How many points?

veronese68

We all know there are some truly appalling drivers out there. But how the hell is this allowed to happen?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-23967547
I don't care what the circumstances are but that person should never be allowed near a motorised vehicle again with such obvious disregard for the law.

rjsterry

Veronese68 wrote:

We all know there are some truly appalling drivers out there. But how the hell is this allowed to happen?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-23967547
I don't care what the circumstances are but that person should never be allowed near a motorised vehicle again with such obvious disregard for the law.

And yet no-one is suggesting that we should suspend all spending on motorways until motorists "get their own house in order". :evil:

sketchley

Problem is with such blatant disregard for the law in the first place would a ban actually achieve anything? Not saying it's right though.

spen666

Before you all start throwing the toys out of the pram. Get thefacts first


These lre likely (and i'm guessing here0 to be caseswhere for example driver was caught several times in a short spaceof timeby a speed camera on thesamestretch of road,. Say for example thinks limit is 40mph, but speed camera is just inside a new 30 zone. Driver drives at 35 mph to/ from work each day for a week and gets 10 tickets, but because of time delay they do not know they have committed any offence and once they learn of offence there are no new offences

OR

As i believe in this caseit relates to S147 failing to give drivers detsails offences where driver completed forms for several speeding tickets. Thinking they haddone them correctly, but turns out there was a defect in their completion and hence several prosecutions - 1for each form.

Matter only comes to light for offender when summonses start arriving.


The courts can only not suspend a licence for a totter on 1 occassion in any 3 year period, so there has to be some unusual back story to how the total of 42 points come to be endorsed, and it must necessarily concern numerous offences being sentenced on one ocassion

Runtothehills

Agree with spen666 - we don't know the back story and 'one person is driving with 42 points' is a far better story than '99% of drivers with 12 or more points banned' (or whatever the figure is).

daddy0

I used to work with a guy who had 30 something points on his licence but who still drove (his brothers Porshe). I got the impression that its quite common TBH. His back story was that he got caught speeding a few separate times, then had a massive accident where he wrote off a few cars and didn't stop at the scene (as he was drunk and had a boot full of coke). They almost threw the book at him, but as he was finishing his masters degree and pretended that he needed to drive for work (delivering coke I guess) the judge pretty much let him off. He should've gone down for the driving, and the coke, and been banned. So actually the *real* back story is more damming than you probably first thought.

BTW - when I worked with him he wasn't a coke dealer anymore and was a thoroughly nice chap!

cookeeemonster

it's amazing how important jobs and livelihood becomes only after they have committed an offence multiple times, to the point where they have been dragged up in court (i.e a last resort for the justice system as it's very time consuming and expensive).

it's amazing that they dont think of their jobs and livelihood as they constantly break law after law, day after day, putting other peoples lives (and livelihood) at risk just for a few seconds or minutes saved a day.

it's almost as if they dont give a funk and only say these things to get off, but i'm sure that's not the case.

Runtothehills

Daddy0 wrote:

I used to work with a guy who had 30 something points on his licence but who still drove (his brothers Porshe). I got the impression that its quite common TBH. His back story was that he got caught speeding a few separate times, then had a massive accident where he wrote off a few cars and didn't stop at the scene (as he was drunk and had a boot full of coke). They almost threw the book at him, but as he was finishing his masters degree and pretended that he needed to drive for work (delivering coke I guess) the judge pretty much let him off. He should've gone down for the driving, and the coke, and been banned. So actually the *real* back story is more damming than you probably first thought.

BTW - when I worked with him he wasn't a coke dealer anymore and was a thoroughly nice chap!

Anecdotes do not equal data.

daddy0

Runtothehills wrote:

Anecdotes do not equal data.

Yes they do - this anecdote equals one piece of data which is relevant to the thread. This is how people get away with bending the law past breaking point. Sure, for this one case maybe another 99 got banned or went to jail, but the very fact that even just one person got away with this AND was free to drive a sports car home is pretty bad, isn't it?

DrLex

spen666 wrote:

[...]
Matter only comes to light for offender when summonses start arriving.


The courts can only not suspend a licence for a totter on 1 occassion in any 3 year period, so there has to be some unusual back story to how the total of 42 points come to be endorsed, and it must necessarily concern numerous offences being sentenced on one ocassion

Spen, can you chip in on a discussion we're having here on this one?
The 42-pointer (which sounds like a mutant stag) arose from an owner not giving driver details, which led to a thought about ownership and driving - can one be the registered keeper of a (non-SORNed) car and not have a driving licence? This would seem to be a good way to avoid losing one's licence for totting up of points - get an aged relative to front as owner, rag the car and accumulate points, then ensure that aged rel. never completes the NIPs that roll up. I don't have a copy of Wilkinson's to thumb through.

veronese68

If you need to drive for work or to look after a relative it means you should perhaps be a bit more careful with your licence. I'm no saint when I'm driving, but I drive according to what conditions will allow. I've been driving for 28 years and haven't managed to accrue 12 points over that length of time. I have worked as a driver and I have been on the road as a salesman so I've covered a lot of miles. To be able to tot up such a large number of points in such a small space of time they are plainly repeat offenders with little regard for traffic laws, offending on an almost daily basis it would seem. If your licence is so important to you be more careful with it. Plain and simple. These people should not to be allowed to drive. If you can't do the time...

bails87

Say for example thinks limit is 40mph, but speed camera is just inside a new 30 zone. Driver drives at 35 mph to/ from work each day for a week and gets 10 tickets, but because of time delay they do not know they have committed any offence and once they learn of offence there are no new offences

But that (theoretical) person was shown to have broken the law on 10 seperate occasions. There will have been signs telling them what speed limit applies, so they ignored them 10 times*. Why is it forgivable 10 times but if I'm on 9 points and get caught speeding again I (presumably) can't just say "Sure, I was driving too fast, but I hadn't paid any attention to any of those big numbers at the side of the road so let me keep my licence". Ignorance is no excuse in so many other areas of law.

*If there were missing/hidden/vandalised signs then presumably there would have been no points?