No Tolerance Speeding Penalties??
Discussion
read something in the paper the other day about a proposal to put a no tolerance policy through on speeding - so if yuo get caught doing 32 in a 30 zone then you will get a fine and possibly points.
been trying to find info on this on the web to verify but can't?
help is appreciated if anyone knows anything / where i can find it
'fresher
been trying to find info on this on the web to verify but can't?
help is appreciated if anyone knows anything / where i can find it
'fresher
refresher said:
read something in the paper the other day about a proposal to put a no tolerance policy through on speeding - so if yuo get caught doing 32 in a 30 zone then you will get a fine and possibly points.
been trying to find info on this on the web to verify but can't?
help is appreciated if anyone knows anything / where i can find it
'fresher
No tolerance would be any realiable measurement over 30 , not waiting to 32.
I am not aware of any policy instructing Police officers that they "must" do the above, though they already can.
This is the bill currently before parliament - intoduces a 'sliding scale' of fines and points from; 2 points £40, through 3 points £60, to 6 points £100 , depending on speed above the limit - implied, but not as far as I can see explicitly stated, is the effective end of the ACPO 10%+2 (which in all fairness was only ever a guidline, not a law). I think the results will probably be very, very, bad, but unfortunately I have absolutely no doubt whatsoever that I am about to find out.
>> Edited by Einion Yrth on Wednesday 15th March 09:56
>> Edited by Einion Yrth on Wednesday 15th March 09:56
what i took from the article was that whilst at the moment you can argue 10% variance on the speedo as mitigation and the CPS don't prosecute, the new ruling will mean that speedo variance mitigation will no longer be accepted therefore you will always be prosecuted.
i might of mis-read the article which is why i'm looking for more info
i might of mis-read the article which is why i'm looking for more info
refresher said:
what i took from the article was that whilst at the moment you can argue 10% variance on the speedo as mitigation and the CPS don't prosecute, the new ruling will mean that speedo variance mitigation will no longer be accepted therefore you will always be prosecuted.
i might of mis-read the article which is why i'm looking for more info
Which is why I gave you a link to the Bill currently before the house, that currently is 'the horses mouth'. After it is passed we get into the practicalities of enforcing the new law, which in all probability means the end of any kind of leeway, but nothing is yet certain.
[quote=Einion Yrth]This is the bill currently before parliament - intoduces a 'sliding scale' of fines and points from; 2 points £40, through 3 points £60, to 6 points £100 , depending on speed above the limit - implied, but not as far as I can see explicitly stated, is the effective end of the ACPO 10%+2 (which in all fairness was only ever a guidline, not a law). I think the results will probably be very, very, bad, but unfortunately I have absolutely no doubt whatsoever that I am about to find out.
cheers. perfect.
now just need someone to decode the legalese of the bill...........
cheers. perfect.
now just need someone to decode the legalese of the bill...........
refresher said:
what i took from the article was that whilst at the moment you can argue 10% variance on the speedo as mitigation and the CPS don't prosecute, the new ruling will mean that speedo variance mitigation will no longer be accepted therefore you will always be prosecuted.
I can see it happening, as the variance argument was always flawed, in that speedometers are allowed to over-read but not under-read. Therefore, if you get pinged doing 32, your speedo must have been reading at least 32mph, possibly more.
Einion Yrth said:
This is the bill currently before parliament - intoduces a 'sliding scale' of fines and points from; 2 points £40, through 3 points £60, to 6 points £100 , depending on speed above the limit - implied, but not as far as I can see explicitly stated, is the effective end of the ACPO 10%+2 (which in all fairness was only ever a guidline, not a law). I think the results will probably be very, very, bad, but unfortunately I have absolutely no doubt whatsoever that I am about to find out.
And The ACPO gidelines have never said that prosecutions shouldn't take place until 10% +2mph over the limits is passed.
vonhosen said:
And The ACPO gidelines have never said that prosecutions shouldn't take place until 10% +2mph over the limits is passed.
That appears to have been the spirit in which the guidelines have been observed, which suited me well, because it suits my style of driving, strongly influenced by, but not a slave to, the speed limit.
