Driving standards

[johnofwessex]

26 minutes ago, Reorte said:

Treating it like that hasn't gone down well in France.

 

http://www.progressivepulse.org/economics/a-short-comment-on-the-situation-in-france

 

But I would add that 

 

1. I would want to proactively remove potentially troublesome vehicles in particular targeting 'untaxed' ones as soon as tax expires.  I suggest that a tow truck with police escort turns up the day after tax expires and with powers to enter private land.  Similarly to target so called ;'community cars' used in crime

2. Look at 'road blocks' as in Australia to pick up drunk/drugged/whatever drivers so they dont find it as easy to try to get away

3. Looking at how Police stop moving cars, I suggest Police Cars working as a pack rather than individually so the targeted vehicle is surrounded before the blues go on.

4. Dont chase so many 'fails to stop' but

5. Put a lot of resources into the ones you do decide to stop in particular air support to minimise risks to the public and Police Officers, and

6. Dont give them the option of not stopping

[kevinlms]

2 hours ago, johnofwessex said:

 

http://www.progressivepulse.org/economics/a-short-comment-on-the-situation-in-france

 

But I would add that 

 

1. I would want to proactively remove potentially troublesome vehicles in particular targeting 'untaxed' ones as soon as tax expires.  I suggest that a tow truck with police escort turns up the day after tax expires and with powers to enter private land. 

 

Total overkill.

 

I've been a few days late paying my rego or tax, because of budget issues.

So what did I do? Didn't leave the driveway for a few days in that car. I transferred some money between accounts, then paid and printed out a copy of the receipt and took with me in that particular car.

I did get stopped and showed my receipt. The police got on to the computer and confirmed it had actually been paid, which it had, a total of 3 days late.

On my way in less than 10 minutes! No threats needed.

 

Any system MUST be policing those who HAVE broken the law, not those who MIGHT break the law! A huge difference.

[johnofwessex]

You could always do a SORN so long as its not on the road

[johnofwessex]

BUT what I would like to do is to both enforce the law around driving while reducing the likelihood of a 'fail to stop' so whats wrong with that?

[Nick C]

43 minutes ago, johnofwessex said:

BUT what I would like to do is to both enforce the law around driving while reducing the likelihood of a 'fail to stop' so whats wrong with that?

Cost. Who is going to pay for that when the police don't have enough resources as it is? Those driving under the influence, and uninsured drivers, are much higher on the list to crack down on IMHO.

[johnofwessex]

1 minute ago, Nick C said:

Cost. Who is going to pay for that when the police don't have enough resources as it is? Those driving under the influence, and uninsured drivers, are much higher on the list to crack down on IMHO.

 

But what does the current arrangements cost?

 

Clearly we dont have unlimited resources but how might we use them more effectively and what might a change in how we do things impact on behaviour?

[jcredfer]

1 hour ago, johnofwessex said:

 

But what does the current arrangements cost?

 

Clearly we dont have unlimited resources but how might we use them more effectively and what might a change in how we do things impact on behaviour?

 

First:- The current costs are defined by what the Gov't and Local Gov't are currently putting in place.  That will only alter when those who wish to get elected perceive that the population will not vote for them, unless they vote for increased amounts.

 

Second:-Those currently responsible for using those funds, as are now available, will have been running Policing priorities through on a constant process.  In short, they are already doing what you are asking and the solution is what you see on the streets and in the news.  {Care needs to be taken, with the later, as they are selective about what they think will sell.  There is clearly much more going on, than they could possibly report, let alone give a balanced picture of the complete situation.}

 

Those levels of priority are passed to the Call centres and police deployed accordingly, based on the supplied information from callers.  A "Fail to stop" is mostly dealt with by an appropriate response car + Blues &Twos, it's quite frequent and mainly with a successful outcome.  Should the offender escalate the incident, by causing damage to persons, property, or other actions, then more resources are deployed to cope.  It does occasionally escalate to a major problem and many units are deployed to deal with it, accordingly.

 

As Kevin summed up, the priorities "Any system MUST be policing those who HAVE broken the law, not those who MIGHT break the law!"  What you suggest is already being done - and with very stretched resources - and it shows - Police, NHS, Housing, Infrastructure.....  the list goes on.....  and comments here will not make one iota of difference.  We all have a vote and may use it as each individual wishes.

 

 

[kevinlms]

7 hours ago, johnofwessex said:

You could always do a SORN so long as its not on the road

What all that extra resources and red tape, when I had NO INTENTION of driving it, while the rego or tax wasn't current? As I stated, it was only for a couple of days, while I transferred cash around.

 

It isn't illegal to have an untaxed vehicle on your private property. Even parking on the street, is another story as illegal.

[Kris]

5 hours ago, kevinlms said:

It isn't illegal to have an untaxed vehicle on your private property. Even parking on the street, is another story as illegal.

In the UK it is illegal not to have SORN an untaxed vehicle even on private land.

[Nick C]

1 hour ago, Kris said:

In the UK it is illegal not to have SORN an untaxed vehicle even on private land.

