On-the-spot fines planned for careless driving

[rf065]

since by your own admission you drive dangerously by undertaking, since you give the impression you charge up behind "dimwitted ****s" flashing your lights (your language tells me you don't do this in a gentle way!) and since you seem to think you are doing other people a favour by your illegal manoeuvres, I don't believe you should be pontificating to any of us about decent driving.

If we never had middle lane hoggers or folk with 70mph on the speedo who may only be really doing 65mph, but will not pull over because they think they are doing the speed limit, then other road users will alter their driving to suit. Whether it is right or wrong, it only proves that driving standards in the UK are very poor and some of our road laws are woefully outdated for modern traffic conditions.
As Steve will concur, driving in France or on Spanish motorways is a pleasure after being used to the UK, everyone indicates to overtake & indicates to pull back in, thay all move out of the way of faster traffic and don't appear to have the blinkered UK attitude of this is my lane and I ain't moving out of it for anyone.
Lets tackle the real problem here.

Russ

 

[Spinal]

Mercy1: Cannot disagree with you more! You'll find that car speedo's are factory set to under-read, thus most people thinking they are doing 70 are doing less than that. Thus, a perfectly legal and safe driver will undertake them (or come up behind and flash their lights, politely asking them to move over).

If you want rude, drive in Germany, where the lack of lane discipline is not accepted. People will honk their horn at you and cut you off (at over 110mph) if you are in the wrong lane or lane hogging. Frankly, quite rightly so!

M.

 

[kikkthecat]

The thread is titled On-the-spot fines planned for careless driving and I've just read 3 pages debating the legality or otherwise of undertaking.

Careless driving consists of a lot more than passing another vehicle on the inside and as can be read in this thread there are many who do not see it as careless but nessacery. Unfortunately the judge would be the policeman who sees you and they may not look at it the same way you do. They may also be given targets to meet and you and I would be that target.

I have no problem with on-the -spot fines for clear transgressions, speeding, running a red light, failing to stop at a junction and such but to be in a position where it is your opinion against that of the officer who stops you is not something I would be comfortable with.

 

[DITTRICH]

If driving standards are to improve then there needs to be more monitoring of driver behaviour on the roads. I would be in favour of the RFL being scrapped and an annual fee introduced for a driving license. Rather than fining people on the spot, give them points and charge them more for the license next year. Just a thought.

 

[neilrr]

The thread is titled On-the-spot fines planned for careless driving and I've just read 3 pages debating the legality or otherwise of undertaking.

Careless driving consists of a lot more than passing another vehicle on the inside and as can be read in this thread there are many who do not see it as careless but nessacery. Unfortunately the judge would be the policeman who sees you and they may not look at it the same way you do. They may also be given targets to meet and you and I would be that target.

I have no problem with on-the -spot fines for clear transgressions, speeding, running a red light, failing to stop at a junction and such but to be in a position where it is your opinion against that of the officer who stops you is not something I would be comfortable with.

Don't you always have the option of disputing the ticket & taking it to Court?

 

[snoop51]

Don't you always have the option of disputing the ticket & taking it to Court?

At the moment yes, but things can change.

 

[rf065]

Don't you always have the option of disputing the ticket & taking it to Court?

This is another problem with fixed penalties.
Unlike innocent until proven guilty, with a fixed penalty it then becomes your responsibility to prove your innocence.

I received a fixed penalty when I drove past a police car and scratched my head, he thought I was using a phone. When stopped I told him he was mistaken and he searched the call log which showed my phone had not made or received any calls for over 24 hours. Made no difference to him, he was still adamant I had used a phone.

After discussions with a couple of lawyers it became clear that to take this to court would cost in the region of £500 to £800, and a court order would be required to obtain the phone records to prove my innocence. While the lawyers were confident I would be found not guilty, I would not be able to claim any of the costs back under Scottish law, English law is different but even then I do not think you can claim the full amount.

Upshot is, it is much easier to pay a £60 fine & accept 3 points than fight your case, and the police know this when they are trying to reach their quotas, a very unfair system which is now going to escalate under these new laws.

Russ

 

[Spinal]

This is another problem with fixed penalties.
Unlike innocent until proven guilty, with a fixed penalty it then becomes your responsibility to prove your innocence.

I received a fixed penalty when I drove past a police car and scratched my head, he thought I was using a phone. When stopped I told him he was mistaken and he searched the call log which showed my phone had not made or received any calls for over 24 hours. Made no difference to him, he was still adamant I had used a phone.

