Is this legalised blackmail?
Discussion
I thought this country was all about fairness,well i thought so anyway,looking at the NIP it couldnt appear more "you are guilty"!!, as apart from being written in bold RED there is absolutely no room for a challenge to the equipment and its performance,just fill in form,your done and if you dont fill it in and return on time you will get a double dose.
Ive heard of so many people who dare challenge the equipment being hit with a bigger penalties that ime now of the mind even though there is a borderline of 3-4mph in my case and i could be legal of not wanting to challenge,like most of joe public i think along the lines of take the £60 fine and 3 points or challenge them and get a £300 fine and 3 points.
Dont get me wrong if its a fair cop ile take it on the chin but how do i know its a fair cop if they havent got the paragraph on the form for me to ask for the last time the cam was calibrated so they can prove to me ive broken the law.
Ive heard of so many people who dare challenge the equipment being hit with a bigger penalties that ime now of the mind even though there is a borderline of 3-4mph in my case and i could be legal of not wanting to challenge,like most of joe public i think along the lines of take the £60 fine and 3 points or challenge them and get a £300 fine and 3 points.
Dont get me wrong if its a fair cop ile take it on the chin but how do i know its a fair cop if they havent got the paragraph on the form for me to ask for the last time the cam was calibrated so they can prove to me ive broken the law.
That fundamentally is the problem. There was once the theory of our justice system of "innocent until proven guilty". Now, unfortunately, it seems that you are "guilty until you can prove otherwise, which will be hard because we will conceal, lie and generally obstruct you at every turn - cos you are guilty so just cop for the fine and points".
Shame really. I wonder how many thousands of people who have simply just taken the easy option, knowing damn well that it wasnt them? And how many thousands get done when the equipment was faulty or illegally placed?
Is it legalised blackmail? Yes, damn right it is....
Shame really. I wonder how many thousands of people who have simply just taken the easy option, knowing damn well that it wasnt them? And how many thousands get done when the equipment was faulty or illegally placed?
Is it legalised blackmail? Yes, damn right it is....
A friend of mine (next door neighbour and PH'er) went to court over a NIP, the old bat of a mag tried to do him for the following:
Failing to fill in the NIP 3 points
Speeding 3 points
Failing to produce license 3 points
+ £1000 fine!!!!
For doing 48 in a 40! untill the cps told her she can't actually do that.
God what did my forefathers fight & die for this country for?
Alan
Failing to fill in the NIP 3 points
Speeding 3 points
Failing to produce license 3 points
+ £1000 fine!!!!
For doing 48 in a 40! untill the cps told her she can't actually do that.
God what did my forefathers fight & die for this country for?
Alan
Yes, it is.
It's quite common, though most people come across it at the low level Scamera Pratnership.
But it runs riot in the "public service".
There was an article in the ST about the Disability mob doing the same thing to some poor sod.
Some unaccountable quango (this includes the Scameras and the "Police Service"
gets an idea into its head (in the case in question it was that a 70 year old disabled man had discriminated against two 60 year old disabled people).
It can spend the bottomless pit of public money collecting or creating evidence to support its view
Then it decides on an appropriate and/or arbitrary punishment. (In this case , £2000 fine and compulsory retraining in disability. This was in response to an issue with a £5/nt campsite, run on a part time basis, and the bloke is himself disabled).
Then the victim has two options. He can pay up, or he can go to court. If he goes to court, he has to pay his legal costs. The quango is funded by the taxpayer, at massive expense. If he loses, he might be done for the quango's costs as well. If he wins, the quango can appeal down the line until it wins or bankrupts him, because they are backed by the bottomless pit of public money.
(There is an extreme case of this with the Railtrack scam, where the gov't is trying to rack up obscene costs to fight off the court case)
So, you either pay up or you get stung for legal costs.
You cannot complain. Well, you can, but there's no point.
You complain to the quango first, who of course will do nothing (i.e. the Police) and side with themselves. This is normally at several levels.
Then you can complain to a review body, which is blatantly on the side of the quango (e.g. the IPCC).
Invariably, you have to prove they were at fault/malicious. They do not have to prove their case. Proving maliciousness is near as dammit impossible.
And, of course, you have to pay legal costs, the quango is public funded, and then you are in the same game again.
In the unlikely event you get as far as the Parliamentary Ombudsman and win, you will probably get costs, but no action will be taken against the quango or its staff, who will carry on as if nothing had happened.
Once one of these scumbag orgs. gets their teeth into you you *cannot* win.
So, legalised blackmail is very accurate.
It's quite common, though most people come across it at the low level Scamera Pratnership.
But it runs riot in the "public service".
There was an article in the ST about the Disability mob doing the same thing to some poor sod.
Some unaccountable quango (this includes the Scameras and the "Police Service"
gets an idea into its head (in the case in question it was that a 70 year old disabled man had discriminated against two 60 year old disabled people). It can spend the bottomless pit of public money collecting or creating evidence to support its view
Then it decides on an appropriate and/or arbitrary punishment. (In this case , £2000 fine and compulsory retraining in disability. This was in response to an issue with a £5/nt campsite, run on a part time basis, and the bloke is himself disabled).
Then the victim has two options. He can pay up, or he can go to court. If he goes to court, he has to pay his legal costs. The quango is funded by the taxpayer, at massive expense. If he loses, he might be done for the quango's costs as well. If he wins, the quango can appeal down the line until it wins or bankrupts him, because they are backed by the bottomless pit of public money.
(There is an extreme case of this with the Railtrack scam, where the gov't is trying to rack up obscene costs to fight off the court case)
So, you either pay up or you get stung for legal costs.
You cannot complain. Well, you can, but there's no point.
You complain to the quango first, who of course will do nothing (i.e. the Police) and side with themselves. This is normally at several levels.
Then you can complain to a review body, which is blatantly on the side of the quango (e.g. the IPCC).
Invariably, you have to prove they were at fault/malicious. They do not have to prove their case. Proving maliciousness is near as dammit impossible.
And, of course, you have to pay legal costs, the quango is public funded, and then you are in the same game again.
In the unlikely event you get as far as the Parliamentary Ombudsman and win, you will probably get costs, but no action will be taken against the quango or its staff, who will carry on as if nothing had happened.
Once one of these scumbag orgs. gets their teeth into you you *cannot* win.
So, legalised blackmail is very accurate.
maxf said:The Theft Act 1968 defined 'blackmail' as being committed "... if, with a view to gain for himself or another or with intent to cause loss to another, he makes any unwarranted demand with menaces - Streaky
Not sure about 'blackmail' - but it seems to me it's certainly demanding money with menaces!
Barstewards...
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff