Should the Police be able to fine you on the spot?

Leigh Ping wrote:

Most motoring fixed penalties offences will rise under the changes:

•a non-endorsable (where the driver does not receive points on their licence) £30 fixed penalty notice will rise to £50
•an endorsable (where points are given) £60 and non-endorsable fixed penalty notice will rise to £100
•an endorsable £120 fixed penalty notice will rise to £200
•the fixed penalty notice for driving with no insurance will rise from £200 to £300

Graduated fixed penalties (mainly for commercial goods and passenger carrying vehicles and including offences like drivers’ hours and overloading) and financial deposits (for drivers without a satisfactory UK address) will also increase:

•a £30 non-endorsable fine will rise to £50
•a £60 endorsable and non-endorsable fine will rise to £100
•a £120 endorsable and non-endorsable fine will rise to £200
•a £200 endorsable and non-endorsable fine will rise to £300

Cherry picking revenue spinning legislation from Europe is fine if it actually works. Let's see if it does. Like most of us here, I hope it does.
If it doesn't, it's basically just another money making exercise which will only impact on the less well off. :yesnod:

Yesterday, I had a small works van in front of me that refused to move over and let me and others go past. The problem was that they were 'hogging' in the fast lane. After 3 miles or so I sat with my indicator on to express my intention to overtake. Still he wouldn't move. I flashed my lights, still he refused to move over. I resisted the urge to tailgate but I did 'undertake' after approx. 4 miles. I think some people get a testosterone surge if your car is quicker than theirs. So they get the hump and refuse to let you go by peaceably. :dry:

Who would get fined for that? Me or the van driver?

Sounds like you agree with the let's deal with the road hogs bit then? If it turns out to be a money spinner it will only be because a lot of people are caught driving 'anti-socially' or dangerously.

Right now issuing summons for court appearances is costing you and me a lot of money as tax payers when in the vast majority of cases there is no defence and a fine is issued - this change to the way the law is applied just cuts out the 'middle man' (the magistrate/sheriff - by the way there won't be a judge or jury for your day in court unless you've done something really major).

In days gone by as a young RAF Officer I had the 'pleasure' of attending numerous courts with airmen charged with driving offences - I can't ever remember anyone of them getting off and my presence there was to send out a signal that their card had been marked - for which they would receive a reduced fine. Meantime I would be paid for a whole day wasted at a time when we were very short of people.

Richard

Paulontour wrote:

Dave Baird wrote: And just because a practice is common in Europe doesn't make it right for here. Driving without due care and attention, or driving negligently, which are both on the statutes, covers both more than adequately.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

But not adequate enough to make them effective

And making them "spot fines" will change that how, exactly?

Dave Baird wrote:

Paulontour wrote:

Dave Baird wrote: And just because a practice is common in Europe doesn't make it right for here. Driving without due care and attention, or driving negligently, which are both on the statutes, covers both more than adequately.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

But not adequate enough to make them effective

And making them "spot fines" will change that how, exactly?

Well its not going to change anything. You get caught on your phone whilst driving your going to pay one way or another so it wont make any difference. The prospect of losing you money in an instant if caught could make you think twice, couple that with higher fines and it could really screw your day up before its even started.

Time will tell but I expect the Police may be more inclined to issue on the spot fines rather than all the paper work that goes with a summons - they see an instant result. More diligence means more deterrence - as I say, time will tell.

And yes, there may well be management targets which means extra 'vigilence'. Take a look at this:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-highlands-islands-19487415

Despite a lot of publicity they caught almost 700 speeding in 10 days - the A9 is a bit of a nightmare at times and I've known several people who have been killed on this road. It's a beautiful road in so many ways but has been engineered with long sweeping curves which makes it hard to see far enough to over take safely - overtaking safely is made more difficult if the car approaching you is doing 90 (or more - Sir Ranulph Fiennes was caught doing 98 mph - http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/celebritynews/9852799/Sir-Ranulph-Fiennes-fined-for-speeding-after-court-rejects-request-for-driving-ban.html) while you are trying to pass an Asda/Tesco lorry travelling at 40. Anyway, back to the point - if on the spot fines makes a few drivers think twice so much the better. And if it has no effect it must be a non-issue.


