Careless drivers to face on-the-spot fines

[Nick W]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-13356983

What do people think? In my opinion, for too long drivers have been able to get away with risky driving behaviour on a daily basis so long as they don't go too fast in front of a speed camera. It's about time something was done about bad driving other than speeding!

 

[Ferret]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-13356983

What do people think? In my opinion, for too long drivers have been able to get away with risky driving behaviour on a daily basis so long as they don't go too fast in front of a speed camera. It's about time something was done about bad driving other than speeding!

I entirely agree, but then it'll be the Police administering this and some of their driving is appalling.

 

[ralphchadkirk]

I'm firmly of the belief that people should be innocent until proven guilty in a court. I don't agree with the police becoming both judge, jury and sheriff. However, our justice system is stretched and simply would not be able to cope with all the cases that are dealt with by the police only. So I suppose this sort of thing had to happen.

 

[mumrar]

I just wonder how many times they'll actually enforce it. There must be tens of thousands of middle lane hoggers every day. That'll be a useful income. But considering the amount of unpunished misrepresented personal car registrations which roam freely despite the maximum £1000 fine, I'm not convinced.

I also agree with Ferret, I've been sped past (on my bike) on numerous occassions by Police cars with no blue lights on in a 30mph, bizarrely usually BMW 5-series!

As a note, perhaps they could just make BMW owners pay an average 'fine summary' at point of purchase, to save doing them all the time when they're out?

In all seriousness, fining is not the way to stamp out bad driving, a more rigourous test in the first place and a system of re-testing every x years will be the only effective way to manage peoples driving standards. This is exactly the kind of wasteful, stupid ideas that the Conservatives criticised Labour for introducing.

 

[Oswyntail]

My guess it is meant to deter - keep drivers driving properly - rather than to punish. But it might have as much effect as the mobile phones law. IE none.

 

[gordonthemoron]

and when do you see traffic police in the UK? hardly ever?

 

[ralphchadkirk]

and when do you see traffic police in the UK? hardly ever?

I see them quite a lot, and I don't even drive!

 

[GB]

and when do you see traffic police in the UK? hardly ever?

I see more traffic police than I do normal police.

 

[Ivo]

The police don't seem to know their own rules half the time. I lost count of how many times yorkie and I saw a police vehicle stopping on the yellow boxes at junctions on Euston Road on Saturday...

 

[The Barlow Boy]

This is all very well but where are all these traffic Police coming from? Just about every force is and has been cutting back.

 

[90019]

and when do you see traffic police in the UK? hardly ever?

I see plenty of normal and traffic police about, including a few unmarked cars.

 

[OxtedL]

Here on the edge of Surrey we have a rather variable police presence. Although the police now appear on Friday/Saturday evenings in response to increasing antisocial behaviour.

A few times recently I have seen a police car parked outside a local primary school (in a 40 zone) but that is it in terms of anything resembling traffic police.

Hurst Green on the other hand sees practically no police presence, except on average maybe twice a year when every single police officer in East Surrey together with Kent and Surrey police helicopters flock in. Most recently this was because of a car chase, but once there were two armed robberies (in each of the two local shops) in quick succession. Tells you something about Hurst Green, although of course there are some very affluent people there too.

 

[passmore]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-13356983

What do people think? In my opinion, for too long drivers have been able to get away with risky driving behaviour on a daily basis so long as they don't go too fast in front of a speed camera. It's about time something was done about bad driving other than speeding!

The flaw in this is that it's such a transient crime, eg unless the police are prepared to divert all their resources in tracking these bad drivers, they're unlikely to prosecute them when these speeding drivers suddenly decide to to drive safely upon seeing them in their police car! Therefore, the police end up with no proof they've driven 'badly' or sped. It's like speed cameras, they only work for a set distance whereby the driver sees the camera and slows down. Positioning them tactically also ends up becoming a pointless exercise.
Fines are a lazy way of ensuring that no matter how severe a crime is committed by a driver, the punishment is the same.

