New Bands for Speeding in UK
Discussion
zygalski said:
GPSHead said:
zygalski said:
Yes, but how can we avoid getting points & a fine? That's the part I can't get to grips with.
Yes, but why post on a motoring forum if one gets pleasure from the thought of drivers being subjected to rigidly enforced, often unreasonably low speed limits, and is desperate to 'humorously' remind everyone of that, multiple times per thread? That's the part I can't get to grips with.What everyone seems to be ignoring is how these new guidelines change the fines even for the most minor offenses.
Under the new regime, the fine for someone 'nicked' doing 35mph in a 30mph zone, earning £300pw will increase to at least £150. At 41mph you're up for at least £200.
That's a lot of free coin to HMG for a quick change in the rules...
Under the new regime, the fine for someone 'nicked' doing 35mph in a 30mph zone, earning £300pw will increase to at least £150. At 41mph you're up for at least £200.
That's a lot of free coin to HMG for a quick change in the rules...
corozin said:
What everyone seems to be ignoring is how these new guidelines change the fines even for the most minor offenses.
Under the new regime, the fine for someone 'nicked' doing 35mph in a 30mph zone, earning £300pw will increase to at least £150. At 41mph you're up for at least £200.
That's a lot of free coin to HMG for a quick change in the rules...
You've missed the point. Not your fault given the misleading media coverage. Under the new regime, the fine for someone 'nicked' doing 35mph in a 30mph zone, earning £300pw will increase to at least £150. At 41mph you're up for at least £200.
That's a lot of free coin to HMG for a quick change in the rules...
35/30 mph is a speed awareness course or a £100 fixed penalty.
Only if the offender does not do the course or pay the £100 fixed penalty, would your example have any relevance.
I accept, of course, that not everyone is eligible for a fixed penalty. E.g. repeat offenders with 9 or more relevant points.
corozin said:
What everyone seems to be ignoring is how these new guidelines change the fines even for the most minor offenses.
Under the new regime, the fine for someone 'nicked' doing 35mph in a 30mph zone, earning £300pw will increase to at least £150. At 41mph you're up for at least £200.
That's a lot of free coin to HMG for a quick change in the rules...
IF the case goes to court, whereas 99% of the time your conviction will be handled with the unchanged fixed penalty system.Under the new regime, the fine for someone 'nicked' doing 35mph in a 30mph zone, earning £300pw will increase to at least £150. At 41mph you're up for at least £200.
That's a lot of free coin to HMG for a quick change in the rules...
This is a good example of how the press misrepresent situations. Myself, like many others it seems, read about this on a national newspaper website, saw the new bands, and had a minor meltdown at being charged hundreds of pounds for driving at 31mph. Whereas the truth is very different. I came on this thread for a rant, but I've left being educated, which is nice.
martindesu said:
Of course, it's ALL about road safety, and not making £££......
GloriaGTI said:
agtlaw said:
No legislative amendment to section 89 or related provisions. No new regulations. No new laws. No change in the 10% + 2 threshold. No change to speed awareness courses. No change to £100 / 3 point fixed penalties. If your case goes to court, the maximum fine is unchanged. No new powers of sentence. Income based speeding fines are not new - they've been around for decades.
So what has changed?
The Sentencing Council, a body independent of the government, has set out a new Guideline to be applied at court. The new Guideline is very similar to the existing Guideline except for the very highest category of offences. For example, 101 mph and above. In such a case, sentencers will now apply a starting point of a Band C fine. Until today it was Band B. Magistrates are not confined by guidelines and may depart from guidelines in appropriate cases. A guideline is not a sentencing power derived from legislation. A guideline is only a guideline.
You're right to emphasise that unless you go to court, absolutely nothing has changed. Pay a £100 fixed penalty and the matter is not dealt with by a court.
Thank you, agtlaw - nice and clear for us simple folk.So what has changed?