Richard

Blow-in wrote: by the way there won't be a judge or jury for your day in court unless you've done something really major).

Well in that case I'll walk. As I won't be contracting to a council worker in a magistrates court who isn't sworn on their oath. Or even qualified to adjudicate.

Here in Oz we've had on the spot fines relating to traffic offenses for years.
Make no mistake kiddies, they will make absolutely NO improvement in driving standards, despite what the politicians and top brass of the police may tell you.
It's a revenue grab and an opportunity for the minister for doing buggerall to get their ugly head on telly, sound bites on the radio, column inches in the paper and to actually look like they are achieving something in the name of road safety, whilst in reality it's a more cost effective means of harvesting the motorist's wallet for cash.

No court cases, means a much better revenue form fines to cost ratio for the government coffers.
The top brass of the police then apply secret on the spot fine quotas on the rank and file members of the police. They do this to please and impress their political masters. It's the only way the top brass can get ahead in their careers.
Secret quotas? You might ask. Yes any talk of quotas is officially denied here in Oz, but talk to any copper under the rank of Senior Sergent and they will quietly and off the record, tell you that they have to make their monthly quotas.
Here I find it's pretty well, any Copper of the rank of Senior Sergent or above is already an ambitious political animal and as such is not to be trusted.

Am I missing the point here? Is this idiotic bunch of jokers we call a government proposing that the police will be authorised to collect payment at the time of the fine? If that isn't the case, then the fine issued is EXACTLY the same legal summons that is currently issued, and which they are fully entitled to issue already.


" And yes, there may well be management targets which means extra 'vigilence'. " For which, read "revenue stream". :dry:

The British motorist is a (meek) milk cow which every government exploits to the fullest - huge petrol prices, ridiculous road taxes, and some of the worst maintained roads in the modern world. But we are all so dumb, compliant and so umbilically hooked to our cars that we just keep swallowing whatever any government throws at us, and paying more and more for less and less. Personally I think it is time that the average British motorist grew a pair.

Cobber, you're just an old cynic, aren't you? :nonod:









I like the cut of your jib, sir! :bust:

HI all
On the issue of hogging a lane I was in the out side lane doing 75-80mph in heavy traffic [ all three lanes were full ]but the car behind me wanted to get passed me although the was no where to go as we where in a line of traffic HE probably though I was hogging the lane but I didn't see the point of pulling into the middle lane just to let him get pass me and then be up the back of another car 50yds-70yrs down the road and if he got pass the other car he would still be 50yds of the next car and so on

On t'other side of chunnel when plod stops you for whatever he feels is wrong,
(43 in a 40 zone, Lille, €41 if paid now, €96 if paid next month and double again if not,never got that far, plus 1 point)

his first fine is £40 ish, and you better have cash, and be nice to him/her,
that thing on his hip is real.

if you don't have cash, he/she may take you to a local cash point so you can pay them cash Now!

if you don't and you give them the finger, it's bread and water time, and/or your car is his/hers(government property).
English youths wont get further than this stage.

If you are very upset and a tear helps, you may get the biggest telling off since your dad gave you one, and a wave to go.....

If it gets those selfish inconsiderate tosspots out of the overtaking lane when they arnt overtaking I'm all for it. Even if it doesn't do more than lighten there wallet I'm all for that too.

Personally I'd go one or two steps further. If your caught with your fogs on or if your headlights are misaligned so you blind people you should also be fined/excucuted

Personally I would love it for tests to be strickter and every 5 years. 2 for anyone over 70.

But who will be checking said driving standards? There are next to no Traffic Plod left, so how will all this work?
I do not beleive most of the poor driving isdown to bad attitude, it is simple ignorance of the rules and lack of training. Nobody is taught how to drive on a motorway, added to this that people who can hardly breathe and walk at the same time are able to gain a driving licence now cars are so easy to operate, means the standard of driving continues to fall.