 

[rail-britain]

I'm firmly of the belief that people should be innocent until proven guilty in a court

There is no real change, just aligning this offence the same as speeding
If you do not agree with the FPN then you can allow the matter to proceed to court
Therefore instead of a FPN it proceeds as a criminal matter if found guilty
For some people it may be beneficial to accept the FPN, thus avoiding the criminal record

 

[ChrisCooper]

One thing I don't like is that they talk about undertakers, when from experiance undertaking is mainly due to poor lane disipline. Far too many people drive too slow in right hand lanes. It's not just motorways but also at junctions too where there are multiple straight on lanes and people will use ones to the right and then pull away so slow that even someone like me who's never driving anything with particular performance and doesn't tend to be hard on the right foot as it is often has to lift so not to undertake them.
Then again lane disipline isn't helped by awful road markings at many junctions. In some cases you end up further to the right than you need to be as previous markings or just guess work draws you to the right only to find when you reach the junction there are lanes further left you can use. In other cases using the leftmost possible lane initially will then put you in a difficult position further on. I can think of many roundabouts in particular where doing it by the book makes life very difficult, yet without knowing the circumstances you would not know what to do. No wonder driving tests are half about knowing the test routes as there are so many things that can catch you out.

I can almost imagine an unmarked police car sitting in the middle lane doing 50mph and then reporting everyone who goes up the inside of them.

 

[Ferret]

One thing I don't like is that they talk about undertakers, when from experiance undertaking is mainly due to poor lane disipline. Far too many people drive too slow in right hand lanes. It's not just motorways but also at junctions too where there are multiple straight on lanes and people will use ones to the right and then pull away so slow that even someone like me who's never driving anything with particular performance and doesn't tend to be hard on the right foot as it is often has to lift so not to undertake them.
Then again lane disipline isn't helped by awful road markings at many junctions. In some cases you end up further to the right than you need to be as previous markings or just guess work draws you to the right only to find when you reach the junction there are lanes further left you can use. In other cases using the leftmost possible lane initially will then put you in a difficult position further on. I can think of many roundabouts in particular where doing it by the book makes life very difficult, yet without knowing the circumstances you would not know what to do. No wonder driving tests are half about knowing the test routes as there are so many things that can catch you out.

I can almost imagine an unmarked police car sitting in the middle lane doing 50mph and then reporting everyone who goes up the inside of them.

I quite agree! No mention of driving at 35 down a motorway sliproad thus making it nigh on impossible for yourself and the poor *******s behind you to join traffic moving at a minimum of 56. My pet hate in case you hadn't guessed....

 

[Greenback]

I'm firmly of the belief that people should be innocent until proven guilty in a court. I don't agree with the police becoming both judge, jury and sheriff. However, our justice system is stretched and simply would not be able to cope with all the cases that are dealt with by the police only. So I suppose this sort of thing had to happen.

I agree with the sentiment. It's unfeasible for every offence to be heard in court, though.

My guess it is meant to deter - keep drivers driving properly - rather than to punish. But it might have as much effect as the mobile phones law. IE none.

I agree that the intention is to deter. And naturally, people will continue to drive badly if they think they have a godo chance of getting away with it. Just like a penalty fare!

I'm staying out of the driving discussion as I don't drive any more!

 

[HST Power]

I think this is a good call by the Government. They've got to introduce it for people who let their dogs foul all over the grass as well. That's what they do in the US, and if we had it here, the Police would raise enough money to slice our budget deficit sixty times over. The amount of people who don't clear up is shocking.

 

[ralphchadkirk]

There is no real change, just aligning this offence the same as speeding
If you do not agree with the FPN then you can allow the matter to proceed to court
Therefore instead of a FPN it proceeds as a criminal matter if found guilty
For some people it may be beneficial to accept the FPN, thus avoiding the criminal record

If you've got a 50 quid fine, and you think you were innocent would you just pay it or would you risk large amounts of money, time off work and stress into it? What these fines do is punish the poor innocent who cannot afford the legal costs or time or stress. That isn't just or fair.

 

[passmore]

If you've got a 50 quid fine, and you think you were innocent would you just pay it or would you risk large amounts of money, time off work and stress into it? What these fines do is punish the poor innocent who cannot afford the legal costs or time or stress. That isn't just or fair.

Exactly, it's simply a lazy way of no matter whether you were innocent or grossly guilty of a driving crime, the punishment is the same.

 

[Greenback]

If you've got a 50 quid fine, and you think you were innocent would you just pay it or would you risk large amounts of money, time off work and stress into it? What these fines do is punish the poor innocent who cannot afford the legal costs or time or stress. That isn't just or fair.

As I said, just like Penalty Fares!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Exactly, it's simply a lazy way of no matter whether you were innocent or grossly guilty of a driving crime, the punishment is the same.

Not just driving offences, there are a lot of fixed penalty offences now.

 

[ralphchadkirk]

I wouldn't class it the same as a PF, because they are a civil thing, and they can be appealed for free.

 

[Greenback]

It may not be the same legally, but many people don't want to spend the time disputing it, or experience the worry that it might bring. In that respect I submit that the effect is similar.

