Finnish man fined £83,000 for speeding because he earns £10.1 million

Speeding would push you insurance up. On a more expensive car the insurance would be even more than the increase from speeding in a cheap one.
 
Uncapped? I don't think it's fair. I think the fines could be proportional to earnings within certain limits, but getting fined six figures for what could be a simple mistake/oversight just because you earn a lot is not particularly logical.
 
in the case of speeding fines, because lives are at stake, then yes I think the deterrent aspect is especially important and means testing to some extent is OK in theory

I wouldn't necessarily apply this to all fines though... a parking ticket on the other hand perhaps wouldn't be so fair to means test, at least not to such a high degree, as though they're not supposed to local authorities tend to use those fines for revenue generation
 
Ridiculous idea and sets a bad precedent, just a way to milk more money. Rich gets fined more if they are more successful in life.

There is a points system, accumulate too many point you get banned, simples.
 
if this cam in over here then it is worthwhile for someone to create a corrupt market for low paid people to take speeding fines on behalf of others for cash payments...

and there are plenty of Romanians to source the low paid people willing to take fines on behalf of the rich
 
It'd be better for govt to raise the minimum requirements of vehicle manufacturers brakes. Then up the speed limit. That guy was probably driving a car that could stop WAY quicker than an average car, so wasn't likely putting anyone in increased danger compared to an average car traveling within the speed limit.
 
A financial penalty should be a deterrent to everyone. A £60 fine to someone on minimum wage is painful, a £60 to a footballer is a joke.

I like the idea, if you're going to fine people make it a proper deterrent.
 
Minstadave said:
A financial penalty should be a deterrent to everyone. A £60 fine to someone on minimum wage is painful, a £60 to a footballer is a joke.

I like the idea, if you're going to fine people make it a proper deterrent.
Click to expand...

That's how I see it. £60 would be more than my weekly food budget, and would represent a significant loss to me. My aunt however, can spend £60 on a taxi without thinking about it. I know who drives more carefully, and parks with greater consideration to the regulations, simply because they can't afford the fine and who parks where they like because sometimes the £60 fine is worth the convenience...
 
An Exception said:
It'd be better for govt to raise the minimum requirements of vehicle manufacturers brakes. Then up the speed limit. That guy was probably driving a car that could stop WAY quicker than an average car, so wasn't likely putting anyone in increased danger compared to an average car traveling within the speed limit.
Click to expand...

Increased stopping distance is not the only thing that puts you and others at increased risk when driving fast.
 
Terrible idea, but no doubt popular with the jealousy driven on the forum who don't understand that the punishment should not vary based on irrelevant factors to the crime.
 
Dolph said:
Terrible idea, but no doubt popular with the jealousy driven on the forum who don't understand that the punishment should not vary based on irrelevant factors to the crime.
Click to expand...

Why? You say the punishment should not vary but it does with our fixed penalty system - it is punishment to some but not others. Means test it and it becomes an equal punishment to all.

I earn a decent wage, this system would punish me more than many others, yet I still think it's worthy of consideration.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom