Safe Speed Forums

HERE



He should be ashamed. I wonder what the 11 points are from ?

_________________
Safe Speed for Intelligent Road Safety through proper research, experience & guidance.

He would have stood in the witness stand and said his ban would have created hardship for others. Is that not what pepioo and safespeed recommend?
The magistrates have chosen to believe him.

I rather think the issue is about his role as the head of British School of Motoring - an establishment which is supposed to teach all drivers to drive in accordance with the law. and the fact he would appear to be right careless in record keeping and observing the speed limit/using COAST Not the behaviour the public at large expects from the boss of a major training provider.

As the BSM insider says




As the boss of BSM - he should have been well able to say who was driving a vehicle registered to himself as the keeper/owner - at the time of the alleged Gatso ping - why he got 6 points on his licence - for not saying.. (and this is a separate issue for many who genuinely cannot recall when sharing a long holiday drive of say 200 plus miles.).


The other 11? Who knows - but that also does not reflect well on his driving standard to date either - nor on the efficiency of a speed camera as a deterrent- assuming half his 11 points were cam flashes... - a realistically statistical possibility these days IAM have sacked officials in their organisation over much, much less than this.

As for "taking his mum to the GP" ? There are taxis! There is no mention of him being her being disabled and him being the carer. If she is housebound - then GP should be making a house visit? Ours makes such visits to my mother-in-law who is very dependent on us for her needs.

Sure - he got in the stand and pleaded hardship over his right (or rather got his solicitor to plead his case for him per the report)- but this guy's job has been compromised in any case by his track record on penalty points/and not being able to give a plausible reason why he could not identify the driver. His job is still potentially at risk because of his own misconduct - which makes his solicitor's comment and the magistrates gullibility in this case a bit" redundant".

_________________
Take with a chuckle or a grain of salt
Drive without COAST and it's all your own fault!

A SMILE is a curve that sets everything straight (P Diller).

A Smiley Per post
FINES USfor our COAST!

Approach love and cooking with reckless abandon - but driving with a smile and a COAST calm mind.

There is a slight difference between the general public and the "boss of Britain's biggest driving school", and he is remaining in his position. Added to that he refused to reveal who was driving (something Safe Speed (and I hope PePiPoo) doesn't recommend) - so yes he should be ashamed.

_________________
Views expressed are personal opinions and are not necessarily shared by the Safe Speed campaign

What makes you say that ? Safe Speed is for taking responsibility for your driving.
You will have to ask Pepipoo what they think of this themselves, I cannot answer for them.
We are not legally qualified so never place recommendations to anyone.

His position give him prominence which he appears to have not taken seriously.
His number of points might imply great concern.

Safe Speed is very concerned that the wrong road safety messages are not able to get through because the wrong emphasis on 'a numeric value' is over-riding them. So import road safety fundamentals are not being encouraged that lead to safe driving, and try to ensure that people always choose a safe and appropriate speed for the conditions (that is one that enables you to stop in the distance that you can see to be clear).

It is good to have a justice system that enables us all to have a fair trial. However it is becoming ever more so that the more money that you can spend on legal representation, the more you are likely to 'walk free' as it were. This system is at fault, and ALL people need to have a properly conducted & fair trial. But more people find themselves acting for themselves with no legal training at all, this is unfair. The Gov want the defendant to start paying too even if they win! This erosion of decent and good moral values is appalling.
The system then from 'above' downwards, also needs proper laws and guidance, whist it has been in place, generally, it is in danger of having State organised roaming magistrates, that 'advise' juries, (!) and this is really big problem, that will more or less end the 12 peer panel acting for themselves.
The Government Policies concentrate too much on speed fines, that make magistrates have no alternative, but to issue fines and penalties, yet the accident stats change little, and trends do not reduce at all, or with any significance.

If we are to reduce accidents then we need better drivers, and the government is failing in this task.

_________________
Safe Speed for Intelligent Road Safety through proper research, experience & guidance.

Claire A truly excellent response!






I endorse this commetn 100%


Of course it causes grate concern. This guy fronts a main and nationally acclaimed training supplier. BSM has a decent reptutation which he has brought into disrepute. It is akin to Merry Hughes' transgression (arguably on a safe road in safe circumstances - but still a huge embarrassment and compromising detriment to his position at the time) and he had the moral and professionally ethical decency to stand down from his post as the Road Safety chap within ACPO at the time.




To be devil's advocate and quote the much spouted grumble from a multitude of folk out there




but as the boss of a driving school - | would expect him to obey the lolly sign or at least see a big yellow thing with tell-tale road markings. I would also expect him to be able to state who was driving the car at the time in all reality




Nick Freeman and his ilk .. cost a lot of cash. The precendents they set though - should be available to all and used by all unless superseded by a higher court Note .. police only enforce a law and provide evidence to CPS. Police officers are not lawyers and their evidence and system are evaluated/appraised/even judged by the courts A policeman's lot ain't such a happy one at times

But I fully understand what you are saying and concede a point well made Justice rather demands an equal footing for all.




