting the typical "a fine can only be imposed by a court" responses

 

[NSEFAN]

My son has just received his penalty for driving at 41mph in a 30mph limit - £100 Fine and 3 Points on his Licence.

A number of years ago I was in receipt of 3 Points and a £60 Fine for a similar offence.

It strikes me this is a bit like being sent to Prison (the points) and getting a Fine simultaneously.

If it's not a revenue raising exercise should it not just be one or the other - not a double whammy ?

Surely the points would only be like prison if they caused him to lose his licence, i.e. his freedoms would be curtailed?

And as for raising revenue... welllll someone has to pay for the policing of the country.

 

[WSW]

My son has just received his penalty for driving at 41mph in a 30mph limit - £100 Fine and 3 Points on his Licence.

A number of years ago I was in receipt of 3 Points and a £60 Fine for a similar offence.

It strikes me this is a bit like being sent to Prison (the points) and getting a Fine simultaneously.

If it's not a revenue raising exercise should it not just be one or the other - not a double whammy ?

Just do the right thing - accept being caught out, accept the penalty and learn from the experience. Do it again, and if it was up to me, I'd take the keys away.

Steve

 

[Puffing Devil]

Before points and Fixed Penalties came along, all driving matters came to court. Appear too many times and you would face a ban. The process was haphazard and bans varied by court. Now we have the totting up procedure to track a driver's behaviour over time and impose a 6 month ban if driving standards are poor in that time.

Operating the scheme allows for cheaper and faster punishment for what is, afterall, breaking the law.

If you don't like the idea of a Fixed Penalty, by all means come to court and you can have a Fine + Costs + Points. The total financial penalty, and possibly the points, will most likely be a lot more in the court. That's the price of personal service

 

[ralphchadkirk]

Tough luck really. If you do the crime, do the time etc.

 

[Butts]

Tough luck really. If you do the crime, do the time etc.

Yes but why a Fine and Points - it's like a double punishment ?

 

[yorksrob]

Or perhaps the penalty is the fine plus the loss of points ?

If the loss of points were removed, should the fine be increased to compensate or visa versa ?

I'm not saying the punishment is correct, it's just the argument that because part of the punishment is applied in one way , it precludes another part being applied in another way that worries me.

 

[transmanche]

Yes but why a Fine and Points - it's like a double punishment ?

Not at all. Many crimes carry a fine and imprisonment as potential punishments; e.g. possession of a Class C drug: up to two years in prison or an unlimited fine - or both.

 

[yorkie]

Yes but why a Fine and Points - it's like a double punishment ?

How is that any different to, say, like railway ticketing matters, which can lead to a prosecution AND a fine?

Well, apart from the consequences being, in relative terms, very trivial!

Excessive speed is arguably more serious than a railway ticketing matter, so I propose prosecution in this case

 

[Temple Meads]

Excessive speed is arguably more serious than a railway ticketing matter, so I propose prosecution in this case

I would generally be inclined to agree with you, but what is worse: driving at 80mph on a quiet motorway in good weather, or travelling on a train without a ticket?

I personally lean towards the latter, coming to that conclusion because I find myself a hell of a lot more annoyed when I see someone on a train without a ticket than I do seeing someone marginally over the speed limit in 'suitable' conditions.

Just my 2 pence...

 

[fowler9]

My son has just received his penalty for driving at 41mph in a 30mph limit - £100 Fine and 3 Points on his Licence.

A number of years ago I was in receipt of 3 Points and a £60 Fine for a similar offence.

It strikes me this is a bit like being sent to Prison (the points) and getting a Fine simultaneously.

If it's not a revenue raising exercise should it not just be one or the other - not a double whammy ?

Send your son to prison for a bit and see if he thinks it is the same as a few points and a fine, he'll probably learn quickly how to use the speedometer. My dad has driven for 40 years and never had a point on his license, knowing him like I do it can't be that hard to avoid this tax on the motorist.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Yes but why a Fine and Points - it's like a double punishment ?

Blimey mate. They'll be giving vandals community service and making them pay fines next. If he can't stick to the speed limit perhaps he shouldn't be on the road. How would you feel about train drivers saying they just can't stick to the speed limit? Poor lamb.

 

[455driver]

My son has just received his penalty for driving at 41mph in a 30mph limit - £100 Fine and 3 Points on his Licence.

Seems reasonable to me!
What would the penalty have been if he had hit a child while doing 41 in a 30 zone?

A number of years ago I was in receipt of 3 Points and a £60 Fine for a similar offence.

That shows that speeding runs in the family!

Okay it shows the cost of inflation.

It strikes me this is a bit like being sent to Prison (the points) and getting a Fine simultaneously.

If you cant do the time, dont do the crime.

If it's not a revenue raising exercise should it not just be one or the other - not a double whammy ?

If it was a money making exercise he would have been offered a 'driver improvement' course for a rather higher fee.


Edit-
For all those saying it should just be a fine and no points, what is to stop rich people belting around everywhere?
The whole point of the current system was to make it fairer!

 

[Butts]

It should be points and no fine !!!

Driver improvement was off the menu as his speed was to far over the tolerance......

On second thoughts the higher the speed the more benefit in theory someone should gain from such a course

Still speaking as someone who exceeds the speed limit every day (almost) 1 ticket in over thirty years driving is not bad.

Is there anyone on here that claim they have never exceeded the speed limit?

 

[meridian2]

Yes but why a Fine and Points - it's like a double punishment ?

It IS a double punishment (drop the dumb Americanised grammar), and ralphchadkirk is absolutely right. 30 means 30.

 

[EM2]

Is there anyone on here that claim they have never exceeded the speed limit?

There probably isn't, but they're not complaining at being caught and having to pay (both literally and figuratively) for their offence.
If I knowingly break the speed limit, and are caught, it's no-one's fault but mine.
And if I'm caught, I know what the consequences are. This is why I use cruise control

 

[Butts]

It IS a double punishment (drop the dumb Americanised grammar), and ralphchadkirk is absolutely right. 30 means 30.

So you never break the speed limit ?

 

[richw]

Is there anyone on here that claim they have never exceeded the speed limit?

Never have in a 30 zone or built up areas but often in dual carriageways etc,

I got a speed awareness course for 72 in a 60. That is the only time I've been caught in just under 9 years of driving, and looking back I did some stupid speeds when I was 17/18/19, I had a Saab 9-5 turbo when I was 19, which was utter stupidity! since I had my daughter almost 4 years ago I have slowed down a lot, won't do more than 80 on motorways these days, which allowing for speedo differences probably isn't much more than 70.

 

[Puffing Devil]

As I said in my earlier post - it is NOT a double punishment. The points are not a punishment, they are a way of tracking your driving behaviour. Yes, your insurance may go up if you have points. It would still go up if you didn't have points as insurers would ask if you had any convictions, as they do now. If you have a speeding, or other driving conviction, you are a bigger risk.

The points are there to catch the habitual speeder or uninsured driver. This is what stops wealthy treating speeding fine as a tax. It also regularises the informal system that used to be in place before points - you would still get a ban with a number of recent convictions. You only need to worry about points if you regularly speed - if you do, you'll tot up and you'll get a ban. At least now you know how much speeding will push you over the edge.

As for fine and jail - it won't happen. It's either/or in 99.999% of cases, with the exception of compensation and the poorly considered "Victim Surcharges" added to all sentences, with the exception of jail time.

 

[RichmondCommu]

My son has just received his penalty for driving at 41mph in a 30mph limit - £100 Fine and 3 Points on his Licence.

A number of years ago I was in receipt of 3 Points and a £60 Fine for a similar offence.

It strikes me this is a bit like being sent to Prison (the points) and getting a Fine simultaneously.

If it's not a revenue raising exercise should it not just be one or the other - not a double whammy ?

Just out of interest was your son not invited to go on a driving awarenes course? I have to say that I have no sympathy for your son; speeding in a 30 mph zone has potentially lethal consequences, especially for pedestrians.

 

[meridian2]

So you never break the speed limit ?

Yes, but I've never moaned about it to the entire world.

 

[starrymarkb]

Should be more careful - I'm no angel though I have slowed down a lot in recent years but I've never been caught because I'm usually pretty strict at adhering to urban limits (plus with a typical speedo error a slight indicated overspeed will be under the limits)

Thing is 41mph on the Radar would probably be approaching an indicated 50mph on the speedo

Just put it down to experience.

 

[breadfan]

I would generally be inclined to agree with you, but what is worse: driving at 80mph on a quiet motorway in good weather, or travelling on a train without a ticket?

I personally lean towards the latter, coming to that conclusion because I find myself a hell of a lot more annoyed when I see someone on a train without a ticket than I do seeing someone marginally over the speed limit in 'suitable' conditions.

Just my 2 pence...

I would think driving at 80mph would be more dangerous. If the driver was to nod off or there was a mechanical failure on the vehicle the chances of regaining control and avoiding/reducing any injury or damage would be less the higher the speed. Travelling without a ticket does not put life in danger as much.

 

[455driver]

Is there anyone on here that claim they have never exceeded the speed limit?

I can state categorically that I have never exceeded any speed limit ever!


Jackanory jackanory!

Well except that one occasion when I did 145mph on the M62 in a Rover SD1 V8 ex Police car (VUA617X), oh and that one time I got pulled for doing 61 in a 50, oh and the time etc etc!

Edit-
I never speed in any sort of built up area, that I can state categorically (and truthfully)!
80 on a motorway at 0400 is rather different to doing 40 outside a school at kicking out time.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I would think driving at 80mph would be more dangerous.

A serious mechanical failure at any sort of speed can be dangerous whether its 70 or 80, if you are so concerned maybe you should either do no more than 20 or maintain your car properly!

As for nodding off, well if anyone is that tired they shouldnt be driving.

We can bring 1000 different reasons/excuses into subjects like this but lets try to stick to the likely scenarios and not the 1 in a million ones.

 

[fowler9]

The primary school by me did an experiment where they put up signs saying cameras were in action, it was amazing to see what 20mph actually looks like. It is an accident black spot as well. People come flying over the railway bridge at over 40 straight in to a crossroads and loads of parked up cars and kids crossing the road.

The most recent one I saw was a parent picking kids up from school reversed out of m road on to the main road (Illegal), not indicating (Illegal) and was hit by a Range Rover which was doing well over 20 (Illegal). The lady reversing on to the main road was already parked illegally before she started moving. Both cars had small children in them. The parents would have been screaming from the roof tops if anyone involved in public transport had put their kids at risk in such a way.

The illegal actions were not isolated incidents, they happen every day, just unfortunately on this occasion (And several others) they resulted in a crash.

Butts you admitted on the internet that you break the law most days of the week. So do a large proportion of motorists, they then complain that they are being targeted by the police. Which other crimes do you think we should go easy on? Perhaps I could post saying I shoplift most days but it doesn't hurt anyone.

 

[breadfan]

A serious mechanical failure at any sort of speed can be dangerous whether its 70 or 80, if you are so concerned maybe you should either do no more than 20 or maintain your car properly!

As for nodding off, well if anyone is that tired they shouldnt be driving.

We can bring 1000 different reasons/excuses into subjects like this but lets try to stick to the likely scenarios and not the 1 in a million ones.

I'm sorry if you have assumed I am overly concerned, I did want to imply I'm ranting. I was trying to point out one is considerably more dangerous than the other. I still think a problem such as a blow-out at 80 will be more dangerous and harder to regain some sort of control than one at 70.

As for nodding off, I totally agree one should not be driving if that tired. But people do (Great Heck for example).

The trouble with one-in-a-million chances is that they do happen. I think the population in the UK is over 60 million now, so there are plenty of those pesky one-in-a-million chances affecting many peoples lives. People play the National Lottery, people drive fast when tired.

 

[richw]

Just out of interest was your son not invited to go on a driving awarenes course? I have to say that I have no sympathy for your son; speeding in a 30 mph zone has potentially lethal consequences, especially for pedestrians.

His son was caught too fast, the limit for the awareness course is 10% plus 6 mph over the limit, e.g. 39 in a 30, 50 in a 40, 61 in a 50, 72 in a 60 and 83 in a 70

 

[Roverman]

I still think it is inconsistent.

A lad was caught on the A19 doing 140+ recently, yes he got a ban and some community service but his fine was just £85. At that speed he should have been fined around £500 or more.

The Courts assume an average weekly net income of £300 unless you can prove to them you don't earn that. This person owned their own pet food business but seemed to only end up with a tiny fine? It doesn't add up to me.

 

[DownSouth]

The Courts assume an average weekly net income of £300 unless you can prove to them you don't earn that. This person owned their own pet food business but seemed to only end up with a tiny fine? It doesn't add up to me.

I don't know a sinlge small business owner who manages to pay themselves that much personal income once all the overheads have been taken out and debts serviced.

 

[richw]

I don't know a sinlge small business owner who manages to pay themselves that much personal income once all the overheads have been taken out and debts serviced.

Most of them seem to be able to find ways of their living expenses being business related and then pay themselves just below the income tax threshold.