New speeding fines

[LotusLC]

I have noticed that on the IPK my digital speed is the same as my TomTom, so they both read 30 mph, but the actual speedo reads 33.

[Tim]

I thought motorways were safer, so should the points be based on danger to the public? Also with todays standard of car build is 70mph slightly arbitrary? Should it be 80 or 85?

[Avulon]

Originally Posted by sponge_mike

31 in a 30mph area? I thought they had to give 10% tolerance for speedometer calibration.

Mike

In which case the limit would be 33mph - so why not just say that on the signs.

Originally Posted by thundercat

They do Mike, so if you get caught you must have been doing more than a bit over the limit as there equipment is calibrated. A sat nav is closer to your true speed not your speedo.

They often do - but that would only be guidelines and benefit of the doubt. Just because if a hard 30mph limit were actively enforced everywhere then the majority of traffic would drive around at about 25mph (which wouldn't make a lot of difference in most towns and cities these days).

Originally Posted by LotusLC

I have noticed that on the IPK my digital speed is the same as my TomTom, so they both read 30 mph, but the actual speedo reads 33.

You takes your choice don't you? But if I see a speed camera or plod with handheld I'm keeping under the limit on whatever reads the highest.

[RobSun]

Originally Posted by thundercat

They do Mike, so if you get caught you must have been doing more than a bit over the limit as there equipment is calibrated. A sat nav is closer to your true speed not your speedo.

Recent articles in the media have reported that a few police authorities are enforcing 1 mph above the limit on the premise that that is the law. Their detection equipment is more accurate now and manufacturers mostly set the speedometer to over read so the argument in favour is that no one should be over the limit if driving to their speedo.

The cars I drive all under read Golf, V50 both read 30 but actually are doing 27. It's a bit closer on the V50 at 40 and 50 but by 70 both the golf and volvo are indicating 74 at 70.

My Hyundai's were however more accurate both being only 1mph lower than 30. On the other hand my Triumph Dolomite is bang on 30 so that's the one I will have to be most careful with.

Now this increase in the fines and banding is coming I think that the forces that have been more strict in enforcement were probably the authorities getting ready and the government experimenting before rolling it out nationally. They have a history of doing this sort of thing before going national so tighter enforcement could well be on the way. We will all need to be a bit more observant in the future at least until we see how its policed.

[steveo]

Originally Posted by Redfive

Now I'm aware that no members of this club ever drive above the speed limits..
BUT just in case you know someone that does

NEW SPEEDING FINES FROM 24/4/2017

SPEEDING drivers will soon face stricter penalties and much higher fines based on what they earn.

From April 24 2017, new rules come into effect in the UK which will mean offenders could now be charged up to 175% of their weekly income.

Currently in the UK the minimum penalty for speeding is a £100 fine and three penalty points added to your driving licence while the maximum fine is £1,000 or £2,500 for motorway offences.

But when the new guidelines are brought in next month, those caught driving at more than 101mph in a 70mph speed limit could be disqualified for up to 56 days and get a fine of between 125 and 175 per cent of their relevant weekly income.
Or if you are caught going between 31 and 40mph in a 30mph zone you will get three penalty points and a fine of between 25 and 75 per cent of your weekly income.

Currently many drivers get away without points and a fine by paying for a speed awareness course.

It follows tougher penalties being brought in this month for anyone using a mobile phone behind the wheel.

The previous penalty of three points and a £100 fine has been doubled to six points and £200.
Why is the law being changed?

According to Green Flag, the number of speeding offences has increased 44 per cent in the last five years.

The new sentencing structure has been designed to produce a sufficient deterrent to reduce the number of speeding drivers.

How will this affect me?

If you’re a high earner, your fine could be huge.

If a footballer earning £300,000 a week was caught driving at 102mph he could face a fine of more than £500,000.

Meanwhile, an 18-year-old driver who works 40 hours a week on the minimum wage would be subject to a fine of less than £400 for the same speed.

How much will I be fined if I’m caught speeding?

The new speeding system is split into three bands which rate the severity of the offence based on the speed limit.

Band A refers to an offence that is between one and 10mph over the stated speed limit.
or example a band A speeding offence in a 20mph zone would be from 21mph to 31 mph.

A band B offence is 11mph to 21mph above the stated speed limit and a band C offence is 21 mph and above the stated speed limit.

The starting point for a Band A fine is 50% of your weekly wage.

Band B starting point = 100% of your weekly wage

Band C starting point = 150% of your weekly wage rising up to 175%

Cheers Ian

Hi
So does that mean if you haven't got a job (no income) it's just the points?
Or is there a clause that says please remove funds from Bank of Dad
Steve

[Ian G]

Originally Posted by steveo

Hi
So does that mean if you haven't got a job (no income) it's just the points?
Or is there a clause that says please remove funds from Bank of Dad
Steve

I think that the minimum penalty of 3 point's plus £75 to £100 stays in place.