After discussions with a couple of lawyers it became clear that to take this to court would cost in the region of £500 to £800, and a court order would be required to obtain the phone records to prove my innocence. While the lawyers were confident I would be found not guilty, I would not be able to claim any of the costs back under Scottish law, English law is different but even then I do not think you can claim the full amount.

Upshot is, it is much easier to pay a £60 fine & accept 3 points than fight your case, and the police know this when they are trying to reach their quotas, a very unfair system which is now going to escalate under these new laws.

Russ

In England, motorists are usually presumed guilty until proven innocent.

I was lucky enough to be taken to court for driving without due care and attention a few years ago, the onus was on me to prove that I was driving carefully and with due attention.

The only "evidence" the police submitted was a report from a constable who attended the scene after the incident, and it was my work (or my lawyers) to prove that I was driving carefully. The police were utterly unhelpful in obtaining CCTV footage from the nearby petrol station, even though there was a party injured in the incident. They were quite happy to claim that I was DWDCAA and thus it was all my fault.

Almost a year later, and £1400-odd in lawyer bills (I got off lightly I would like to think), we won the case and was awarded costs. They didn't give me all the costs, so I still had to pay £100-odd towards the lawyer.

I don't see how it's fair that I had to pay the equivalent of a fine if I was found innocent... but heyho - no points! I was told throughout it was easier to pay up and accept the points, but it was a matter of principles! Apparently (this I was told my my lawyer, so not sure how true it is) only 2% of people contest a DWDCAA case and win...

M

(P.S. I have no issues with the policemen and women - they are just doing their job, which is a tough and ungrateful one at that. I do have issues with our goverments persistent persecution and prosecution of motorists though!)

EDIT: Some of the details of the case are getting blurry as it was 6 years ago... but if youre interested in details search the forum, I documented most of it here...

 

[Adam230K]

Frankly, I'm of the opinion that if there is space to undertake, someone is in the wrong lane. I would want to see the person in the right lane prosecuted! Lane discipline is appaling in the UK - and that's coming from someone of Italian origin!

M.

There's a first time for everything and for the first time since joining this forum I actually agree with you!

 

[nick.ged]

But it's not as simple as that, is it? In my experience, the worst undertakers are those who charge up the middle lane to get past a whole line of cars in the outside lane. The guy at the back of that queue would argue that he too would like to push on faster but cannot because of the guys in front of him. He won't undertake himself so he has nowhere to go...
So does that make him a lane hogger? Not in my view, we have all been in that situation and pulling over yourself will neither help you nor anyone else behind you.

if a person can undertake them a line of traffic the middle lane, they should all be nicked for driving in the outside lane, when they could be in the middle, or maybe even the left lane.

the guy at the front is controlling the speed of the line, and he should move over, the next guy can then either choose to drive faster and then also move over, or move over behind the front guy, ect ect

if there was a month of enforcement, it would raise the money to pay for itself, plus sort out all the lane hoggers, and self appointed speed restriction enforcers, or even worse the 60 mph lane hoggers, who cause everyone to get frustrated and maybe lower there driving standards in order to pass, and speeding fines would catch some of the faster drivers, raising more revenue, so my tax bill could be lowered as well lol

but the one thing that would solve this problem at a stroke would be to allow free-laning.

that would do it as long as you didnt get the rolling blockade at 60!

 

[jepho]

If you are not overtaking someone then you must, by definition, be required to be in a lane not considered to be the overtaking lane. The number of people who drive in the outside lane at 75mph and refuse to move back into the middle lane to allow others the same facility, is staggering.

Careless driving as a revenue generator? Not from where I sit. Why are we not educating those that don't understand why they are driving carelessly, into driving with better driving standards?

 

[MOCAŠ]

While more regulation does seem, on its face, to be a desirable thing and something that should be applauded, I would like to see greatly improved training for drivers.

When launching this policy initiative, Philip Hammond made it clear that the on-the-spot fines were aimed mainly at the kind of driver who has a momentary lapse of concentration (a kind of short, sharp shock), in an effort both to change behaviour and to free up the courts to deal with more serious driving offences. Far tougher measures will be in place for reckless or aggresive driving, including requiring disqualified drivers to undergo training and even re-pass their driving test before they can get their licence back.

He said the new system would allow for renewed focus on dangerous driving offences such as tailgating and undertaking rather than just speeding.

"The police, under pressure of resources, have simply stopped addressing this offence," he told BBC Radio 4's Today programme.

"By giving them the fixed-penalty notice procedure, we hope to allow them effectively and efficiently to address poor driving skills and behaviour on our roads, while at the same freeing up court and police resources to tackle the really dangerous drivers that are the real problem on our roads."

He said that police would "clamp down ruthlessly" on drivers who were "reckless, persistent and wilful in their behaviour".

 

[grober]

Does this not also open the door to the following possible scenario:- Excuse me "Sir" but we have pulled you over for scaring the nice bunny rabbits that feed by the side of the road round here- this means you will have to pay an on the spot fine for careless driving--- unless of course you wish to make an anonymous cash donation to the Fund for Distressed Traffic Police Officers- a worthy cause you would agree?

 

[MOCAŠ]

Does this not also open the door to the following possible scenario:- Excuse me "Sir" but we have pulled you over for scaring the nice bunny rabbits that feed by the side of the road round here- this means you will have to pay an on the spot fine for careless driving--- unless of course you wish to make an anonymous cash donation to the Fund for Distressed Traffic Police Officers- a worthy cause you would agree?

In a word, no.

 

[Mercy1]

I think there is an idealistic view and there is a real world view of motorway driving and maybe there is a middle ground somewhere which we should all aim for.
The whole issue is complicated by the fact that there are just so many vehicles on the motorways these days, and this poses huge problems along every single mile (Eg, why is it that every time I want to leave a motorway, a huge convoy of lorries suddenly emerges from nowhere blocking my exit! But that's to digress.)
I am with every one who condemns lane hoggers, and drivers who sit in the third lane certainly make my blood boil.
I ALWAYS move over at the first opportunity but the grey area is your view of what consitutes the first opportunity.
Is it 200 yards of free centre lane or free first lane? Is it half a mile? Is it two car lengths?
Two hundred yards at motorway speed is nothing. Dipping and diving into short gaps can cause more trouble than its worth. Once you have moved over, you will almost certainly want to move out again, possibly within seconds, possibly needing to brake first.
If you are in the second lane and move to the first at 70 mph, how long before you have to slam on the anchors because a lorry looms ahead? In the ideal world, you act well ahead and move out. In the real world, you can't because of all the vehicles coming up fast behind! So muggins is left at 45 mph with nowhere to go - doesn't make for relaxed driving.
I don't know the answer, you tell me...

 

[rf065]

I don't know the answer, you tell me...

Firstly, HGV's, driving through France & Spain I noticed they are not allowed on the m/ways on a Sunday. There's one day of the week without any major traffic hold ups.

Secondly, again in France & Spain, when the m/way reaches a hilly area, signs tell HGV's they are not allowed to overtake for the next 25km for example. Therefore no chance of an HGV taking 5 miles to overtake another and causing massive frustration as a result.

Last but not least, we are reaping the benefit of 30 or 40 years of government policies which basically amounted to spending as little as possible on the m/way infrastructure and even less on any form of fast, safe and reliable public transport, but lets hammer the car owners at every opportunity anyway by raising fuel prices and tax.

Russ

 

[jepho]

... Eg, why is it that every time I want to leave a motorway, a huge convoy of lorries suddenly emerges from nowhere blocking my exit!

This doesn't happen when you get ready for the exit lane in good time. If the lorries are blocking you from entering the exit lane, you were in the other lane for too long. In my experience, you may have to move over at the 1 mile marker and put up with a slightly slower journey over the course of one mile. It makes for a much less fraught exit.

...I ALWAYS move over at the first opportunity but the grey area is your view of what consitutes the first opportunity.

If you have overtaken safely, then moving over is what you do next. Overtaking when there is no space in to move back into means that you are going to be 'hogging' the overtaking lane and then cars behind you will begin tail-gaiting and intimidating you because they perceive you as a numpty. To some extent, your own driving style has something to do with it... I try to keep a good space (8 ~ 10 car lengths) between me and the guy in front. I overtake slower moving traffic and then move back in, often adjusting my speed to be slower so that I have my 'cushion' in front of me.

I don't want to stamp on my brakes very time I see a brake light come on. For me, it is a more relaxed way of driving and I don't get into the near miss situation when everyone is driving at speed, in a train, that closely follows everyone else. If you are too close to the guy in front, it is the idiot in front of you who is dictating how you will drive. Back off and give yourself some space in which to make decisions. In the car park like conditions I meet sometimes, I just get off at the services and have a coffee and a rest for an hour. Usually the jam has resolved and I arrive home a little later than expected but safe and good-tempered.

I don't know the answer, you tell me...

I don't know anything either and certainly not without seeing how you drive. Think space and maintain it carefully... it is your safety margin. Accept that sometimes you really have to slow down before an exit... drive into the slower lane in good time. Aim for high average speeds rather than fast bursts interspersed with slowing for traffic. Not much point accelerating up to a traffic jam when staying back a little will prevent you from braking needlessly.

 

[Mercy1]

I appreciate your views Jepho, but wonder what sort of motorways you drive on. Much of your ideal advice is fine and straight from the textbooks. But on the Midlands motorways at rush hour, for example, you simply could not do what you advise.
Lorries convoy in the first and second lane FOR MILES. Finding that elusive gap is the challenge we all have to deal with, and of course we usually do with careful driving.
In congested motorway situations, it is too simplistic to say that you overtake, you pull in, you overtake, you pull in, etc, etc.
It's impossible in my view. If you took that driving policy to its logical conclusion, everyone would end up in the first lane behind slow traffic, unable to get out. It just doesn't happen.
Your tip on space is fine. I always dutifully aim for two chevrons ahead of me but my care is quickly frustrated by other drivers moving out into the space, and halving it a stroke!
Your coffee tip is also great, but again, are we talking about the real world? Tell that to the rep who has got to make three calls in an afternoon! We would all get nowhere fast - and could the service stations cope?? lol...

 

[jepho]

I appreciate your views Jepho, but wonder what sort of motorways you drive on.

M6, M1, M25, M4 M23, M18, M180 are typical.

Much of your ideal advice is fine and straight from the textbooks. But on the Midlands motorways at rush hour, for example, you simply could not do what you advise. Lorries convoy in the first and second lane FOR MILES. Finding that elusive gap is the challenge we all have to deal with, and of course we usually do with careful driving.

Perhaps I should ask which roads are you driving on.

In congested motorway situations, it is too simplistic to say that you overtake, you pull in, you overtake, you pull in, etc, etc.
It's impossible in my view.

my emphasis: Yes, it is impossible so all you can do is to keep the gap in front of you. Where you are staying the in the overtaking lane because of two lanes of HGV traffic, you can be sure that no one will move into your space. any cars that do so from the centre lane should be a signal for you to slow and open the space again. Your only duty to yourself is to get where you are going in one piece. Your duty to your fellow road users is to try to keep them safe too.

If you took that driving policy to its logical conclusion, everyone would end up in the first lane behind slow traffic, unable to get out. It just doesn't happen.

This doesn't happen and we don't see it... not because you are right but because the traffic flow is such that there is always the space you need. You can use some acceleration to get in front of a slowing truck on a hill, for example.

Your tip on space is fine. I always dutifully aim for two chevrons ahead of me but my care is quickly frustrated by other drivers moving out into the space, and halving it a stroke!

I have no idea what two chevrons looks like as a unit of measure but I can judge car lengths. In my estimation, events can unfold rather quickly at speed. When you add reaction times to the mix, you may find that 2 chevrons is insufficient space. I will open that gap in the rain, for example. Nothing about my driving is slavish and fixed, for that way lies madness. when the space I deem to be my safety margin is closed, I will open it again by slowing down. It works for me and I am not a specialist driver so I have sufficient cause to believe that it will work for every driver.

Your coffee tip is also great, but again, are we talking about the real world? We would all get nowhere fast - but could the service stations cope?? lol...

Is this the same real world which wants everybody in work at 9.00am? I choose which hours I travel and having chosen to drive, I accept that it mandates new behaviours from drivers. I can no longer drive with the same expectations I had during the 1960s. I am not trying to be censorious or holier than thou here. I am saying that my safety (and the safety of other road users, which ultimately impinges on my own safety) is my only concern here.

 

[neilrr]

If you are not overtaking someone then you must, by definition, be required to be in a lane not considered to be the overtaking lane. The number of people who drive in the outside lane at 75mph and refuse to move back into the middle lane to allow others the same facility, is staggering.

Careless driving as a revenue generator? Not from where I sit. Why are we not educating those that don't understand why they are driving carelessly, into driving with better driving standards?

We've already educated them when they learned to drive & took a driving test. I thought it was pretty clear when I went through that process.

I have grown weary of the "educate them" call, whether it's to teach driver's to obey the Highway Code, stupid people how to feed their children properly, young adults not to drink themselves into a unconsciousness, anyone not to smoke or take heroin or snort speed or anything else anyone with half a brain already should know.

Just fine them & give them points. That'll educate 'em!