Motoring penalties

sevenhills

In a previous post, someone commented that they thought it was justified for the police not to fine motorists for some offences.

Surely its endorsements and fines that educate and deter motorist from committing offences?

Motorists caught driving a vehicle with illegal tyres risk a £2,500 fine and three penalty points on their driving licence; yet they could also be given a vehicle rectification notice.

I believe some offences now take into account a persons earnings when there is a fine. This is all rather complicated and open unfairness.

There are educational courses that can be used instead of a fine, speed awareness courses, but people know they are speeding, a course is not as effective as an endorsement.

Millions must be raised through fines, surely that is a great way to fund the police or the government?

caprikid1

Does the same management style suit everyone ? Same approach to education and learning suit all ? Prison works ?

Unfortunately our road policing has become more and more automated with less flexibility to allow a more tailored application.

A speed camera records one speed, a pursuit car can record tailgating, undertaking as well as speeding.

forgotmyname

Yeah a camera is a simple computer says yes/no...  A police car can follow you and stop you and say yes its 4am on an empty motorway
and just warn you to watch your speed.

Cameras don't give that option.  Fines relating to earnings makes sense.  If someone was fine 0.0001% of their earnings where is the
incentive not to do it again?

TooManyPoints

I believe some offences now take into account a persons earnings when there is a fine. This is all rather complicated and open unfairness.

It's not a recently introduced feature. All fines levied in a court are calculated on the basis of income. It's not that complicated and it's certainly not unfair. What would be unfair would be to fine a person living on benefits the same amount as a person earning £100,000pa. 

Police have a vested interest in offering courses for motoring offences as they get a cut from the fee (around £35 IIRC). They have no such interest in offering fixed penalties or prosecuting in court as all fixed penalties and fines go to the Exchequer.

TBagpuss

With all criminal offences, for someone to be charged there are a range of considerations including whether there are reasonable prospects of a successful prosecution and whether it is in the public interest to prosecute.

Motoring offences are a little different from most other criminal offences as the most prominent (speeding) is often automated  but there's no reason why motoring offences should be treated in a similar way. Sometimes advice and education is much more effective than punishment. The aim is to end up with safer roads and safer drivers, and  so actually speaking to someone, explaining the issue is likely to be highly effective in education people - often more so than a fine where people may feel that they were punished on a technicality, and therefore not make any changes to their driving habits

It's surely no different to having people attend sped awareness courses rather than simply finding them, when they are caught speeding - the aim is to educate rather an merely to punish

MEM62

sevenhills said:

a course is not as effective as an endorsement.

Please state you source / evidence for that statement.  

sevenhills

TBagpuss said:

Sometimes advice and education is much more effective than punishment.

Someone with 9 points on their licence is much more likely not to speed than someone that can speed without getting banned.

I understand there is a need for fixed penalties, to make it simpler. A £100 fine for no MOT, seems like a let-off if they earn £1,000 per week.

People that modify cars seem to escape lightly, illegally tinted windows and they often just take it off.

sevenhills

MEM62 said:

sevenhills said:

a course is not as effective as an endorsement.

Please state you source / evidence for that statement.  

It's just a statement, but it is shame that the Government do not base penalties on evidence. Unless you know different.

Like the need to advertise speed cameras and paint them yellow, it's almost like they don't want to catch people speeding.

MX5huggy

sevenhills said:

MEM62 said:

sevenhills said:

a course is not as effective as an endorsement.

Please state you source / evidence for that statement.  

It's just a statement, but it is shame that the Government do not base penalties on evidence. Unless you know different.

Like the need to advertise speed cameras and paint them yellow, it's almost like they don't want to catch people speeding.

Courses are more effective at reducing reoffending than points and a fine. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/706208/national-speed-awareness-course-evaluation.pdf

People gain knowledge on the courses such as streetlights = 30 unless otherwise posted and what actually is a duel carriageway. That driving 10 miles at 39mph saves less than 5 minutes over 30 mph.

ontheroad1970

sevenhills said:

MEM62 said:

sevenhills said:

a course is not as effective as an endorsement.

Please state you source / evidence for that statement.  

It's just a statement, but it is shame that the Government do not base penalties on evidence. Unless you know different.

Like the need to advertise speed cameras and paint them yellow, it's almost like they don't want to catch people speeding.

You want to see what it's like in other countries.  In South Korea, they have a police flashing light and sirens on lamp posts 100m before the camera.  

Car_54

sevenhills said:

MEM62 said:

sevenhills said:

a course is not as effective as an endorsement.

Please state you source / evidence for that statement.  

It's just a statement, but it is shame that the Government do not base penalties on evidence. Unless you know different.

Like the need to advertise speed cameras and paint them yellow, it's almost like they don't want to catch people speeding.

There is no such need. It was a "guideline" about 20 years ago, but never became law.