Black boxes for all cars

[Russ]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3178579.stm

And how long will it take for someone to find a way to modify the chip to their own advantage?

[Xaccers]

Imagine how powerful the computer system would have to be to cope with all the motorists out there breaking the law!
Most people on motorways would be done for doing more than 70mph (hopefully including the Police Peugeot Expert driver who passed me at 100mph last night near Derby on the M1, who drifted all over the place, changed lanes without indicating and certainly didn't have his blue lights going).

[Lord Nikon]

My response would be this....

1) How would it be fitted? Splicing into an existing wiring harness could theoretically cause a fire risk, and would invalidate the warranty on some cars as well as void things like mobility agreements.
2) if the link to it was fused, then what is stopping the fuse being removed
3) if the link is NOT fused, then I assume the Govt will foot the bill for cars burned out due to electrical problems
4) if the unit is fitted then I assume the govt will be footing the bill for increased fuel usage? (current drain on the alternator increases drag on the engine and lowers fuel efficiency)
5) Who do they expect to foot the bill?

[Stuart]

Originally posted by Lord Nikon
My response would be this....

1) How would it be fitted? Splicing into an existing wiring harness could theoretically cause a fire risk, and would invalidate the warranty on some cars as well as void things like mobility agreements.

If the device were fitted when a car was new, the warranty would surely cover it. If the device is fitted to an older car (during the MOT) then surely the warranty would have expired anyway?

2) if the link to it was fused, then what is stopping the fuse being removed

Don't know. If a car uses an engine management system, the chip could be integrated in that.

3) if the link is NOT fused, then I assume the Govt will foot the bill for cars burned out due to electrical problems

Probably not...

4) if the unit is fitted then I assume the govt will be footing the bill for increased fuel usage? (current drain on the alternator increases drag on the engine and lowers fuel efficiency)

Again probably not. Actually, I wouldn't have thought the current drain would be any more than say switching the radio on, or plugging a mobile phone in.

5) Who do they expect to foot the bill?

Probably us.

Actually, I don't see the point of this chip. They say it could be used to track terrorists and criminals. Theoritcally, it could. This is assuming that a) The criminal/terrorist is using their own car (unlikely) or b) The police know what car they are using (possible).

It could, however, make Congestion Charging easier/cheaper to implement, and make tax dogers easier to find.

Other than that, it does not seem to achieve anything our current systems cannot.

Originally posted by Lord Nikon
My response would be this....

1) How would it be fitted? Splicing into an existing wiring harness could theoretically cause a fire risk, and would invalidate the warranty on some cars as well as void things like mobility agreements.
2) if the link to it was fused, then what is stopping the fuse being removed
3) if the link is NOT fused, then I assume the Govt will foot the bill for cars burned out due to electrical problems
4) if the unit is fitted then I assume the govt will be footing the bill for increased fuel usage? (current drain on the alternator increases drag on the engine and lowers fuel efficiency)
5) Who do they expect to foot the bill?

The other important question, would you make dam sure Labour, never makes Government for a third term ?

[Lord Nikon]

Originally posted by scastle
[snip]
Actually, I wouldn't have thought the current drain would be any more than say switching the radio on, or plugging a mobile phone in.
[snip]

Maybe, but I CHOOSE to switch on a radio, or to plug in a phone charger, I do NOT choose to install an electronic surveilance device in the car, which is effectively what this system would be. A way to monitor ALL cars & people constantly while moving.

The system states it can check "when cars waver on the road, or how many times a car enters a bus lane"

Point here is how many times do you swerve to avoid a cat / dog? or a drunk pedestrian? possibly a pothole in the road?

each of those would also be logged, and could lead to the police charging you with not having proper control of the vehicle.

Recently I had to tax the car again. (6 months tax the first time) and couldn't find the MOT the first time, I found it within a week and taxed the car... The law generally allows a little leeway, 2 weeks to renew tax, this is at the discretion of the officer involved and as long as you tax the car from the start of that month they are happy... This system would allow NO leeway.

If the system is ECU based then what happens if the ECU Fails? the records would be tied to the OLD ECU, not the new one, if you fit a second hand ECU (more economical on older vehicles) then the system wouldn't point to your car any more...


Its an example of how they want to mess us around, yet again.


Also, new cars purchased and imported. They would also require a retrofit of the system which COULD or WOULD invalidate the warranty!

[zoombini]

You also have to wonder if it will be made so that it cannot be disabled without disabling the car?

Disabling it would help thieves get away without capture, so disabling the car would seem a pretty sensible thing to do if the box gets disabled.

However, you can bet that there are going to be many that want to disable them anyway.

I would imagine that they would only initially be compulsory in new cars.

Originally posted by zoombini
I would imagine that they would only initially be compulsory in new cars.

Thats not what i heard, apparently whenever someone takes along their 2nd hand car to be MOT'd they will install it there at the garage.

I think the brains behind this have thought about people wanting to disable the box, the thing is, if the signals require information about Road tax MOT status etc to be sent to the receivers out on the road then, you will be getting fines through the post for either 1) Not having a MOT certificate or 2) Not having a valid road fund license.

I think the chip will also include driving license information, so disabling the box could be almost impossible to avoid fines, as the system itself requiring the data when you pass receivers out on the roads.

Total barmy idea and I do not think it will ever work.

[Ramrod]

Another example of Labours dream of a nanny state

[Xaccers]

What if you sell the car but the new owner doesn't update the chip details like a lot of people dont update their log books?

[Lord Nikon]

And what about vehicles with multiple drivers? eg family car, pool car etc etc etc

the system is fraught with problems, and will receive unbelievable amounts of opposition

[Jerrek]

This is a bad idea.

[Shaun]

Excellent idea, your all law abiding people, you have nothing to worry about, I think we should chip people too, not so we can tell where they are just who they are.

Gets my vote.

[Stuart]

Originally posted by Lord Nikon

Also, new cars purchased and imported. They would also require a retrofit of the system which COULD or WOULD invalidate the warranty!

The government would simply change the law to require the manufacturer to fit the chip at the factory. They would then ban any sales of non-chipped cars in this country. They have done this in the past in all sorts of industries.

As to warranties. Surely, most manfacturer's warranties allow authorised service centres to make modifications?

Unfortunately, if the government decides to introduce this (and there is no evidence they will), they will not worry about the effect on the motorist.

I don't see what this system can do that can't be done with the current systems a lot more cheaply.

Also, as far as I can tell, the only people who will benefit from this are the government.

The chip is a bad idea.

[Lord Nikon]

Is there any way we can get the current govt out of power before the next election?