New speeding fines

[Psycho Sonny]

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....

I have given it serious thought but if I had tried to do this it would have ended really badly for me so I chose not to.

I'm talking about my old office where nepotism was and still is rife. Had i called them out on it my cards would have been marked forever. I would never have gotten the new better paying job I have now for example. I chose to play the game and get away from what I didn't like for my own good. As long as I'm doing what is right is what matters. If others want to cheat the system they run the risk of being caught and fined, etc.

I take it you work PAYE. I do too but I wonder how you would view it if you were self-employed for instance. If you could get away with under declaring would you? I know many would and some wouldn't. I know for a fact some don't under declare, there are still plenty of honest people out there, that get called idiots for being honest.

Hitting everyone with 6 points isn't a great solution IMO. it's speeding first of all nothing serious enough that you should be banned for x years should you get caught twice within 2 years. I know someone who has been caught drink driving 3 times and the last time they nearly killed someone. they are still driving today. to me that is something i'd rather be tackled properly than hitting people who break the speed limit.

 

[snapdragon69]

Weren't the fines fixed before? £60 or £100 + points on your licence.

That's the fixed penalties.
This is about fines imposed during a court case.

 

[ttaskmaster]

I have given it serious thought but if I had tried to do this it would have ended really badly for me so I chose not to.

And so people will continue getting away with whatever they can, often not even having the common courtesy of trying to hide it any more, until someone stands up and stops them.

I'm talking about my old office where nepotism was and still is rife. Had i called them out on it my cards would have been marked forever. I would never have gotten the new better paying job I have now for example.

You still had the option to go work for any number of other companies in any number of other industries though, I assume?

I chose to play the game and get away from what I didn't like for my own good.

This is The Law, though. You don't get to move away from that, unless you think leaving the country over this is somehow a sensible and affordable option, or you're advocating I lie about my earnings like everyone else and then speed away to my heart's content, secure in the knowledge that they can't fine me a penny because I haven't told them I earn anything??!!

I take it you work PAYE. I do too but I wonder how you would view it if you were self-employed for instance. If you could get away with under declaring would you?

I have been self-employed before and was as accurate as possible during my accounting, simply because the penalty of getting it wrong (even by accident) was not worth it to me. I didn't even consider the likelihood of getting caught.

I know for a fact some don't under declare, there are still plenty of honest people out there, that get called idiots for being honest.

If it's getting to the point where The Game, as you put it, is mostly in favour of cheaters, then The Game itself needs changing, not the way you play it. That means changes in the rules and the enforcement thereof, about which we can do something.

Hitting everyone with 6 points isn't a great solution IMO. it's speeding first of all nothing serious enough that you should be banned for x years should you get caught twice within 2 years.

But if that was the punishment, you can bet that people won't take it so lightly as they currently do... assuming the follow-up for being caught driving without a licence was properly harsh, too, that is...

I know someone who has been caught drink driving 3 times and the last time they nearly killed someone. they are still driving today. to me that is something i'd rather be tackled properly than hitting people who break the speed limit.

It all needs tackling, really. Instead, it's being used as a cash cow though, and the mostly-honest folk who make small mistakes will be paying the highest prices for it.

 

[Supernova]

A few years ago I'd have said this was a bad thing, but now I couldn't give a monkeys, and I actually think it's good. I'm fed up of being on a motorway unable to make progress at 70 (and yes I do do this) because of the variation in the traffic speed between the lorries at 56mph and cars cruising at 90mph+. It just seems impossible to get anywhere at 70mph these days with the number of lorries there are to negotiate in lane 1, and how difficult it is to overtake them when the traffic in lane 2 and 3 is doing 85, 90 etc. If you don't want to speed, you just have to pull out on them and make them brake, which isn't good for anyone. Braking causes traffic.

I even like smart motorways (when they aren't changing the speed from one gantry to another and dropping them to 40mph) as it calms everything down and makes negotiating the slower vehicles easier for everyone. The traffic seems to just flow along.

Our motorways are far too busy for slow moving vehicles mixing with very high speed vehicles. I've recently been to Norway and their roads are extremely quiet. Over 2 hours you may overtake 1 or 2 cars, and you'd barely see a lorry. It is a lot easier to keep vehicles flowing.

10 years ago I'd be here saying this is an unfair tax on the motorist, but now (on the motorway at least) I see that we need this to keep motorway traffic speeds more consistent, which keeps the flow of vehicles high.

 

[Psycho Sonny]

And so people will continue getting away with whatever they can, often not even having the common courtesy of trying to hide it any more, until someone stands up and stops them.

It was that bad. The power went so much to certain peoples heads they didn't care that they were sending completely inappropriate emails through the works email system, etc. Sweeping issues under the carpet. They were challenged through staff panels and staff surveys and then they stopped the method allowed for them to be challenged in the first place, basically the panel was no longer allowed to consult with staff on issues and they were told nobody has made an official complaint through the official channels so as far as we are concerned there is no issue to fix, even though the survey states 28% of staff in that office had been the victims of bullying and/or harassment. Basically people used to report things unofficially by going to their manager's manager, he would then punt them to another office rather than fixing the behaviour of their staff. Like I say try to stand up and your card is marked forever so your effectively told deal with it or leave.

You still had the option to go work for any number of other companies in any number of other industries though, I assume?

it's not that easy to get another job elsewhere especially in Glasgow, it would take years to get one that was comparable and my company is the only company that does this work in the UK. I would need to leave the UK to effectively work for another company in the same job. something i may have considered in my younger years but not today. another industry then sure but it was easier for me to just move out that office to another office within that company on a promotional basis. they wouldn't allow me to leave under a sideways move as i possessed a valuable skillset no other person in that office had.

I have been self-employed before and was as accurate as possible during my accounting, simply because the penalty of getting it wrong (even by accident) was not worth it to me. I didn't even consider the likelihood of getting caught.

If you had the means to stash away £40K tax free in cash would you have? illegally or legally? i would do so legally but not illegally, it's not worth the repercussions to me.

If it's getting to the point where The Game, as you put it, is mostly in favour of cheaters, then The Game itself needs changing, not the way you play it. That means changes in the rules and the enforcement thereof, about which we can do something.

how do you do this though? unless you have tonnes of money to burn and if you did you wouldn't care about stuff like this anyway in the first place. MP's don't do much for the people. they only further their own interests and agendas. also a lot of the people who make the big decisions within the public sector shouldn't be in the job in the first place. it's a broken system which only works as more people are scared to break the law than those that do. basically you want to scare them into not speeding rather than fixing the real issues on the roads.

But if that was the punishment, you can bet that people won't take it so lightly as they currently do... assuming the follow-up for being caught driving without a licence was properly harsh, too, that is...

i think it would be too harsh for speeding though. is speeding really the issue here or you don't like the current method of enforcing penalties on those that do speed? 6 points IMO is just far too harsh for speeding. this country is too lenient IMO. people can commit rape and be out within 2 years for example. people can evade tax as the punishments in place are too lenient if they were to be caught. you would need to change all punishments starting with much more important ones first. speeding should be way down the list and IMO it isn't a problem that really needs tackling in the first place.

you could for instance have an online test people need to do every 5 years or so. a reaction game type test. then that is linked to their driving license which they need to put into their car. their car then limits how they can drive based on reactions. you could also add other factors. age, experience, etc. if they have had a crash or not. so for example a great driver with good reactions would be allowed to if they wanted to drive a bit faster. someone with slower reactions and had bumps, etc would have their car restricted based on the roads they were driving on. that IMO would be a much better system than simply giving everyone 6 points for speeding.

It all needs tackling, really. Instead, it's being used as a cash cow though, and the mostly-honest folk who make small mistakes will be paying the highest prices for it.

as above. for instance i would vote for a law that anyone found guilty of corruption in any matter had to spend 10 years in prison for example. it would stamp out most corruption overnight. it would solve a lot more problems than speeding which IMO isn't a big a problem as it's made out to be. the punishment for it IMO should be as is, possibly even the fine reduced to a token amount to cover admin costs like £30. corruption, drink driving, taking drugs and driving, rape, etc they should have bigger penalties/sentences.


this just feels like another form of tax to me.

 

[ttaskmaster]

Like I say try to stand up and your card is marked forever so your effectively told deal with it or leave.

Or just kick their teeth out... They can come mark my card, for all I care, I will go to whoever I can to deal them a hit they can't ignore. Go to the papers, or even the law, if needs be.
I'm sorry you were bullied, but that does not mean everyone else should just sigh and accept being ****** over in all aspects of their life... especially not by the law of the country, which is supposed to treat everyone fairly and equally.
But like I said, the more you let people get away with this kind of attitude, the more they will do it and the more they will get away with it.

it's not that easy to get another job elsewhere especially in Glasgow, it would take years to get one that was comparable and my company is the only company that does this work in the UK.

It's also very stupid to stay in a position where such people have such power, because one way or another, however well you play their game, it is their game and they will end up screwing you over for all your worth and leaving you for dead. Far better to hit back now than lay down and die for their benefit, no?

If you had the means to stash away £40K tax free in cash would you have?

Again, no, not illegally.

how do you do this though?

Same way you get slavery and racism outlawed, gay marriage legalised and things like that, I imagine...

i think it would be too harsh for speeding though.

You want to stop people committing a crime? Any crime? You make it certain they will get caught and you make it a very scary punishment, not if, but when they do.

is speeding really the issue here or you don't like the current method of enforcing penalties on those that do speed?

Speeding is perhaps not the problem, but it is the issue currently being dealt with. I'm just looking at more convincing ways of enforcing it.
Truth is, that approach will work for most of the normal daily road problems, from tailgating to drunk driving, to speeding, to mobile phone use. You make it too risky and too scary for people to do it.

you could for instance have an online test people need to do every 5 years or so... [snip]... would have their car restricted based on the roads they were driving on.

Too complex, too involved, too expensive to set up and administer and maintain and police.
Give them all self-driving cars instead, which they pay for and then hold the manufacturers' programmers responsible for any violations of road law. Job done.

i would vote for a law that anyone found guilty of corruption in any matter had to spend 10 years in prison for example.

You know how I mentioned those abusive people in power would end up screwing you over?
Boom - YOU just became their scapegoat. While you were busy playing some game, they were setting you up.
This is one way how they do it and get away with it. At best, you and a few others would be 'made redundant', shortly before the investigation kicked off. Cunningly, you lot would have been the team responsible for maintaining whatever records would have been proof of guilt/innocence and since you left said records will have been lost... server failure, staff error, something like that.
So at best, you are to blame but cannot reasonably be pulled back in, so without evidence either way the case is merely suspicion and it gets dropped.
At worst, you'd have been subtly conned into taking on some role or other and ultimately put in a position where you personally have ultimate accountability. Off you go to prison, presumably still not caring about things you cannot change...?
And yes, this is exactly how it happens. I have a couple decades experience of seeing it and fighting against it.

it would stamp out most corruption overnight.

It'd take out the lower levels, maybe stop some DPD guy from accepting a tenner to let you collect your parcel when the depot is technically closed to the public... but the corrupt management know their game far better than you. They'll limit liability from Day One, usually taking their money and moving jobs before the mess they instigated even filters down to where the real trouble starts, leaving small fry like you and me to suffer.

this just feels like another form of tax to me.

AH-HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!
[Sean Connery voice] Of course it's just another form of tax, dear boy.... Just like the restrictions on vaping that so many countries are enforcing, while still advocating harmful tobacco products that already have an established and profitable taxation mechanic.
If you want to talk about the reality of things, here it is - No-one cares. No-one gives a rat's ass if you live or die, so long as you pay for the priviledge... and if you do die, better make sure your descendants have enough left to pay for it, too.

 

[Psycho Sonny]

I wasn't bullied but many others were. I was the only one capable of doing half the jobs there, yet they gave the bonus to their friends every year rather than those who were good at their jobs, usually limited to 1 person in 10 (the bonus). I was basically told I couldn't apply for jobs and they tried to control me. I applied anyway. They then tried to stop it and I said show me where it says I cannot apply for that job and basically they realised this guy isn't going to take no for an answer then let me do whatever I wanted. Many others though were told the same thing and accepted it.

It was like a dictatorship the way things were run. My new office however is the complete opposite. I only worked in that other place a short while - 2 years. They made is as hard as possible though to progress and I had to jump through hoops. Their friends however were handed them on a plate, etc when a position opened up it was earmarked. I'm glad i'm away from there now.

It's what happens when you give the wrong people power.

 

[adolf hamster]

well this thread's gone off on quite the tangent

you's didn't even let me derail it for you!

 

[Rainmaker]

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.

That has nothing to do with the statement I made, though. I also disagree with you. People don't tend to speed because it's unlikely they'll get pulled, they tend to 'speed' where conditions allow for a higher speed than the artificially low (often politically motivated) posted limit. In many cases the current limit will be 20mph or 30mph lower than it was five years ago on the same road anyway!

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?

The max speed signs on the approach to bends are only advisory. The driver has the same choice with or without a posted speed (advisory or otherwise) - drive to the prevailing conditions, or get it wrong and potentially pay the price.

 

[Housey]

http://www.counsel.direct/news/2015/3/25/speeding-sentencing-guidelines

 

[Voxination]

I've heard conflicting information about when these new fines are implemented from.

I committed an offence on the 15th April 2017 for 99 in a 70 (non-motorway dual carriageway), what % of my weekly earnings am I about to be relieved of? Plod was hidden at the side of the road with a speed gun

 

[Jono8]

I've heard conflicting information about when these new fines are implemented from.

I committed an offence on the 15th April 2017 for 99 in a 70 (non-motorway dual carriageway), what % of my weekly earnings am I about to be relieved of? Plod was hidden at the side of the road with a speed gun

You might get a court summons for that.

 

[Supernova]

I've heard conflicting information about when these new fines are implemented from.

I committed an offence on the 15th April 2017 for 99 in a 70 (non-motorway dual carriageway), what % of my weekly earnings am I about to be relieved of? Plod was hidden at the side of the road with a speed gun

A good bit of policing I'd say. You won't do that again.

 

[Gaygle]

I've heard conflicting information about when these new fines are implemented from.

I committed an offence on the 15th April 2017 for 99 in a 70 (non-motorway dual carriageway), what % of my weekly earnings am I about to be relieved of? Plod was hidden at the side of the road with a speed gun

It's TISPOL speed week this week so everyone is getting done for speeding and they're dedicating a lot more time to it. TBF, it's not like you got caught at 71 though

You'll have to go to court for yours. The starting point will be 100% of your weekly income (after tax and NI) with a 33% reduction for a guilty plea and probably 4 points for that. Plus £30 victim surcharge and £85 costs.

For the average earner it'll be around £400 all in.

Top tip - if you are going to speed in the future, keep it to 96mph or below. 96mph means you pay a £100 fine and get 3 points. 97mph means you have to go to court and pay £loads + up to 6 points.

 

[Lakeland]

http://www.counsel.direct/news/2015/3/25/speeding-sentencing-guidelines

This is much clearer. Basically don't be a tool and get taken to court and you will be ok.

 

[Voxination]

A good bit of policing I'd say. You won't do that again.

Thank you, I'm sure you're a 100% law abiding citizen.

It's TISPOL speed week this week so everyone is getting done for speeding and they're dedicating a lot more time to it. TBF, it's not like you got caught at 71 though

You'll have to go to court for yours. The starting point will be 100% of your weekly income (after tax and NI) with a 33% reduction for a guilty plea and probably 4 points for that. Plus £30 victim surcharge and £85 costs.

For the average earner it'll be around £400 all in.

Top tip - if you are going to speed in the future, keep it to 96mph or below. 96mph means you pay a £100 fine and get 3 points. 97mph means you have to go to court and pay £loads + up to 6 points.

I wasn't aware of the discount for a guilty plea, that's a result. Clear conditions, good attitude and first time offence I'm hoping will net me only the 100% fine and 5 points maximum. Thanks for the info

Well aware of the repercussions for speeding, but as with all things you make your choice and you take the risk.

 

[Supernova]

Thank you, I'm sure you're a 100% law abiding citizen.

There's breaking the limit, and then there's taking the ****. I'm sorry but 99 on a DC is outrageous. Because you wrote there was a policeman hiding and a " " it made it look, to me, that you're only sorry because you got caught.

 

[Rainmaker]

There's breaking the limit, and then there's taking the ****. I'm sorry but 99 on a DC is outrageous. Because you wrote there was a policeman hiding and a " " it made it look, to me, that you're only sorry because you got caught.

You only think it's 'outrageous' because you're conditioned to. We have no idea about the road in question, or the circumstances. There are plenty of A roads where 99mph in places would be nothing at all special if one drove to the conditions; six plus lanes total, wide open miles-long sight lines, no adjoining junctions etc. Who's to say @Voxination was doing a constant 99mph in a hazard-rich built up area with traffic or whatever, as opposed to taking advantage of the open/straight bits and then slowing down where necessary? You've just seen a number on the internet and decided he was wrong, without even possessing any facts. The same roads a few miles over the water on the Isle of Man will see speeds much higher in places (at times twice as fast), and indeed on this very island of our own you could see cars doing over 150mph as a matter of routine before the national speed limits were introduced in 1965. Not all old cars were slow...

Vox good luck in court mate. You may wish to seek the advice of someone like Andrew Thompson (Barrister - 'AGTLaw' on PistonHeads) or Bobby Bell (solicitor and Crown court advocate). Both are very highly regarded in cases like yours, offer fairly low fixed fees and can be surprisingly effective in avoiding or mitigating the consequences.=

 

[Housey]

This is much clearer. Basically don't be a tool and get taken to court and you will be ok.

Andrew is good at making sense of this stuff. He is a Barrister who specialises in this area so tends to be a useful contact to have.

 

[Boycey0211]

I'm struggling to work out if the 10% + 2 rule still applies then? More to the point I'm getting asked a lot if it will do, and this seems to be the bit that is getting confusing.

So, is what I'm being told about getting a £1000 fine for doing 31 in a 30 true or not? I'd imagine it isn't but can't work out if they've actually lowered the discretionary limits.