Caporegime
- Joined
- 21 Jun 2006
- Posts
- 38,367
i imagine they would just lift it from your previous years P60 or an average of your last 3 monthly payslips, probably the latter
New speeding fines
- Thread starter Lakeland
- Start date
i imagine they would just lift it from your previous years P60 or an average of your last 3 monthly payslips, probably the latter
Well, the super rich probably still wipe their backsides with 50k, but it's quite a sum indeed
Soldato
- Joined
- 11 Sep 2013
- Posts
- 12,654
Which is immediately flawed by anyone who cooks their own books or simply doesn't pay income tax...
Caporegime
- Joined
- 21 Jun 2006
- Posts
- 38,367
there is nothing you can do about that though. they can only go on the information available.
you could make the fine a percentage of what the vehicle is worth? that seems fair to me, apart from van drivers obviously who don't really care about their van as it's a tool so will drive a shed.
there will be winners and losers in any scenario.
Soldato
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2012
- Posts
- 8,352
I think the means testing is to make people equally put off speeding.
Tbh i take the view that speed in and of itself isnt the problem, more going faster than the driver/cars ability and adding distractions/road hazards is the issue.
Ie lewis hamilton is much less likely to crash doing 150 on a motorway in a supercar than some 17 year old kid doing 45 round a wet corner on a country road in his ancient polo running cheap worn out tyres.
And yes i do realise the irony that lewis did crash his mclaren.....
They would use an average over say a four or eight week basis I guess, that's how other statutory things are calculated
Bingo. We all know that, but unfortunately many of the people setting the limits are either 97 and have never driven, or are middle class middle-aged cyclists who think cars are evil and that Brake! is the answer. If we really wanted to improve road casualty rates we'd be better removing limits and dumping enforcement, putting the onus back into the driver's hands. Effectively, decriminalise / legalise 'speeding' but emphasise careless/dangerous driving laws and factor in better education and re-education. The speed camera / speed kills machine is a failure, which even government statistics bear out. Before the 85th percentile method of determining a road's speed limit was dropped, road casualties and fatalities dropped year on year for fifty whole years. After the speed kills lot came to the fore and cameras became 'the thing', suddenly - after fifty years of non-stop downward trend - road casualties started rising year on year.
If nothing else we should at least move back to using the 85th percentile for urban roads and make non-urban roads derestricted. The whole 'speed kills' message is skewed, uses bad science and outright fabrications, and just doesn't work. For example, the old 'Hit me at 30mph and there's an 80% chance I'll live. Hit me at 40mph and there's an 80% chance I'll die. Think! It's 30 for a reason.'. Well, yeah... But all this assumes the driver actually hits the victim at 30 or 40. In the real world people hit the brakes, and cars slow down very quickly indeed under an emergency stop. Real world government casualty statistics show the percentage of fatalities in all car versus pedestrian accidents hovers at a massively small 1.5% of victims for 20mph, 30mph and 40mph limits. It's a far cry from 80%, no? Don't forget this 1.5% includes suicides and those drunks/inattentives who literally step right in front of NSL vans and whatnot. It's almost as though the original speed isn't a factor, yet we still pootle around at 20 on wide open roads.
The police love to trot out the 'Fatal Four' line, yet their chosen sins (speed, phones, alcohol/drugs and seatbelts) are four of the lowest contributory factors in KSI accidents, or indeed in all accidents period. Speed is a factor (casting the net broad here, 'a factor' not even 'the primary factor') in a 'massive' 3-5% of accidents. Drink and drug driving, and mobile phone use, contribute to even less accidents (2-3%). That's from the police/government's own figures. Failing to look properly / not paying attention, meanwhile, is around 60-65% of KSIs accounted for. It's' a lot more work to pull over really dangerous drivers (tailgaters, lane hogs, dawdlers etc) and provide re-education than it is to sit in a van with a camera, though.
Don't forget, that low single-figure percentage of accidents where speed was listed by police as a factor includes all your Road Wars style high speed pursuits through town centres, joy riders, stolen cars, fleeing convicts and so on. Remove those people (who wouldn't obey a speed limit sign whether it said 5mph or 100mph) from the stats and focus on real world every day drivers doing real world everyday driving, and the figure shrinks even more.
Imagine any other area where someone would say 'Look, 95% of these deaths were caused by X, but 5% were caused by Y and Z. Let's spend a lot of money, and hit people hard, in pursuit of Y and Z. Screw X, who cares?'. It's ludicrous.
The late Steve Smith (an engineer) has a great website - kept live by his family and supporters) - with a ton of research and learning material related to traffic engineering and why speed cameras and limits are bad, which you can read here. The Understanding section makes for interesting reading if you persevere through it all.
</soapbox>
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 24 Mar 2011
- Posts
- 6,479
- Location
- Kent
It is exactly this.
Lots of people thinking they're suddently going to get fined 50% of their weekly income for going 1mph over....
Nope.
FPN of £100 and 3 points isn't changing, nor is the 'guideline' of 10% + 2mph (or whatever it is).
The ONLY thing that is changing is that the fine if you go to court is different, still a max of £2500 (was £1000 or £2500 if on a motorway), but instead of a blanket 100% of weekly wage, it'll be structered so the less you're speeding by, the lower the % of your weekly wage the fine COULD be. 50% to 150%.
Simples.
Or not, for a lot of people, judging by facebook and god knows where else...
Soldato
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2012
- Posts
- 8,352
</soapbox>
or in short, would you rather people concentrate on the road or their speed needle?
Soldato
- Joined
- 27 Mar 2013
- Posts
- 9,446
Simples.
Or not, for a lot of people, judging by facebook and god knows where else...
I think what confuses it, is stories like this circulating - http://www.express.co.uk/life-style/cars/792879/Speeding-fines-new-rules-UK-April-2017
It makes no mention of whether it applies to fixed penalties, only court proceedings etc. and so the natural assumption for most is that it would replace FPNs, as who on earth would get taken to court for 31 to 40mph if you can currently be FPNd at much higher speeds?
99% of the time you won't get anything for less than 35 in a 30, that is how cameras as set up. Partly because they would be absolutely swamped with paperwork having to send out fines to people going a couple of mph over the limit. Many who would successfully appeal it for being to marginal.
Soldato
- Joined
- 11 Sep 2013
- Posts
- 12,654
So you're happy paying a fortune for your 1mph over, while tax-dodging Danny Dolemoney gets away without paying a penny because he has no declared income and Offshore Oswald's accounts cannot be verified, allowing both to swan around at 40-mph over the limit in the knowledge that they cannot be fined?
This is not like Scandinavia, where people seem far more honest...
Sounds like the only winners are the criminals...
I disagree, in part.
People avoid comitting crimes not based on the punishment if caught, but on the certainty of getting caught. For example, we currently speed because it's not that likely we'll get pulled, especially if we know where the cameras are and can see the bright yellow markings of cop cars.
We need more enforcement to increase the likelihood of getting caught and being subject to nasty penalties.
I agree that enforcing speed limits is not the way to go, so perhaps take down all these Max Speed signs on bends, forcing the driver to take it easy or risk an accident and lump it all such offenses under something like dangerous driving?
Caporegime
- Joined
- 21 Jun 2006
- Posts
- 38,367
Just because someone doesn't pay taxes in the UK doesn't mean they are a criminal. Or if they use a legal way of avoiding it. They are just using methods available to them to decrease how much tax they need to pay. It's perfectly legal.
There is nothing that can be done about the above. So I don't care tbh. I'm not happy or sad. I have came to an understanding that is the way the world works.
Like I said there are winners and losers in every scenario. When you realise this is how the world works you will either get further or be happier in life. e.g. Prince Harry will never have to work or worry about money, neither will the guy who inherited half of London a year or two back, just because they happen to be born into those families. Whilst someone else say in Africa will die young and live a miserable life. Focus on what you can change, don't worry about stuff you can't.
Soldato
- Joined
- 11 Sep 2013
- Posts
- 12,654
I wasn't speaking about the legal ways, so much...
I'm glad you are happy for the law to be applicable to some but not others, then... I wonder if you feel the same about all laws.
That is the general idea here, though, to make the law work in a way that anyone breaking it gets punished equally. Otherwise there's no point in having them.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 21 Jun 2006
- Posts
- 38,367
so how would you punish John the taxi driver who only declares half his fares? or Billy the plumber? or Scott the window cleaner?
they can only use the figures they themselves have provided.
we could get rid of physical currency. that would stop it straight away as everything would be traceable then. however it looks like most people hate that idea for some reason. it would also solve the problem of organised criminals and black markets but then people say another form of physical currency would appear for them to continue their trades.
if a window cleaner only declares he's making £150 a week and there isn't an easy way of catching them all with the resource available there is nothing that can be done unfortunately. is it fair? no would be the answer to that. however there is nothing that can be done so why worry about it? i'm happy knowing the world isn't fair as I now know not to hate on the player but the game. Make the game work for you. You can only play with the cards dealt in front of you.
Soldato
- Joined
- 11 Sep 2013
- Posts
- 12,654
NOT make it based on how much they appear to earn, for starters...!!
And nobody would EVER lie about that, would they?
Might as well let murderers off, just because they say they didn't do it...
Well.... yeah.
What do you think people used before coinage became universal and mandatory?
In fact, that'd make it even easier to launder wealth and hide criminal activity - Heck, dealing in goats would make that currency so subjectively variable that you could hide all manner of dodgy dealings in it.
NO.
There is no way to fairly and universally apply that one legal mechanism. That doesn't mean nothing can be done.
Far better to ditch the monetary fine and double the points, for example. It needs to be something that hits people hard enough that they stop doing it, rather than yet another mechanism purely for putting money into the government Christmas Party fund.
So the idea of calling out other players for cheating is not something that occurs to you? You're happy being cheated and ripped off and screwed over by anyone who can get ahead at your own expense??!!
Have I mentioned this really cool scheme I'm involved in......? You could make a few quid from it yourself, for just a small fee....