Einion Yrth said:
And The ACPO gidelines have never said that prosecutions shouldn't take place until 10% +2mph over the limits is passed.
That appears to have been the spirit in which the guidelines have been observed, which suited me well, because it suits my style of driving, strongly influenced by, but not a slave to, the speed limit.
agree completely Einion.
I think the reason for the ACPO Guidelines of 10% + 2 was because it was originally thought to be a safe margin of error to allow for inaccurate speedometers.
Bearing in mind that old cars had fairly inaccurately calibrated speedos and couldn't be guaranteed accurate, on average they were believed to be 10% out. Therefore the 10% leeway + 2 virtually guaranteed a fair cop for exceeding the posted speed limit in ANY vehicle of that time.
Obviously modern day vehicles have vastly improved speedometers with much better accuracy and maybe this government wishes to increase its revenue by changing the margin allowed for error to reflect that accuracy.
>> Edited by XMG5 on Wednesday 15th March 12:57
Bearing in mind that old cars had fairly inaccurately calibrated speedos and couldn't be guaranteed accurate, on average they were believed to be 10% out. Therefore the 10% leeway + 2 virtually guaranteed a fair cop for exceeding the posted speed limit in ANY vehicle of that time.
Obviously modern day vehicles have vastly improved speedometers with much better accuracy and maybe this government wishes to increase its revenue by changing the margin allowed for error to reflect that accuracy.
>> Edited by XMG5 on Wednesday 15th March 12:57
The ACPO guidelines suggesting that 10%+2 was the best threshold at which prosecution should be considered were never there to help the motorist. It is to ensure that the tolerances in measurement of the measuring equipment are fully allowed for. Every piece of electronic or electro-mechanical measuring equipment has a tolerance. If the prosecution of drivers for, say, 31 mph in a 30 mph limit starts, the speed reading is easily challenged and more people are likely to challenge it. I know I would challenge 31 or 32 whilst I would probably not consider challenging 35 or 36.
Additionally, of course, it will annoy more people who almost never, technically, exceed any speed limit and that is something the Police will be anxious to avoid (if they've any sense of P.R.).
The question is whether the new laws will alter the way in which the speed limit threshold is operated IN PRACTICE rather than what the law allows.It already allows for prosecution for 1 mph over any limit. Common sense says that the current thresholds probably won't change at all.
Additionally, of course, it will annoy more people who almost never, technically, exceed any speed limit and that is something the Police will be anxious to avoid (if they've any sense of P.R.).
The question is whether the new laws will alter the way in which the speed limit threshold is operated IN PRACTICE rather than what the law allows.It already allows for prosecution for 1 mph over any limit. Common sense says that the current thresholds probably won't change at all.
pdV6 said:
what i took from the article was that whilst at the moment you can argue 10% variance on the speedo as mitigation and the CPS don't prosecute, the new ruling will mean that speedo variance mitigation will no longer be accepted therefore you will always be prosecuted.
I can see it happening, as the variance argument was always flawed, in that speedometers are allowed to over-read but not under-read. Therefore, if you get pinged doing 32, your speedo must have been reading at least 32mph, possibly more.
The tolerence I'm talking about was only ever a rule of thumb and was never to be confused as law or mandate, just good practise to give the speeding driver a "bit of rope" with which to hang himself so to speak.
>> Edited by XMG5 on Wednesday 15th March 13:35
XMG5 said:
The tolerence I'm talking about was only ever a rule of thumb and was never to be confused as law or mandate, just good practise to give the speeding driver a "bit of rope" with which to hang himself so to speak.
Yeah I realise that; I was just explaining why I think they will ditch the 10%+2 guideline.
Posted this previously but still valid and at the risk of repetition.
Scientifically if one wishes to calculate the experimental error when reading an analogue instrument the maximum accuracy to which it can be read is +/- half of the minor scale division.
Eg voltmeter marked in increments of 0.1V, error in reading is +/-0.05v.
That is for a steady reading in a lab situation having eliminated parallax errors etc.
Now a typical speedo is graduated in 5mph intervals, therefore the closest to which it can be read accurately is +/-2.5mph, i.e. half a minor division.
