Threshold for Speed Awareness Course Offer Increasing

[MGF]

To 10% + 9mph for most areas. 42 in a 30 before you get points although only one chance in a three year period.

[ROG]

Drivers can only attend one speed awareness course, costing between £60 and £100, in a three-year period.

Perhaps another caveat should be -
If caught again within that 3 year period then the original points will be added and no refund for the course

[jont]

Sends the wrong message (ie that speeding isn't that bad really), and continues the obsession of judging safe driving by a number on a stick.

I'd rather see limits actually set appropriately (and not by local politicians) and then enforced more rigidly.

If drivers need re-educating, let's find a better way to do it. I suspect it will end up with many councils setting limits 10mph lower than they expect people to drive (or would be safe for a given bit of road). People who habitually speed will still feel aggrieved when caught, and it further dumbs down driving for those of us who keep to limits and will cause more friction between those that stick to limits (even if going faster would be safe), and those who choose to ignore them.

[PeterE]

Perhaps another caveat should be -
If caught again within that 3 year period then the original points will be added and no refund for the course

Do you have a reference for that, as I can't see it mentioned in the original article?

Now that it is common knowledge that most insurers won't load policies for 3 speeding points, I would have thought that taking the points now looks a more attractive option than doing the course.

(Not that I... etc )

[ROG]

Perhaps another caveat should be -
If caught again within that 3 year period then the original points will be added and no refund for the course

Do you have a reference for that, as I can't see it mentioned in the original article?

Exactly!! - I think it should be there

[TiJay]

Hmm, not sure what to make of this. As someone mentioned in the comments on the BBC site, there's a difference between 40mph in a residential 30 and 90mph on an empty motorway. It all seems to be about adhering to artificial numbers with no focus on driver or pedestrian education.

[PeterE]

Perhaps another caveat should be -
If caught again within that 3 year period then the original points will be added and no refund for the course

Do you have a reference for that, as I can't see it mentioned in the original article?

Exactly!! - I think it should be there

Wouldn't that further reduce the incentive for taking the course? The only real advantage is that you have three fewer points on your licence, but if you get them back if you're caught again even that is wiped out.

[ROG]

Wouldn't that further reduce the incentive for taking the course? The only real advantage is that you have three fewer points on your licence, but if you get them back if you're caught again even that is wiped out.

But it would further discourage the driver from doing the same again for at least 3 years as they would know a double whammy is coming if they did

[Stephen]

This is nothing new for the police as for the past 16yrs mine and neighbouring forces have had a unwritten policy that unless there is a specific reason then no one gets done below 45 in a 30 and around 42 in a 30 in surrounding forces,the only difference now is it could be made common knowledge guidelines and now all of a sudden its unacceptable but before nearly everyone caught was pleading that it was stupidly low.
It won't encourage speeding as remember the proposals will only be guidelines and with all the facts taken into account then a decision can be made as to what action is taken like it does now,and for the ones who want to challenge that and take it to court based on guidelines,like happens at the minute the court decides if it is acceptable or not.
I feel that the proposals are not going to be as good and easy as what first appears,there must be a clause if the government have to forfeit all that revenue which they make with the 10%=2. Either way dont worry carry on as you are doing and there is no need for anyone to change there driving style unless they are going to increase to just below the threshold limit.
Stephen

[MGF]

...It all seems to be about adhering to artificial numbers with no focus on driver or pedestrian education.

Isn't that what speed limits are about? Education is another front albeit a rather thinly manned one.

But it would further discourage the driver from doing the same again for at least 3 years as they would know a double whammy is coming if they did

I think the point is that your suggestion would only be effective if drivers were forced to go on the course rather than choosing to. Given the choice they would probably just take the 3 points up front.

I think the rationale behind the course is to give minor offenders an opportunity to be educated into compliance before putting them on a course towards disqualification.

What you suggest is a sort of suspended sentence which doesn't really help the driver unless the 3 points would be detrimental to him. And as Peter suggests they aren't really.

[MGF]

...I feel that the proposals are not going to be as good and easy as what first appears,there must be a clause if the government have to forfeit all that revenue which they make with the 10%=2.

10% + 9 isn't the threshold for action but the threshold for a speed awareness course no longer being offered. 10% +2 is still the formal policy for action generally. Whether or not the Treasury loses money depends on how much of the course fee ends up there as compared to what they get from fixed penalties.

Personally I am reluctant to use informal thresholds as a basis for choosing my speed as they may well be much more variable in terms of the way forces and individuals apply them.

[PeterE]

Wouldn't that further reduce the incentive for taking the course? The only real advantage is that you have three fewer points on your licence, but if you get them back if you're caught again even that is wiped out.

But it would further discourage the driver from doing the same again for at least 3 years as they would know a double whammy is coming if they did

But consider the scenarios:

1. Driver receives an NIP. Accepts the charge, pays £60 fine, gets 3 points on licence. No insurance loading. Doesn't lose any pay. 18 months later, gets another NIP, pays £60 fine, gets another 3 points on licence. Mild insurance loading.

2. Driver receives an NIP. Opts for speed awareness course, pays £90 fee, gets no points on licence but has to take half a day off work. 18 months later, gets another NIP, pays £60 fine, gets 6 points on licence and has to tell insurers, thus resulting in mild insurance loading.

In scenario 1 you are marginally better off.

Given that, unless you are on 9 points already, there is no practical benefit in taking the course.

[Standard Dave]

The government would have to completely re write thousands of years of British Law to put points on licences if people were caught again.

Speeding and most other traffic law and regulations are summary only offences and therefore cannot be processed by the courts more than 6 months after the offence took place, it is also unlawful to attempt two disposals of the same offence (double jeopardy) without new and compelling evidence.

Other advantages of the course are that it won't be recorded on your driving licence or DVLA record like a FPN or conviction is so in future you are not required to disclose it to employers or anyone else who has cause to inspect your driving licence.

[martine]

The government would have to completely re write thousands of years of British Law to put points on licences if people were caught again.

Speeding and most other traffic law and regulations are summary only offences and therefore cannot be processed by the courts more than 6 months after the offence took place, it is also unlawful to attempt two disposals of the same offence (double jeopardy) without new and compelling evidence.

I sort of understand what you're saying but isn't it like previous convictions being taken into account for the new offence?

[GJD]

Speeding and most other traffic law and regulations are summary only offences and therefore cannot be processed by the courts more than 6 months after the offence took place, it is also unlawful to attempt two disposals of the same offence (double jeopardy) without new and compelling evidence.

I sort of understand what you're saying but isn't it like previous convictions being taken into account for the new offence?

Are previous convictions able to be taken into account for a new offence? If you and I committed similar burglaries, and I'd got a previous burglary conviction but you hadn't, could that fact be taken into account in justifying a harsher punishment for me than you? (Note that this would be different to me fessing up to a string of hitherto unsolved burglaries and asking for them to be taken into account at this time).