The Sentencing Council, a body independent of the government, has set out a new Guideline to be applied at court. The new Guideline is very similar to the existing Guideline except for the very highest category of offences. For example, 101 mph and above. In such a case, sentencers will now apply a starting point of a Band C fine. Until today it was Band B. Magistrates are not confined by guidelines and may depart from guidelines in appropriate cases. A guideline is not a sentencing power derived from legislation. A guideline is only a guideline.
You're right to emphasise that unless you go to court, absolutely nothing has changed. Pay a £100 fixed penalty and the matter is not dealt with by a court.
RWD cossie wil said:
So.... that's saying it's far safer to speed in 30/40/50/60 mph zones? The motorway fine is £2500 max.... where's the logic? Or is it simply a case of better chance of speeding so up the maximum fine to rake it in?
Of course, it's ALL about road safety, and not making £££......
To be honest you have to be doing pretty well for yourself if £2500 is 175% of your weekly income. I'm surprised there is actually a maximum cap, maybe agtlaw knows the reasons why?Of course, it's ALL about road safety, and not making £££......
I would surmise that the reason penalties are higher on motorways is that the speed you're likely to be doing, combined with the number of vehicles around you, means that the potential for big accidents that involve others is significantly higher than other roads?
Durzel said:
To be honest you have to be doing pretty well for yourself if £1000 or £2500 is 175% of your weekly income. I'm surprised there is actually a maximum cap, maybe agtlaw knows the reasons why?
I would surmise that the reason penalties are higher on motorways is that the speed you're likely to be doing, combined with the number of vehicles around you, means that the potential for big accidents that involve others is significantly higher than other roads?
Well clearly that is a bit off since the motorways are the safest roads in the country and most accidents involve fatigue or user error rather than outright speed. I would surmise that the reason penalties are higher on motorways is that the speed you're likely to be doing, combined with the number of vehicles around you, means that the potential for big accidents that involve others is significantly higher than other roads?
Maximum fines are set by Parliament. These are the current levels for all offences (not just motoring offences):
Level 1 - £200
Level 2 - £500
Level 3 - £1000
Level 4 - £2500
Level 5 - unlimited
Exceeding a speed limit on a motorway is a Level 4 offence. Any other road, Level 3. Don't ask me why Parliament decided that.
The Sentencing Council (which is independent of the government) defines the guideline Bands used at court within the maximum levels set by Parliament. This is their introduction:
1. The amount of a fine must reflect the seriousness of the offence.
2. The court must also take into account the financial circumstances of the offender; this applies whether it has the effect of increasing or reducing the fine.
3. The aim is for the fine to have an equal impact on offenders with different financial circumstances; it should be a hardship but should not force the offender below a reasonable ‘subsistence’ level. Normally a fine should be of an amount that is capable of being paid within 12 months though there may be exceptions to this.
4. The guidance below aims to establish a clear, consistent and principled approach to the assessment of fines that will apply fairly in the majority of cases. However, it is impossible to anticipate every situation that may be encountered and in each case the court will need to exercise its judgment to ensure that the fine properly reflects the seriousness of the offence and takes into account the financial circumstances of the offender
This part (page 426 of the latest guideline document) is pertinent to high income offenders:
25. Where the offender is in receipt of very high income, a fine based on a proportion of relevant weekly income may be disproportionately high when compared with the seriousness of the offence. In such cases, the court should adjust the fine to an appropriate level; as a general indication, in most cases the fine for a first time offender pleading not guilty should not exceed 75% of the maximum fine. In the case of fines which are unlimited the court should decide the appropriate level with the guidance of the legal adviser."
Level 1 - £200
Level 2 - £500
Level 3 - £1000
Level 4 - £2500
Level 5 - unlimited
Exceeding a speed limit on a motorway is a Level 4 offence. Any other road, Level 3. Don't ask me why Parliament decided that.
The Sentencing Council (which is independent of the government) defines the guideline Bands used at court within the maximum levels set by Parliament. This is their introduction:
1. The amount of a fine must reflect the seriousness of the offence.
2. The court must also take into account the financial circumstances of the offender; this applies whether it has the effect of increasing or reducing the fine.
3. The aim is for the fine to have an equal impact on offenders with different financial circumstances; it should be a hardship but should not force the offender below a reasonable ‘subsistence’ level. Normally a fine should be of an amount that is capable of being paid within 12 months though there may be exceptions to this.
4. The guidance below aims to establish a clear, consistent and principled approach to the assessment of fines that will apply fairly in the majority of cases. However, it is impossible to anticipate every situation that may be encountered and in each case the court will need to exercise its judgment to ensure that the fine properly reflects the seriousness of the offence and takes into account the financial circumstances of the offender
This part (page 426 of the latest guideline document) is pertinent to high income offenders:
25. Where the offender is in receipt of very high income, a fine based on a proportion of relevant weekly income may be disproportionately high when compared with the seriousness of the offence. In such cases, the court should adjust the fine to an appropriate level; as a general indication, in most cases the fine for a first time offender pleading not guilty should not exceed 75% of the maximum fine. In the case of fines which are unlimited the court should decide the appropriate level with the guidance of the legal adviser."
- 'pleading not guilty' must mean that D was found guilty after a trial.
Durzel said:
I would surmise that the reason penalties are higher on motorways is that the speed you're likely to be doing, combined with the number of vehicles around you, means that the potential for big accidents that involve others is significantly higher than other roads?
I've always thought speeding in a 30 is far more dangerous than speeding on a motorway.30's are mostly found in built up/developed areas, where you're more likely to find pedestrians at the side of the road, parked vehicles and vehicles stopping/starting and emerging from junctions.
Speeding in a 30 is reckless and inexcusable, there's too many potential hazards. Speeding on a motorway, depending on the conditions/time of day/traffic volume, less so IMO.
I utterly hate the blanket 'speeding' term, it's of no use whatsoever.
It's all about hazards, their predictability and proximity along with your speed, observation, planning and reacting abilities. So what's 'speeding'? 31 in a 30? 71 in a 70? Which is more dangerous?
It's all about hazards, their predictability and proximity along with your speed, observation, planning and reacting abilities. So what's 'speeding'? 31 in a 30? 71 in a 70? Which is more dangerous?
GloriaGTI said:
I've always thought speeding in a 30 is far more dangerous than speeding on a motorway.
BertBert said:
I utterly hate the blanket 'speeding' term, it's of no use whatsoever.
It's all about hazards, their predictability and proximity along with your speed, observation, planning and reacting abilities. So what's 'speeding'? 31 in a 30? 71 in a 70? Which is more dangerous?
Exceeding the limit by more than 10% plus 2mph, as per the NPCC speed enforcement guidelines. It's all about hazards, their predictability and proximity along with your speed, observation, planning and reacting abilities. So what's 'speeding'? 31 in a 30? 71 in a 70? Which is more dangerous?
GloriaGTI said:
I've always thought speeding in a 30 is far more dangerous than speeding on a motorway.
In response to your question, I'm of the opinion that exceeding the limit in a 30 is higher risk. If an M road was as dangerous as a built up zone with 20 or 30mph limit, we would all be doing 30mph on the motorway.
Even Edmund King seems to have confused 'exceeding the speed limit' with 'dangerous driving'.
BBC.
BBC.
Edmund King on the BBC said:
AA president Edmund King said it was right that "extreme offenders" were punished "severely".
He added: "Responsible drivers will welcome the changes coming into force today. The majority of drivers who keep to the correct speed, as well as driving to the conditions, won't be affected.
"It is only those who deliberately drive dangerously who will end up in court."
He added: "Responsible drivers will welcome the changes coming into force today. The majority of drivers who keep to the correct speed, as well as driving to the conditions, won't be affected.
"It is only those who deliberately drive dangerously who will end up in court."
MikeGoodwin said:
Well thats gonna hurt.
Its the 60 limit I am worried about the most. 60 means fun road. The others are not an issue.
Speed kills though right...
To be fair, if you're doing over 90 on 60 limit roads regularly, you probably need to have a think about your driving.Its the 60 limit I am worried about the most. 60 means fun road. The others are not an issue.
Speed kills though right...
I'd be more worried about the 60 roads which are now inappropriately 50 or 40 limits.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff