New Fixed Penalty Notice Fines

QUOTE(Nick A @ 13 Dec 2009, 06:07 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Why just in London ????

It may well be all over the country, but I work in London and thats the new rates introduced in the Met Police area.

Some of my colleagues elsewhere in the country may be able to assist me in finding out if it has gone country wide

QUOTE(Storm @ 13 Dec 2009, 05:17 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>There has been a new change in legislation regarding the Fixed Penalty Notices that are issued within London.

For those of you not aware of what they are, they are basically a ticket you get issued in the street by a police officer for breaking certain types of traffic law (no seatbelt, mobile phone, no insurance etc etc). A lot of the fines will stay at £30 with no points and £60 with 3 points.

The ones that have changed are as follows:

Seatbelt not being worn: Driver £30 NOW £60 (no points)

Seatbelt not being worn: Passenger - Adult £30 NOW £60 (no points)

Seatbelt not being worn in the front: Child - £30 NOW £60 but DRIVER is still responsible for cost. (no points)

Illegally spaced number plate: £30 NOW £60 (plus the very strong chance of losing the cherished transfer you paid for BUT no points)

Causing a nuisance with a vehicle: £30 NOW £60 (no points)

Not that I think any of you would but consider doing any of these, but is you do, prepare to be relieved of twice as much than before.

I have just fitted my cherrished plate slightly modded whoops sorry storm wont do it again. Since i am on holiday until Jan 4th i will change it back tomorrow. thanks for the advice.

QUOTE(Andy @ 13 Dec 2009, 07:21 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>I have just fitted my cherrished plate slightly modded whoops sorry storm wont do it again. Since i am on holiday until Jan 4th i will change it back tomorrow. thanks for the advice.

Andy..

I just don't want to see people lose something that they have invested their hard earned cash in

QUOTE(Storm @ 13 Dec 2009, 07:30 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Andy..

I just don't want to see people lose something that they have invested their hard earned cash in

your advice is always greatly appreciated here mate, there for the grace of and all that go I.
Would be real downer if I lost the plate so it's now back leagal

cheers mate

QUOTE(Gav @ 14 Dec 2009, 03:18 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>It's a cash-raising exercise, nothing more. If it were about safety, they'd have increased the points, not the fine.

And I think that should you wish to NOT wear a seatbelt - loony as that may or may not be - it's no-one else's business but yours. Prevent people from doing things that can hurt others, but why protect the stupid from themselves? Let 'em take themselves out of the gene pool and save us all some bother.

Agreed....as usual

QUOTE(Storm @ 14 Dec 2009, 04:04 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Gav, I agree totally apart from one thing. If a person chooses not to wear their seatbelt, then they deserve what they get. It's no-one elses business until they decide to put themselves through the windscreen. Then, it's done to officers to remove them from it, body part by body part and then tell the family!

It's not a nice part of the job, so unfortunately, it's not just their business when it turns fatal. Been there and done it :-(

I totally agree that points and a fine are the way forward to deter people. But, it's never going to stop those who want to not only ruin their life, but make police officers suffer the trauma of removing their remains.

Understand what you're saying Scott, however it is part and parcel of the job role when you sign up to the Force that there will undoubtedly be elements of it that are unpleasant and gory. However, I do think that where an individual's choice to do something stupid is concerned, they should be left to take themselves out of the loop. Eventually, the problem will solve itself methinks.

QUOTE(LawwaST @ 14 Dec 2009, 04:15 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Sadly, if my friends Sister had put her seatbelt on in the back seat then, when they were stationary and got rear ended, she wouldn't have flown forward into the front seat, crushed Sally's spine and left her in a wheel chair for the rest of her life.......not wearing your seatbelt doesn't just affect the non-wearer at all!!!

Whilst a very sad event, the choice to wear or not wear seatbelts (and subsequent enforcement for passengers) in a car should be down to the driver, especially if they have someone sitting behind them. A person can be flung forward with a huge force (many multiples of their 'normal' body weight) and I for one will not set off with someone as a passenger in my car who isn't restrained. If it's your car, it should be your rules. If, as the driver, you choose not to wear your seatbelt or to allow others not to wear a seatbelt, then that choice is yours. I can't, for example, understand drivers who do not restrain their kids appropriately. Sadly, my original point stands; if the above were about safety, they'd have made it an offence for which points would be added. As it is, it's clearly about revenue.

As Martine says the cost of these things tend to far outweigh the fines recouped.

Though I tend to agree with Gav on the let the pond life cull themselves approach, no one travels in my vehicle unbelted at any time. Had a broken back once, don't want that again.

You have to be careful what you wish for though, I can remember the populist policy of means tested fines for speeding, when I was fined £400 for speeding at 89 in a 70, the next case up was 57 in a 30 and he got a £48 fine as he was "poor"!

I would much rather see huge fines for speeding of say £1000 first offense, £2000 2nd £4000 third and so on, think it would be more effective, but would require a court appearance and the prosecution to prove what you were doing was actually causing peril to others, rather than the current dumb 69 good, 79 bad rule.

We have far too much nannying, it is causing the dumbest parts of our society to make it to breeding age (13 or 14) and burdening those of us that actually contribute to society with their ills.

Well said Storm like you been to far to many fatals over the years.

Gav your argument would be all well and good if the stupid ones that dont wear seat belts only affected themselves but their selfish attitude affects many people...and yes i know as police we sign up for the ..but what about the hospital bed they take up that could go to someone more deserving along with the time the nurses could spend on someone else...then you have all the relatives that can be affected or the kids that no longer have a dad if they have died as a result of their injuries the list could be never ending.

So it really is not just themselves that is affected otherwise i would agree with you matey.