Penalty Points

Nightglow · 7 Jan 2014 at 13:31

45 points on his licence & still driving.

As you all know 12 points within three years you can be disqualified.

Shouldn't this be compulsory disqualification now, no grounds for appeals to keep licence because of hardship, job, etc, far too many drivers still on the roads with 12 points & over.

http://news.sky.com/story/1191373/motorist-with-45-points-still-on-the-road

BombayMix · 7 Jan 2014 at 13:45

To right, doesn't say what his excuse is but really he has no regard for the law and should be a long ban regardless.

Trigger_Happy · 7 Jan 2014 at 14:15

Oh I dunno!

Back in the day when I had a Porsche 928 I accumulated 28 and still managed to keep driving.

Expensive lawyer though, who ultimately cost me thousands.

Freefaller · 7 Jan 2014 at 14:17

Did you ever stop to understand and review your driving as clearly you struggled with sticking within the rules.

Yes most of us enjoy a bit of spirited driving from time to time, but clocking up 28 points doesn't happen by accident.

Woden · 7 Jan 2014 at 14:36

I don't see why driving is any different to any other law. Or can I get caught mugging grannies 20 times and get away with it 'cos it would cost me my job?

Nightglow · 7 Jan 2014 at 14:59

BombayMix said:
To right, doesn't say what his excuse is but really he has no regard for the law and should be a long ban regardless.

Insurance firms need to come down harder, but then it would probably result in more uninsured drivers on the roads.

One solution, if your banned due to points top up, crush their car.

R.C.Anderson · 7 Jan 2014 at 15:01

Not sure I ever knew it was possible not to loose your license when you hit 12 points... I always thought people got themselves out of points, and therefore didn't reach 12, no that no notice was given when 12 was hit.

Wouldn't expect his to go down though, as with 45 points I would be very surprised if any insurance company would insure him...

The "I need it for my job" excuse is a load of bull too. Surely if it was that important for your job, you would take more care to ensure you keep your job. I don't see why any exceptions have to be made because someone didn't consider the implications before breaking the law.

Nightglow · 7 Jan 2014 at 15:04

There quite a few peelers in this forum, be interesting to see what there views are.

kaiowas · 7 Jan 2014 at 15:18

It mentions that the points were "for eight offences of either failing to disclose the identity of the driver or for speeding". 45 points for 8 offences could easily be one 3 point offence and seven 6 point offences.

What if the 'driver' in question operated, and was the registered keeper of, a fleet of vans and for whatever reason didn't keep adequate records of who was driving them on any given day.

It's feasible that in a short space of time 7 of his drivers got clocked for speeding, as well as him picking up an unrelated minor offence himself. He is unable to disclose who was driving the vans at the time of the offences as he simply doesn't have accurate records. Bang. 8 offences and 45 points for having actually done very little wrong.

Imy · 7 Jan 2014 at 15:28

Ummmm I think it needs to be looked at on a case by case basis.

MooMoo444 · 7 Jan 2014 at 15:30

HIGH SCORE!

45 Points

Please enter your name

_ _ _

R.C.Anderson · 7 Jan 2014 at 15:32

kaiowas said:
It mentions that the points were "for eight offences of either failing to disclose the identity of the driver or for speeding". 45 points for 8 offences could easily be one 3 point offence and seven 6 point offences.

What if the 'driver' in question operated, and was the registered keeper of, a fleet of vans and for whatever reason didn't keep adequate records of who was driving them on any given day.

It's feasible that in a short space of time 7 of his drivers got clocked for speeding, as well as him picking up a speeding offence himself. He is unable to disclose who was driving the vans at the time of the offences as he simply doesn't have accurate records. Bang. 8 offences and 45 points for having actually done very little wrong.

In which case, surely it's his fault for not having accurate records?

There just doesn't seem to be any point giving him points if it doesn't do anything. Either give hi the points & disqualify him, or don't give him the points.

Muffin` · 7 Jan 2014 at 15:35

Judging the findings of a court is so hard without the facts of the trial

kaiowas · 7 Jan 2014 at 15:36

R.C.Anderson said:
In which case, surely it's his fault for not having accurate records?

There just doesn't seem to be any point giving him points if it doesn't do anything. Either give hi the points & disqualify him, or don't give him the points.

My point is that the 'points' system was designed as a way of keeping bad drivers off the roads. Due to recent changes in the law (basically a clumsy attempt at fixing loopholes that were being exploited by speeding motorists) it could easily find itself misapplied to the point that the system is punishing bad administrative skills or even bad luck (what if in this hypothetical scenario he had kept perfectly good records that were wiped out by an office fire?)

antijoke · 7 Jan 2014 at 15:53

Trigger_Happy said:
Oh I dunno!

Back in the day when I had a Porsche 928 I accumulated 28 and still managed to keep driving.

Expensive lawyer though, who ultimately cost me thousands.

Diamond Mark is that you?