Yep..we need better training. Unfortunately, the boss of the main training establishment has proven that

1. speed cams do not deter bad habits

2. accumulation of penalty points without any corrective training does not improve matters

3. Complacent attitudes result - especially amongst those who can afford legal "smooth talkers" to be very cynical for once.

I doubt if chunky123 or Greenshed can suggest any realistic solution. Mine has been try to educate .. punish as last resort - but to keep a learning rubric within the FPN by way of acid lecture by our staff out there on the hard face. Sure .. if you do an FOI on this patch - you'll find we have a high statistic on inconsiderate/careless/dangerous charges but a fairly low return on speeding raps when compared and contrasted with other areas. AN FOI on stats reveale we crush more uninsured heaps than elsewhere... and have a more than decent record on road safety percentagewise n KSO figures. We would rather this stat be zero .. but that's sadly a bit of a pipedream given human nature as we all know it. Heck . I am a realist. I do not deceive myself as to human faults - and am aware of my own .. and try to correct them.

I guess the difference between me and Steve Greenshed (or chunky ) (and we want the same result - ROAD SAFETY FOR ALL ) us that our patch accepts folk make mistakes and we try to correct them whereas a speed cam cult cannot do so with the same immediate impact - as it's a bit too remote from the situation.

I am not saying we are omnipresent .. but nor are fixed or mobile cameras We monitor known hot spots ... after all in our cosy van and equally cosy stealth and marked-mobiles

_________________
Take with a chuckle or a grain of salt
Drive without COAST and it's all your own fault!

A SMILE is a curve that sets everything straight (P Diller).

A Smiley Per post
FINES USfor our COAST!

Approach love and cooking with reckless abandon - but driving with a smile and a COAST calm mind.

You talk complete rubbish my friend! You don't even know how many officers man the van used by the force you claim to be in or even how many vans or officers are involved.
How can you support a drive within the distance you can see to be clear then spout on about how another person should have been banned when he clearly drove to that doctrine?
You are no more a Durham officer than I am and you have spouted evidence here that confirms that.
The BSM boss is entitled to plead hardship as anyone else is so justice is done, not that I would have allowed it personally, but that is the decision of the mags present.
Your stance is hypocritical and your persona is false.

I have to ask the question is what are the courts thinking of?

Is this multi millionare REALLY going to suffer financial hardship over losing his licence...very unlikely. It's a bit different to the average bloke in the street who can't get to work or may lose his job because of a ban. And it's not even as though he was on 12 points....17 for christs sake...where do these people draw the line???

_________________
My views do not represent Safespeed but those of a driver who has driven for 39 yrs, in all conditions, at all times of the day & night on every type of road and covered well over a million miles, so knows a bit about what makes for safety on the road,what is really dangerous and needs to be observed when driving and quite frankly, the speedo is way down on my list of things to observe to negotiate Britain's roads safely, but I don't expect some fool who sits behind a desk all day to appreciate that.

What if he got the first 11 for going just over the acpo threshold on roads where it was perfectly safe to do so?

_________________
Driving fast is for a particular time and place, I can do it I just only do it occasionally because I am a gentleman.
- James May

Hardship should mean just that. Clearly a man of his financial resources (multi-millionaire) is not going to suffer any hardship by being banned, and having to PAY somebody to drive his elderly mother to the GP! Hundreds of elderly people have to make their way to their GP under their own steam every day - often with the help of bus tokens.
He is the BOSS of BSM - I doubt he still gives lessons, so all he has to do is arrange for one of his instructors to give him a lift into work in the morning, like any other banned driver!

When I last saw Durham's van, there were two officers IN the van, and one sat 1/4 mile down the road in a quick looking marked car - apparently to break cover or go and fetch doughnuts!

As to your alter ego's humorous observation of the "closeness" of three men in a van - they are not as likely to be as "close" as men cooped up in a submarine for long periods! No wonder they call it the Silent Service... nobody talks about what goes on at sea... except to each other!

Your attack on In Gear's integrity is breathtaking - coming from someone hiding behind more identities than Rory Bremner!
When you last used your real identity, I identified you as being a liar and a charlatan, and changing your identities more times than some people change their socks is not going to change that!

_________________
Time to take responsibility for our actions.. and don't be afraid of speaking out!

Add to that, someone who makes rash statements that he cannot back up, for the fact they are false, has a total misunderstanding of basic maths and road safety and that just about sums the guy up.

_________________
My views do not represent Safespeed but those of a driver who has driven for 39 yrs, in all conditions, at all times of the day & night on every type of road and covered well over a million miles, so knows a bit about what makes for safety on the road,what is really dangerous and needs to be observed when driving and quite frankly, the speedo is way down on my list of things to observe to negotiate Britain's roads safely, but I don't expect some fool who sits behind a desk all day to appreciate that.

I have seen nothing in the press to suggest that the bench were in any way gullible. There are two issues here. If the report is correct he refused to name the driver and got the prescribed penalty. 6 points and a fine related to his means. That led to the second issue of a potential totting ban. Such a ban is NOT a sentence of the court it is an order ancilliary to sentence and is NOT related to the offence which took his points over the magic 12. The bench MUST consider any exceptional hardship put forward on its own merits and compare it with the guidelines. The standard at which a court must find exceptional hardship is very low and the vast majority of first time totters don't get a ban.