Of course it is possible to estimate a more accurate reading, but that is all it is, an estimate!
So all this bollox in that vile piece of legislation, the Road Safety Bill, which promises variable fines and variable points for differences in readings of 1mph, when the instruments that the offenders and the enforcers use are only accurate in the region of v +/-2mph or +/-3mph in the case of some cameras. Well the ineptness and stupidity of it just blows my mind.
Long time ago a very wise Inspector once said words to the effect of "Limit plus 10%, that gets the reading and calibration errors out of the way. Add another 10 mph on top to get "Limit + 10% + 10mph" then they must have known they were speeding."
Seemed fair then, seems fair today.
FiF
edited typos
and again even more typos!!!
>> Edited by Flat in Fifth on Wednesday 15th March 14:16
Scientifically if one wishes to calculate the experimental error when reading an analogue instrument the maximum accuracy to which it can be read is +/- half of the minor scale division.
Eg voltmeter marked in increments of 0.1V, error in reading is +/-0.05v.
That is for a steady reading in a lab situation having eliminated parallax errors etc.
Now a typical speedo is graduated in 5mph intervals, therefore the closest to which it can be read accurately is +/-2.5mph, i.e. half a minor division.
Of course it is possible to estimate a more accurate reading, but that is all it is, an estimate!
So all this bollox in that vile piece of legislation, the Road Safety Bill, which promises variable fines and variable points for differences in readings of 1mph, when the instruments that the offenders and the enforcers use are only accurate in the region of v +/-2mph or +/-3mph in the case of some cameras. Well the ineptness and stupidity of it just blows my mind.
Long time ago a very wise Inspector once said words to the effect of "Limit plus 10%, that gets the reading and calibration errors out of the way. Add another 10 mph on top to get "Limit + 10% + 10mph" then they must have known they were speeding."
Seemed fair then, seems fair today.
FiF
edited typos
and again even more typos!!!
>> Edited by Flat in Fifth on Wednesday 15th March 14:16
Flat in Fifth said:
Posted this previously but still valid and at the risk of repetition.
Scientifically if one wishes to calculate the experimental error when reading an analogue instrument the maximum accuracy to which it can be read is +/- half of the minor scale division.
Eg voltmeter marked in increments of 0.1V, error in reading is +/-0.05v.
That is for a steady reading in a lab situation having eliminated parallax errors etc.
Now a typical speedo is graduated in 5mph intervals, therefore the closest to which it can be read accurately is +/-2.5mph, i.e. half a minor division.
Of course it is possible to estimate a more accurate reading, but that is all it is, an estimate!
So all this bollox in that vile piece of legislation, the Road Safety Bill, which promises variable fines and variable points for differences in readings of 1mph, when the instruments that the offenders and the enforcers use are only accurate in the region of v +/-2mph or +/-3mph in the case of some cameras. Well the ineptness and stupidity of it just blows my mind.
Long time ago a very wise Inspector once said words to the effect of "Limit plus 10%, that gets the reading and calibration errors out of the way. Add another 10 mph on top to get "Limit + 10% + 10mph" then they must have known they were speeding."
Seemed fair then, seems fair today.
FiF
edited typos
and again even more typos!!!
>> Edited by Flat in Fifth on Wednesday 15th March 14:16
that reminds me when the local traffic department gave a talk and the policeman told us that 85mph was the start limit in cheshire for stopping/prosecution on the m’way, for the very reasons you have stated, lets hope that grass roots police will apply commonsense otherwise there will be a significant back lash, afterall, you only police by consent
vonhosen said:
All the ACPO guidelines say is you shouldn't be issuing warnings for any speed above 10%+2mph over the limit (only in exceptional circumstances). They say nothing about not issuing tickets below that mark.
I think we've got that thanks, constantly repeating yourself is pointless.
I am not sure myself whether or not this means an end to any initial allowence of the 10% + 2. The law states that anything over 30mph has an automatic fine of 3 points plus £60. The new one states 30 to 39 is 2 points and £40. The lower limits are not changing, just the relative fine. Maybe its not safe to just assume that now we have 35-39 as 2 points, and 30 - 34 will still be ignored, but I think it will remain like that.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff