[creepy coupe]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-39053658

[Edinburra]

Something exceptionally wrong with the system, unbelievable. Words fail me, the system fails me.

[GEP77]

It is insane. In the most part breaking the law while driving is an entirely voluntary action. I can't understand how hardship can be an excuse not to be banned when the choice to break the law in the first instance was made by the individual.

I'd like to see bans made mandatory for getting 12 points however the length of the ban is then adjusted according to the types of offence. 4 minor speeding offenses on the motorway whould be treated in an entirely different light to speeding in a built up area for instance. A ban could then be as short as a month - all the way to lifetime for persistent serious offenders.

[creepy coupe]

Originally Posted by GEP77

It is insane. In the most part breaking the law while driving is an entirely voluntary action. I can't understand how hardship can be an excuse not to be banned when the choice to break the law in the first instance was made by the individual.

I'd like to see bans made mandatory for getting 12 points however the length of the ban is then adjusted according to the types of offence. 4 minor speeding offenses on the motorway whould be treated in an entirely different light to speeding in a built up area for instance. A ban could then be as short as a month - all the way to lifetime for persistent serious offenders.

I agree. The points system should be more finely tuned for different offences.

[Archer-s]

I wonder how much their insurance is?

[goodbyalfa]

To be honest, I'm all for bans at 12 points if it wasn't for the invention of the traffic cameras. It is entirely feasible that you could be banned from 1 trip with quite minor speeding offenses i.e. 4 x 36mph in a 30 zone etc if you were particularly unlucky/careless.
I'm 99% sure that if the plod pulled you over and gave you a speeding ticket, you definitely wouldn't tot up another 3 x 3 point offences on the way to wherever you were going.
Big brother is watching is the problem...

[Nobby Clark]

"Automatic disqualification can be avoided or reduced in cases of 'exceptional hardship'. The process is a robust one and the concept of hardship must be proved to an exceptional level."
Losing a job on its own would rarely qualify, but proving it would mean being unable to pay a mortgage or feed your family, would."

So you're generally a good egg, working hard and you've paid of your mortgage, you have to be extra careful, otherwise you could loose your licence and your job.

Or be a bam, working the benefits system, and get 62 points?

[Jaghave]

Yea speed limits should be abolish and replace with recommanded speed and lost of license only occurs when you exceed the recommanded and are involve in an accident. Remove speed limits being a phantom tax by the government

[creepy coupe]

Originally Posted by Nobby Clark

"Automatic disqualification can be avoided or reduced in cases of 'exceptional hardship'. The process is a robust one and the concept of hardship must be proved to an exceptional level."
Losing a job on its own would rarely qualify, but proving it would mean being unable to pay a mortgage or feed your family, would."

So you're generally a good egg, working hard and you've paid of your mortgage, you have to be extra careful, otherwise you could loose your licence and your job.

Or be a bam, working the benefits system, and get 62 points?

Exactly. So you can get to 12 point and plead exceptional hardship if you have no insurance because you cancel the direct debit and needed the money to eat.But still continued to drive. But if you get twelve points for working hard and driving 40k miles a year. Pleading exceptional hardship because you want to keep your job isn't enough.

[Herr Dreier]

I can sort of get why someone pleading hardship may avoid a ban as long as there is also an element of remorse.

However, I really don't see how someone can rack up more than 15-18 points, as that must indicate that they've been let off once, but are still getting further points.

I would have thought the "hardship" rule should only apply once. After that, you're a stupid fucker and get what you deserve. Anyone let off more than once is just going to learn they can stick two fingers up and do what they please knowing they'll just keep getting off.

[creepy coupe]

Originally Posted by Herr Dreier

I can sort of get why someone pleading hardship may avoid a ban as long as there is also an element of remorse.

However, I really don't see how someone can rack up more than 15-18 points, as that must indicate that they've been let off once, but are still getting further points.

I would have thought the "hardship" rule should only apply once. After that, you're a stupid fucker and get what you deserve. Anyone let off more than once is just going to learn they can stick two fingers up and do what they please knowing they'll just keep getting off.

Although the "hardship" rule can be used several times. The same reason can't be used. EG I need a car to take my donkey to the vets. So if you're a good bullshitter.You're ok.

[NISFAN]

Should at the very least be a suspended ban. Any more traffic violations and the ban is automatic.

These with more than 20 points are most likely the types that don't give a shit, so it's either send me to jail or STFU your honour. Jails full so just stick some meaningless points on this losers license.

[creepy coupe]

Originally Posted by NISFAN

Should at the very least be a suspended ban. Any more traffic violations and the ban is automatic.

These with more than 20 points are most likely the types that don't give a shit, so it's either send me to jail or STFU your honour. Jails full so just stick some meaningless points on this losers license.

It staggers me when watch police-scum-robber programs. when they nick a tea leaf who doesn't have a licences,insurance etc and give them a ban.

[NISFAN]

Originally Posted by creepy coupe

It staggers me when watch police-scum-robber programs. when they nick a tea leaf who doesn't have a licences,insurance etc and give them a ban.

Yes, no deterrent whatsoever. Seems the only people concerned about going to jail are the law abiding, hard working types. I really do think corporal punishment should be brought back.......if not capital

[F30Andy]

Originally Posted by NISFAN

Yes, no deterrent whatsoever. Seems the only people concerned about going to jail are the law abiding, hard working types. I really do think corporal punishment should be brought back.......if not capital

Have to agree with you.

During my misspent youth the reason I was such a naughty bastard was because it was so easy to get away with it and because I had the knowledge from my peers a few years ahead of me that until you have been caught around half a dozen times the punishment is no more serious than the proverbial slap on the wrists.
Further to this I had no wife, kids or any other real responsibility and had "friends" staying in all the holding prisons in my catchment area. Because of this getting a year's jail time meant nothing to me in those days as I knew I would spend a maximum of three months behind the door before I was out.

What would have stopped me from being such a twat?......
Knowing that instead of staying at her majestys pleasure and coming out with increased street cred there would have been a risk of me being legally physically hurt or killed.

Fast forward to my mid 30's, wife kids and real responsibility.
All of a sudden prison is no longer a place to network with old faces but somewhere I would not want to be. A genuine fear runs inside of me at even the thought of doing something that would result in the loss of my freedom.

[Goneinsixtyseconds]

As you can only use the hardship rule only once in every three years, the guy with 62 points must be an extreme example of building up a lot of points in a short period and then bunching them together in one court appearance. Probably up and down an average speed limit or something similar for a couple of weeks and no idea what he was doing.

Probably less dangerous than one person caught doing 60 in 30 in a built up area and getting just 6 points.

What he can't be, is someone who repeatedly does it over 3 years, in lots of different locations or he would be banned.

[Edinburra]

Maybe this will go some way to redress the balance
Police seize 110,000 uninsured cars as drivers continue to ignore insurance rules | Motoring News | Honest John

[JNW1]

Originally Posted by F30Andy

Have to agree with you.

During my misspent youth the reason I was such a naughty bastard was because it was so easy to get away with it and because I had the knowledge from my peers a few years ahead of me that until you have been caught around half a dozen times the punishment is no more serious than the proverbial slap on the wrists.
Further to this I had no wife, kids or any other real responsibility and had "friends" staying in all the holding prisons in my catchment area. Because of this getting a year's jail time meant nothing to me in those days as I knew I would spend a maximum of three months behind the door before I was out.

What would have stopped me from being such a twat?......
Knowing that instead of staying at her majestys pleasure and coming out with increased street cred there would have been a risk of me being legally physically hurt or killed.

Fast forward to my mid 30's, wife kids and real responsibility.
All of a sudden prison is no longer a place to network with old faces but somewhere I would not want to be. A genuine fear runs inside of me at even the thought of doing something that would result in the loss of my freedom.

What I find interesting is how the courts in at least some parts of the country deal with offences of excessive speeding compared to all of this.

For someone to amass over 60 points they are clearly just habitual offenders who don't give a monkeys because they know they'll just get away with it. Similarly, I suspect people get away with suspended sentences for things like burglary and assault, especially if it's a first offence; that despite the fact they've done real damage to others (financial or physical), often (usually?) with malice aforethought.

Now contrast that with the punishment handed-out to the bike rider in the link below. Yes he was way over the speed limit and in my view deserved more than 3 points and the standard fine; however, 4 months in prison and a 5-year ban? Even if you accept the high speed was by definition dangerous driving (debatable IMO) he killed nobody, injured nobody and inconvenienced nobody on what was a relatively deserted piece of road in (comparatively speaking) the middle of nowhere. Therefore, how is that punishment proportionate to the offence and how on earth is it justified given the leniency shown to others for what I at least would consider more serious crimes?

Strange set of values our legal system seems to have developed....

https://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/fp...ike-at-149mph/