It is, but the penalty is an automatic £80 fine, wheras the penalty for using an untaxed car on the road is a £1000 fine or 5 times the annual tax. 

[kevinlms]

1 hour ago, Kris said:

In the UK it is illegal not to have SORN an untaxed vehicle even on private land.

In Australia, it is NOT illegal to have an unregistered vehicle on private land - you will get a series of letters/threats if you just don't pay to renew. Penalties relate to DRIVING while unregistered.

 

Take a look at the penalties - do you think we are soft on law breaking with vehicles?

 

https://online.fines.vic.gov.au/Your-options/Fine-amounts-and-demerit-points

[johnofwessex]

2 hours ago, kevinlms said:

In Australia, it is NOT illegal to have an unregistered vehicle on private land - you will get a series of letters/threats if you just don't pay to renew. Penalties relate to DRIVING while unregistered.

 

Take a look at the penalties - do you think we are soft on law breaking with vehicles?

 

https://online.fines.vic.gov.au/Your-options/Fine-amounts-and-demerit-points

 

OK, missed the bit about your location, I am looking at it from a UK perspective/legislation.

 

Always great fun when the DVLA have been round and clamped the untaxed vehicles

 

[Enterprisingwestern]

 

Talking about the UK, if one wanted to keep their car untaxed and off the road for, say, a week because of financial issues, how practical is it to fill out a SORN and then rescind it, I bet the PNC won't be kept up to date, it really is a system that is more trouble than it's worth.

It's just a money making exercise to cover for the fact that aren't enough police patrols to catch anyone who uses a vehicle untaxed actually on the road.

 

Mike.

[kevinlms]

1 hour ago, johnofwessex said:

 

OK, missed the bit about your location, I am looking at it from a UK perspective/legislation.

 

Always great fun when the DVLA have been round and clamped the untaxed vehicles

 

You aren't the first (nor last) to miss my location. All we can do is conform with LOCAL laws.

 

I have certainly seen vehicles clamped in a shopping centre car park here. The driver missed the part where every vehicle gets photographed entering the car park, thus making it dead easy for infomation to be automatically sent to the appropriate authorities - after all the private property owners, don't want illegally driven vehicles on their property either. Same for major fuel stations.

 

So yes, I share your mirth!

[Kris]

3 hours ago, kevinlms said:

In Australia, it is NOT illegal to have an unregistered vehicle on private land - you will get a series of letters/threats if you just don't pay to renew. Penalties relate to DRIVING while unregistered.

 

Take a look at the penalties - do you think we are soft on law breaking with vehicles?

 

https://online.fines.vic.gov.au/Your-options/Fine-amounts-and-demerit-points

I recognised your location and all I was doing was pointing out differences in the law in different locations. As to being soft on law breakers, I didn't make any comment either way. 

[kevinlms]

6 minutes ago, Kris said:

I recognised your location and all I was doing was pointing out differences in the law in different locations. As to being soft on law breakers, I didn't make any comment either way. 

I wasn't suggesting that you were. I included the statement about being 'soft' and the link to show the costs, to prove that we aren't, to anyone reading this thread.

Remember I pointed out that I had paid by the 3rd day and still got stopped - so the system here does work.

 

I also got stopped 9 times in about 2 years, while driving my wife's car. Because she was suspended due to medical issues and her vehicle was pinged as owned by a suspended driver. The police were always courteous and once they checked things were OK (like my licence was fine), I was shortly on my way. Of course the first couple of times it was a concern, but later, I had my licence ready, by the time they got to the window,

 

Yeah, I learnt a bit about the law too.

[PhilJ W]

I once was pulled over by the police as my car (recently purchased) had come up on their system as uninsured, luckily I had a cover note to prove that I was insured. In fact I was on my way to to collect the certificate from the insurance broker. That was about twenty + years ago, I just hope that such details are kept more up to date now.

[Enterprisingwestern]

12 minutes ago, PhilJ W said:

I once was pulled over by the police as my car (recently purchased) had come up on their system as uninsured, luckily I had a cover note to prove that I was insured. In fact I was on my way to to collect the certificate from the insurance broker. That was about twenty + years ago, I just hope that such details are kept more up to date now.

 

Not that I frequently watch TV programmes dealing with traffic police, but from what I have seen, there have been occasions when the PNC wasn't up to date and because it was the weekend the police couldn't physically check in real time, and there have been times when the driver has the documentation contradicting the PNC information, even down to ownership, so I doubt if things are much, if any, better nowadays.

 

Mike.

[PaulCheffus]

1 hour ago, Enterprisingwestern said:

 

Not that I frequently watch TV programmes dealing with traffic police, but from what I have seen, there have been occasions when the PNC wasn't up to date and because it was the weekend the police couldn't physically check in real time, and there have been times when the driver has the documentation contradicting the PNC information, even down to ownership, so I doubt if things are much, if any, better nowadays.

 

Mike.

Hi

 

I bought a new car recently and changed the plates for my personalised ones, this change was done online. There was warning on the DVLA website that it would be with immediate effect and to have the new plates ready to put on the vehicle. The new details didn't appear online for three days but I had all the necessary paperwork if I was stopped by the Police.

 

Cheers

 

Paul

[johnofwessex]

5 hours ago, kevinlms said:

You aren't the first (nor last) to miss my location. All we can do is conform with LOCAL laws.

 

I have certainly seen vehicles clamped in a shopping centre car park here. The driver missed the part where every vehicle gets photographed entering the car park, thus making it dead easy for infomation to be automatically sent to the appropriate authorities - after all the private property owners, don't want illegally driven vehicles on their property either. Same for major fuel stations.

 

So yes, I share your mirth!

 

Now thats a really good idea

[Jonboy]

6 hours ago, Enterprisingwestern said:

 

Talking about the UK, if one wanted to keep their car untaxed and off the road for, say, a week because of financial issues, how practical is it to fill out a SORN and then rescind it, I bet the PNC won't be kept up to date, it really is a system that is more trouble than it's worth.

It's just a money making exercise to cover for the fact that aren't enough police patrols to catch anyone who uses a vehicle untaxed actually on the road.

 

Mike.

Back in 2018 I had a car with damaged valves that needed the engine stripped and rebuilding. We decided to do it DIY over a few weekends (bought another vehicle and was then going to sell this one) and two weeks in the tax expired. Rang the DVLA and they advised to keep it off the road and not bother to declare SORN if only a couple of weeks.

6 weeks later a letter arrived stating tax it, SORN it or receive an automatic penalty.

 

Dont really understand the benefit of the tax anyway, just extend fuel duty another couple of pennies a litre…

Edited July 18, 2023 by Jonboy

[johnofwessex]

https://www.theguardian.com/law/2023/jul/19/driver-who-killed-pregnant-woman-in-123mph-m66-crash-jailed-for-12-years

 

Rose Gibson-Harper, a solicitor representing Jules-Hough’s family, severely criticised the sentence.

“Today’s 12-year sentence is insulting and an injustice to the catastrophic injuries little Tobias sustained, and the life sentence Mrs Hough’s family were needlessly handed following her and her unborn daughter’s death due to an act of sheer stupidity,” she said.

“Last year, judges were given the power to hand down greater sentences to those convicted of death by dangerous driving – previously, the maximum tariff was 14 years but it was increased to life imprisonment.

“This case stands as one of the worst examples of dangerous driving I have witnessed in my 27-year career as a catastrophic injury lawyer, and we expected the justice system to fulfil its duty and utilise its newfound powers.

“It is important to emphasise that dangerous driving is not a game. It has real and devastating consequences, and we must collectively work towards creating a society that values responsible driving and prioritises the safety of all road users. We urge everyone to reflect upon this tragic incident, which should serve as a wake-up call for humanity.”

 

Apart from any other issues what concerns me is that the perpetrator could be back out in 6 years, only aged 28 and able to behave the same way again.

 

If he were to be given a life sentence even with a relatively short 'tariff' he would be on a very short lead and liable to recall for any breach of his release conditions, I would especially suggest being anywhere near the driving seat of any vehicle ever again or posting on social media.

 

 

 

[PhilJ W]

1 hour ago, johnofwessex said:

https://www.theguardian.com/law/2023/jul/19/driver-who-killed-pregnant-woman-in-123mph-m66-crash-jailed-for-12-years

 

Rose Gibson-Harper, a solicitor representing Jules-Hough’s family, severely criticised the sentence.

“Today’s 12-year sentence is insulting and an injustice to the catastrophic injuries little Tobias sustained, and the life sentence Mrs Hough’s family were needlessly handed following her and her unborn daughter’s death due to an act of sheer stupidity,” she said.

“Last year, judges were given the power to hand down greater sentences to those convicted of death by dangerous driving – previously, the maximum tariff was 14 years but it was increased to life imprisonment.

“This case stands as one of the worst examples of dangerous driving I have witnessed in my 27-year career as a catastrophic injury lawyer, and we expected the justice system to fulfil its duty and utilise its newfound powers.

“It is important to emphasise that dangerous driving is not a game. It has real and devastating consequences, and we must collectively work towards creating a society that values responsible driving and prioritises the safety of all road users. We urge everyone to reflect upon this tragic incident, which should serve as a wake-up call for humanity.”

 

Apart from any other issues what concerns me is that the perpetrator could be back out in 6 years, only aged 28 and able to behave the same way again.

 

If he were to be given a life sentence even with a relatively short 'tariff' he would be on a very short lead and liable to recall for any breach of his release conditions, I would especially suggest being anywhere near the driving seat of any vehicle ever again or posting on social media.

 

 

 

Should have an automatic life ban.

[johnofwessex]

34 minutes ago, PhilJ W said:

Should have an automatic life ban.

 

I would not disagree with that 

 

I would suggest that any banned driver (in the UK) should have too take an extender retest, I am also keen on doing something similar to what they do in Victoria (Australia) where a banned driver has to do the 'naughty Boy' course successfully, pay off any outstanding motoring fines and go up before a Judge before they can even think about the retest.  I would also suggest an interview with a Probation Officer and Physiatrist Phycologist (shrink) 

[PhilJ W]

From 5:35, playing pinball with a couple of HGV's