Safe Speed Forums

From the Ministry for Transport data for Lancashire in a four year period over 130,000
drivers issued with NIPs, neither were excused through emergency services, went through
the courts, paid a fixed penalty or went on a speed awareness course. This seems to indicate
1. Some 400,000 points are not on speeders licences. 2. £8 million has not been collected.
NB. In normal circumstances an unpaid fixed penalty escalates to £90 plus £35 court fees
are added. However one has to presume that the tickets are now out of date.
A major worry is that some of these alleged speeders may have previously been prosecuted,
have almost then maximum totals, indeed some of the 130,000 might be habitual speed
merchants.
So my proposal for reducing speeding in Lancashire is -
The management & folk operating the
Safety Partnership should get a grip on the situation.
One suspects Government when it first piloted, then tweaked the Safety Partnership 'fast track'
concept, then ensured Safety Partnerships had adequate rules & guidelines to work to. Indeed
whilst the lost revenue (under the 'netted out' system pre to April 2007) is a challenge.
How many extra safety features, teachers, hospital operations could that fund? The
implications to our safety, be-it other drivers, pedestrians old, all, especially the young plus
property are down right alarming.
Hopefully now with the new annual grant system (based on the previous -obviously flawed
performance data) - Lancashire Police with all its Safety Partnership colleagues will get their
act together. All the evidence points to the coppers on the beat or traffic doing a sensible job
applying the law. They must cringe at the set-up proclaiming Safety is our goal As for the
Treasurers & Lead Partner of the Partnership - LCC - surely the taxpayers & visitors to our
County should expect better application of road safety. Or,or is it just a cash
cow, generating millions from the drivers who do pay up.

An added thought -
Whilst by law the fixed penalty notice is never of out of date (unlike the time for serving a summons ),
once issued - the courts or central ticket office may pursue ad lib- with bailiffs if the officers deem
is their policy in theory for ever. This would be a super earner for the bailiffs, very expensive for the non-payers.
However such 'lost' income after up to 6 years, is probably more an embarrassment than anything. After all why
bother when they were/are racking in millions without much trouble.
BUT increasing safety is the goal - Or is it?