An unemployed friend of mine recently got caught doing 62 in a 50 and it was an on the spot ticket for 3 points and £100.
Cheers

[Arryhall]

Does this mean that in order for road safety to be paramount, we should all spend most of our time and attention looking at the speedometer to ensure we remain 1mph under the limit if the tolerancies are so tight, or actually looking at the road for the child / dog / cat / sheep that could run out in front of you? I fail to see how such tight limits can be beneficial to actual safety.
I was coming home from work one night, down a country lane, with an arbitrary limit of 40, with NO housing or businesses or farms on the road but often several speed traps, at 2am, and a badger ran out of the hedge right in front of my car. As I was actually looking at the road and not my speedo coz the coppers don't like being up and out past 11 so felt fairly safe I could increase speed via gravity down the steep banks to 45 without much danger of being done, I saw the flash of the white fat butt and braked and missed it. Normally in the day I'd have been looking at the speedo the entire time and would have hit the badger. Probably wouldn't have hurt the beastie, but it'd knacker me car!
There's also wildlife like rabbits and pheasants (and peasants, where it is!) that wander about the place, and as the road is incredibly hilly, when you start to down a very steep incline, your speed increases. That's where the cops trap you, so everyone stares at their speedo and not the road. More rabbits and pheasants are squished on the hills on this road than anywhere else because people aren't looking at the road! I did my IAM and they talk constantly about observation. Lowering tolerances for speeding to 1mph on an already abused cash-cow system can't possibly result in fewer accidents because of the increase in not looking at the pigging road!

[RobSun]

I did my IAM and they talk constantly about observation.

I did an advanced police driving course and that also would major on the same thing for safer driving especially at speed. However as part of that, and I would have expected the IAM course to have included it, you had to be able to tell the instructor/tester what speed you were doing without looking at the speedometer. Any driver with a modicum of skill can achieve this and should be able to achieve this within reason, but still one mile per hour is not reasonable and personally with technology as it is now and to allow for the odd creeping over limits due to going down hill etc. a 5% tolerance would be acceptable.

My course was done in the 70s so it was a different world and the Inspector said anyone caught speeding deserved it because if you cant see a big jam sandwich (patrol car) you shouldn't be driving. He then said that the new speed guns on the way will change things because we can sit behind hedges and hide so you've got no chance. His opinions were that this was not fair.

Recently I was having a conversation about the fitting of tyres and the latest instructions of fitting the best tyres on the rears. I was brought up with the best went on the front. This conversation was with a recently retired fast responder advanced driver. He agreed with me that the good tyres should be on the front for control but they tell them now to put them on the rears because "the poor dears now have no idea how to drive and control a car when it goes into a slide. They need handbrakes that work themselves and stop them rolling backwards on hill starts, self parking, parking sensors, etc. etc. because the driver skills are reducing" Well I don't know if I agree wholeheartedly with him but you have to agree if someone now learns in a car with all those gadgets fitted how well will they manage in a car without them. If you pass your test in an auto you cant drive a manual. Does the fact that they exist make my mates observations that drivers are less skilful in part because of them suggest they are less observant also.

Maybe his observations are correct, he's had to deal with the messes on our roads, and the authorities are now trying to rebalance things by forcing better observation by tightening up regulations. After all if it happens and its expensive people will change their habits.

[Arryhall]

RobSun, the IAM I did a few years ago was basically the Roadcraft that the Police use. Well, not basically, it IS! Even the skidpan training I did was taken as part of that to learn to control rear and front wheel spins on ice.

Plus it was brilliant fun!

But I paid for it, I did the training, took the exam, put everything into practise, and yes, you do learn to use your peripheral vision to keep an eye on your speedo, but to be accurate to 1mph? My eyesight isn't that good!

But that's with training. Look at the level and standard of most drivers around. Most people don't see a truck, let alone a police car! So the chances of them observing junctions, hedges, road signs, surrounding traffic and knowing what speed they are doing are nil. If the idea is to improve the standard of driving, then the DVLA need to improve the standard of the tests. And lane hogging and messing on phones, and drink and drug driving ought to be more enforced than speed cameras.
I followed a car up the road the other week, with 6 people in, all of whom were drinking cans of Tennents (I know the brand, they threw the empties out of the window) and passing around joints, and all does include the driver. The smoke coming from the car was worse than what came out of my old Montego exhaust 20 years ago!
But it was fine, because they were only doing 25mph. I told one of the police officers when I got to work (not a cop, I just work in the same building) and he couldn't be less bothered. He actually said "at least they weren't speeding".
Speed doesn't kill. Bad driving kills. And apparently you can be a terrible, dangerous driver just so long as you do it slowly.

[Avulon]

Simple solution is to not try and be so close to the limit in the first place, aim to drive between 25-30 and it's easy without constantly checking the speedo, aim to drive at 29mph and it's very hard. Of course, if there are no speed cameras or enforcers about then relax a bit. No-one hears a tree fall in the forest if there's no one to hear it you know...