Fixed Penalty Notice motoring fines may rise to £90

[Taf]

Fines for motoring offences such as speeding should be increased from £60 to £90, the government suggested as it launched a consultation on the subject.

...drivers caught tailgating, braking suddenly, or passing a vehicle on the nearside might face a fixed penalty notice in future, like many speeders today.

Fixed penalty notices for driving without insurance should also be raised, from £200 to £300, the document adds, "to reflect the seriousness of the offence".

Ministers are seeking views from the public on the proposals, which would apply to England, Scotland and Wales, before deciding whether to pursue them.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-18438724

I see so many idiots on the road these days that £90 seems a trivial ammount, but I think it's about time for penalties to be set according to income or it hits the poorest hardest (as usual).

[Tim Deegan]

Originally Posted by Taf

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-18438724

I see so many idiots on the road these days that £90 seems a trivial ammount, but I think it's about time for penalties to be set according to income or it hits the poorest hardest (as usual).

I agree with you on this Taf. It seems that many people don't care about the fines as they stand at the moment, because it is like small change to them.

Maybe it should be worked out as a percentage of their income.

[Pierre]

Sorry, is the crime anymore serious if committed by somebody well paid?

[Ramrod]

Originally Posted by Tim Deegan

Maybe it should be worked out as a percentage of their income.

Some areas of the country do that already......

[Russ]

Originally Posted by Pierre

Sorry, is the crime anymore serious if committed by somebody well paid?

It's not but £90 to you or me is likely to have a bigger impact than on a top-4 team Premiership footballer.

[Tim Deegan]

Originally Posted by Pierre

Sorry, is the crime anymore serious if committed by somebody well paid?

The fine is supposed to be a punishment that acts as a deterrent. £90 to one person may be a huge punisment, that they will struggle to pay. But for others it won't put them off doing it again, as it is like small change for them.

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by Russ

It's not but £90 to you or me is likely to have a bigger impact than on a top-4 team Premiership footballer.

Nothing would bother a top 4 premiership player.....

No this, as usual, would hit the hard working middleclass most, and joyriding toe rags off the estate least.

[Tim Deegan]

Originally Posted by Pierre

Nothing would bother a top 4 premiership player.....

No this, as usual, would hit the hard working middleclass most, and joyriding toe rags off the estate least.

I'd say it would hit the rich the least

[Sirius]

Originally Posted by Taf

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-18438724

I see so many idiots on the road these days that £90 seems a trivial ammount, but I think it's about time for penalties to be set according to income or it hits the poorest hardest (as usual).

I hope they will also fine the middle lane owners club members

---------- Post added at 17:03 ---------- Previous post was at 16:59 ----------

Originally Posted by Tim Deegan

The fine is supposed to be a punishment that acts as a deterrent. £90 to one person may be a huge punisment, that they will struggle to pay. But for others it won't put them off doing it again, as it is like small change for them.

Then fixed penalties should be abolished and make the fines be based on what the judge see's as best fits your pay packet, That means then that the unemployed get away with nothing to pay as they dont earn

A fine is a fine and just because you work does not mean you should be hit harder than someone who does not work. ?

Originally Posted by Pierre

Sorry, is the crime anymore serious if committed by somebody well paid?

Looks like some think they are

[Tim Deegan]

Originally Posted by Sirius

I hope they will also fine the middle lane owners club members

---------- Post added at 17:03 ---------- Previous post was at 16:59 ----------



Then fixed penalties should be abolished and make the fines be based on what the judge see's as best fits your pay packet, That means then that the unemployed get away with nothing to pay as they dont earn

A fine is a fine and just because you work does not mean you should be hit harder than someone who does not work. ?

If the unemployed got away with paying nothing, then it wouldn't be a deterrent. There has to be a minimum fine.

[danielf]

Wouldn't means-testing for fines cost more than it would raise?

[MovedGoalPosts]

Fixed penalties are exactly that a set amount. Harsh for some, and relaxed for others. As far as I know you don't have to accept a fixed penalty and can ask to be heard at court. But you then risk a higher penalty as FPNS should simplify stuff. The court is also likely to apply a sliding scale based on actual means to pay.

FPNS have gradually been used to save costs of paperwork in prosecution. Fair enough, but they only offer a little discretion. They should only be used for straightforward matters where they are an equivalent to a slap on the wrist. I'm not sure careless driving can fall into that?

That same article also suggests a FPN for lack of insurance. That one is a difficult call. I know your car can now be towed and potentially scrapped as an added deterrent. Realistically though the punishment needs to be in addition to the amount of the insurance premium the person has evaded paying, otherwise some who drive around in bangers will see the risk of getting caught as cheaper than doing it properly.

[Sirius]

So here's a hypothetical question which crime is more serious ?

John speeds on the motorway and is fined for doing 80 miles an hour he earns £20000 a year and is fined £70.00

Bill speeds on the motorway and is fined for doing 80 miles an hour he earns £30000 a year and is fined £130.00

Meanwhile Eric who feels working is for mug's speeds at 80mph in a car he borrowed from his m8 what would his fine be when caught

[rogerdraig]

scrap the penalty charge completely and make it community service instead aas long as it was the same amount of days what ever your income then i would say the punishment would be proportionate for all


but i bet this is more about getting more tax in than educating drivers ( not that i am at all cynical )

[Sirius]

Originally Posted by rogerdraig

scrap the penalty charge completely and make it community service instead aas long as it was the same amount of days what ever your income then i would say the punishment would be proportionate for all


but i bet this is more about getting more tax in than educating drivers ( not that i am at all cynical )