 

[passmore]

It may not be the same legally, but many people don't want to spend the time disputing it, or experience the worry that it might bring. In that respect I submit that the effect is similar.

But that's exactly why we have courts in this country, to dispute these cases involving being hit by a car for instance.

If I had a relative who was knocked down by a car that didn't stop, I would want it to be investigated by both police and hopefully end in prosecution. I wouldn't be worried by 'the worry it might bring' as I know that justice is being fulfilled in a more productive way than just a slap-on-the-dashboard PF.

An on-the-spot PF fine is hardly the most productive use of police time, is it?

 

[ralphchadkirk]

The problem with minor offences being dealt this way is that people, innocent or guilty, will just pay up. Let's face it, most will just hand over the £50 and take the three points and be done with it. Most people won't drag it to court with the stress and the expense.
To a certain extent PFs are similar, but it is not criminal and you can contest it for free with minimal evidence without having to go to court.

 

[Eng274]

I think this is a good call by the Government. They've got to introduce it for people who let their dogs foul all over the grass as well. That's what they do in the US, and if we had it here, the Police would raise enough money to slice our budget deficit sixty times over. The amount of people who don't clear up is shocking.

This is a huge problem where I live. I don't know if my street is a magnet for inconsiderate dog owners, or the fact that a huge area of green park area nearby makes it attractive for dog owners to play with their loveable mongrel wretches, but its like hopscotch some days!

I also take great affront to people to crawl down the sliproad then merge with 70mph traffic (or more, it usually is!) then speed up once they've merged, causing untold chaos. I've experienced this myself, been pelting down the sliproad then had to brake to a complete stop because some reprobate in a turquoise corsa is stopped on the bottom of the sliproad waiting to join.

If it can be properly implemented I think it could be a worthwhile thing to have on the spot fines, though it opens up a potential floodgate for corruption, discrimination and ambiguity, where what the police officer sees and the actual event might not coincide.

 

[HST Power]

This is a huge problem where I live. I don't know if my street is a magnet for inconsiderate dog owners, or the fact that a huge area of green park area nearby makes it attractive for dog owners to play with their loveable mongrel wretches, but its like hopscotch some days!

People should have to apply for licenses if they want to have dogs. This sounds a total stereotype, but I'd probably be ninety percent correct if I said that practically all the pit bulls and Dobermans in my town are being walked by eighteen year olds in baseball caps, grey jackets and drop downs. If we introduce licenses, it would ensure that people who owned dogs would be responsible, caring and genuine, not just idiots that need pit bulls to rank up their street appeal and show all their friends what hard men they are.
A test would be required too. And a home assessment.

 

[j0hn0]

People should have to apply for licenses if they want to have dogs. This sounds a total stereotype, but I'd probably be ninety percent correct if I said that practically all the pit bulls and Dobermans in my town are being walked by eighteen year olds in baseball caps, grey jackets and drop downs. If we introduce licenses, it would ensure that people who owned dogs would be responsible, caring and genuine, not just idiots that need pit bulls to rank up their street appeal and show all their friends what hard men they are.
A test would be required too. And a home assessment.

I agree with licences

I don't agree that there is a log of dog muck everywhere in this country though. Having lived in Haarlem, NL and Duesseldorf, DE, I have to say that these places are infested with it. Especially Duesseldorf, I lived in Pempelfort where it's all flats, yet everyone has dogs! They just take them down the road to crap in someone elses street, unbelievable.

Back to the topic, I haven't seen any press releases saying that lane hoggers will be fined, why is this? If people didn't lane hog then the undertaking, cutting up and tailgaiting just wouldn't happen. So again, they are treating the symptoms rather than the causes.

I've lost count how many people these days dawdle on the motorway at 40 - 50mph, in my opinion this is more dangerous as everyone has to squeeze into the other 2 lanes, which are filled by lane hoggers anyway.

I honestly think that if roads were designed properly, people didn't lane hog and everyone kept a decent constant speed, we wouldn't have half the jams we have now.

 

[mumrar]

I've lost count how many people these days dawdle on the motorway at 40 - 50mph

Perhaps they can't afford to drive a long way at 70mph and are saving on fuel by driving at around 50mph?

 

[90019]

Perhaps they can't afford to drive a long way at 70mph and are saving on fuel by driving at around 50mph?

Down to 50mph is fine IMO, so long as it's not busy and you're not disrupting the flow.
Any lower than that and you shouldn't be driving on the motorway.