Umm, another wedge going in thin end first...

Unread post by **CitroJim** » 11 May 2011, 12:13

This could be risky.

The powers that be are speaking of on-the-spot fines and three points for careless driving.

Reported here by the Broken Biscuit Company

This really is a worrying. If a grouchy rozzer is having a bad day and nicks you out of sheer spite what recourse will you have?

Plus, one rozzer's idea of careless driving is a bit subjective..

Citroenmad · Unread post by **Citroenmad** » 11 May 2011, 12:22

Who was that pulling out in the Xantia Exclusive

Yes risky, no doubt many will see it as another money making exercise.

citronut · Unread post by **citronut** » 11 May 2011, 13:01

im in favour of messures to try and combat tailgateing and undertaking,

but as you say Jim who is going to be judge, jury and exacutioner :dom:

regards malcolm

MikeT · Unread post by **MikeT** » 11 May 2011, 13:20

I think I'm in favour too, after listening to the report.

1. Prosecutions for bad driving have fallen dramatically due to political pressure and cuts.
2. Most people think breaking the speed limit is the most dangerous form of driving.
3. Only traffic police will have this power.
4. You will still have the right to a court trial if you disagree.

Unread post by **myglaren** » 11 May 2011, 18:59

I think that it is a good idea too to prosecute bad and dangerous driving over minor speeding infingements.

As said it is possibly reliant on the judgement of individual officers BUT with the prevalence of in car cameras then there should be a record of the offence able to be used as evidence should the offence be disputed. Valuable for both parties.

Tailgating is already an offence that attracts fines and points. The average speed cameras are supposed to be able to detect and record offences.

addo · Unread post by **addo** » 11 May 2011, 23:35

Coming from the country with (yes, really) the most laws in the world my opinion differs.

Laws are a response to a lack of respect and courtesy. You cannot legislate these aspects back into society! If resentment starts at the top and trickles down, all one is doing with new penalties, is ultimately increasing dysfunction. What we consider it acceptable to do, when nobody is looking, nor shall they find out, is a better measure of where a society is at - and frankly, most people contrive any number of excuses to avoid looking squarely into the mirror.

As for defending yourself:

Myself and at least three friends have been in the past subject to unreasonable prosecutions. Mine was withdrawn (back when I was too green to understand my rights to approach the magistrate and request costs), a friend won with costs awarded, another friend was persistently harrassed into pleading guilty and yet another is still in process. That's the reality of ordinary people having to defend the unreasonable - don't forget the time and lost work this entails.

Chlorate · Unread post by **Chlorate** » 12 May 2011, 00:24

Plans for an 80mph speed limit for motorways and reduced speeds on country roads are not included in the legislation, but are part of ongoing plans.

This bit made me chuckle, 80mph on the motorways is a good idea, a lot of people do that already; but in my experience people think the speed limit on country roads is 35 mph, regardless of how wide and clear the road is.

Would this also mean being fined for the odd times when you can't help but do something annoying?

citronut · Unread post by **citronut** » 12 May 2011, 08:22

the idea of the rules of the road are/should be so everyone know what the other person/drive is going to do,

now it seems in the UK no one knows or has a clue what the other road user is about to do,

as they dont seem to be taught any rules anymore,

dont get me started

also Adam
the reason most people hear ignore the rules/laws, is because no one trusts the lieing theaving bloated blutacrates who are spozed to be leading us,

regards malcolm

KP · Unread post by KP » 12 May 2011, 09:40

Not being funny but undertaking is not always bad driving but is usually casued by bad driving... it usually happens on dual carriage ways and mways as they sit there pootling along and won't move over.

I travel a lot of miles on the motorways every year both for work and personal and the amount of people not only sitting in the middle lane when the inside one is empty at 5 am or even the outside lane is shocking.

If they wanted to fine people for dangerous driving in these circumstances then why not fine both parties as if the one being undertaken was driving correctly in a lot of cases there would be no undertaking...

Unread post by **Paul-R** » 12 May 2011, 10:47

KP wrote:If they wanted to fine people for dangerous driving in these circumstances then why not fine both parties as if the one being undertaken was driving correctly in a lot of cases there would be no undertaking...

Absolutely!

But what's the betting Mr 50mph in the centre lane will escape scot free?

KP · Unread post by KP » 12 May 2011, 11:20

I'll have to go back to what i used to do then.

Flashing headlights and honking the horn...

Doesn't work as much in the swift due to its noddy-esque horn but the Disco's made people move from a fair distance lol

Unread post by **CitroJim** » 12 May 2011, 12:41

Paul-R wrote:But what's the betting Mr 50mph in the centre lane will escape scot free?

He's just the kind of offender they need to target. In common with a load of categories of careless driving I'm not sure the big whack of an OTS Fine and points is the way to go.

Much better to have a Dixon of Dock Green type of copper pull him to the side and give him a damm good rollicking and send him on his way with his tail between his legs.

Worked well when I was a nipper..

I reckon that's far more effective for many instances of misconduct that currently attract points and time.

It'll never work though as there's no money in it for the old bill

citronut · Unread post by **citronut** » 12 May 2011, 13:03

i agree Jim

let them rack up points on a very reliable .GOV data base,

then if they still ignore Dixon of the green clobber them with points and a heafty fine,

a few years ago i saw they were developing a device to check/catch tailgaters,

are they still working on such a device??

regards malcolm

MJM · Unread post by **MJM** » 12 May 2011, 14:30

There are several points of interest here.

As far as I know:-

No one in this country can be fined for a motoring offence without either pleading guilty or being found guilty by a court. The current NIP process for speeding offences does this by default.

A traffic officer, with current legislation, cannot find anyone guilty of anything; he can only present evidence to the relevant authorities who then decide whether to proceed with legal action.

Speeding is a black or white offence. You were either exceeding the posted limit or you weren’t. As long as the equipment used is calibrated, etc, there is no argument. Careless driving is many shades of grey depending upon opinion as much as outcome. So is tailgating. Does Highway Code rule 151 encourage it? How close is tailgating? Some is obviously dangerous. Some is less obviously so. If you are travelling in the centre lane of a 3-lane motorway with an adequate gap in front of you and someone pulls into that gap from either lane are you momentarily “guilty” of tailgating? (If the officer sees just that snapshot of your driving and he is having a bad hair day, what defence do you have?)

The undertaking part is also not black or white. I can’t find the right section of the Highway Code but it does advise staying in the same lane even if traffic to the left is flowing more easily. (i.e. undertaking)

On the spot fines? What the same ones as for litter, loutish behaviour? They really worked didn’t they?

Who is going to enforce the laws? The same people who enforce the mobile phone law?

I don’t carry £80 in cash on me and as far as I know there is no legal requirement to do so. I refuse to use a card in this situation and I bet there would be no mobile facilities to do so.

I thought that the era of passing pointless unenforceable legislation had passed, but apparently not.

Rant over.