_________________
I am not a lawyer and can't give legal advice. I do have experience of the day to day working of courts and use that knowledge to help where possible. I do not represent any official body and post as an individual.

If you were to say that the more money you spend on a lawyer the more likely you are to get national headlines I would agree with you. If you ask any JP they will confirm that the tactics used by highly paid headline grabbing lawyers are exactly the same as those used day in and day out in courts across the country by ordinary** lawyers who deal with motoring offences as part of their normal duties.


** I don't mean ordinary in any derogatory sense, I have considerable respect for the lawyers I see very day in court who maintain high professional standards, whatever and whoever they are dealing with. I use the word to distinguish them from the household names.

_________________
I am not a lawyer and can't give legal advice. I do have experience of the day to day working of courts and use that knowledge to help where possible. I do not represent any official body and post as an individual.

Its not financial hardship he had to prove, its exceptional hardship. In other words something which amounts to more hardship than could be expected from the decision of the court. As I have already posted the question of a totting ban is considered separately from the offending behaviour which got him to that number of points.

All of which would probably count as exceptional hardship.


He was under the magic 12 so the matter of a totting ban could not be considered by the court. A single offence put him over the 12 and the court considered a ban at once. We draw the line where the government tells us to draw it, having considered all the relevant factors and exercised what little discretion we have left.

_________________
I am not a lawyer and can't give legal advice. I do have experience of the day to day working of courts and use that knowledge to help where possible. I do not represent any official body and post as an individual.

If the majority of first time totters do not get a ban - then that makes a mockery of the system. Most folk we know of who achieve 12 points GET the mandatory ban. If they do not - then this undermines the whole point of penalty points as a deterrent.


This guy reached 17 points. He is the boss of a major driver trainer provider. As such - he would be required to hold a clean driving licence - maybe the odd transgression of a 3 pointer but would prove a hard lesson learned - which is the whole POINT of the penalty point system.

Guy''s reported to be a millioanire = he can thus afford a chauffeur! And one for his Mother's visits to her GP.

It is not hypocitrical of me to pass such comments. It is hypocriticalof a person to hold 2 or more accounts and even 5 with another message board and talk to himself - eh SteveC? We know all about you By the way - are you not breaking the terms of your official reprimand? Tut tut. We know all about that too Oh and by the way - I'd lay off the Magic Mushrooms if I were you.... especially when chatting about road safety. Three officers are usually involved with the cam van in any case. You asked how many staff we operate - I replied correctly that we usually try to have three officers involved. I am placing this comment in tiny font to reply to your vulgarity without dragging everyone else into the argument - but making a response in public all the same. My original post did not say three were huddled in the van. My later post did not confirm one way or the other - and was perhaps facetiously worded - as perhaps I was "baiting" you there - and you are the one showing yourself up - not me. If you are as you claim to be - an SCP officer - then you spend little time doing your job - give 5 different user accounts on the Westmorland Gazette - two different accounts on this board and three or more on the PH message board. When do you actually DO ANY WORK for which you are paid by the taxpayer?

_________________
Take with a chuckle or a grain of salt
Drive without COAST and it's all your own fault!

A SMILE is a curve that sets everything straight (P Diller).

A Smiley Per post
FINES USfor our COAST!

Approach love and cooking with reckless abandon - but driving with a smile and a COAST calm mind.

Why? Why would the Chief Executive of a driving school be required to have a driving license at all? He is not giving driving instruction, he is administrating the company.

_________________
When I see an adult on a bicycle, I do not despair for the future of the human race. H.G. Wells
When I see a youth in a motor car I do d.c.brown

My thoughts exactly

My father in Law has been in hospital for 23 weeks, during which time he has had to have first a toe, and then the rest of his leg amputated.
He lives some distance out into the country from the hospital at Southport.
During that time, my mother in law who is 78 has had to rely on family for lifts - but work committments made this restrictive.. we could only take her at weekends.
So she finally plucked up courage to use the rural bus service - a journey with THREE changes, of 90 minutes. It only takes 20 minutes by car (and £3 to park in the car park!) but she did it three or four times a week...sometimes only one way when family were available to take her home after they finished work.
For this well heeled clown to claim hardship is insulting to those who are forced to make such journeys on a regular basis!

_________________
Time to take responsibility for our actions.. and don't be afraid of speaking out!

You mean the ones you see on your 26 or so sittings? I agree that some lawyers will alert the tabloids (with consent of client ) for the accolades. I also note that journalists will sit in the public gallery - especially if a case involves someone like the BSM boss or other professional who should know better as this would be "in the public interest" in their opinion, I also concede that the journalese style will be used to "sell copy" and that they will spin out the more lurid aspects of each case.

However, the guy happens to be the boss of a major driving school and as such would be expected to be able to identify the driver as the law requires of him.

He can afford a chauffeur - easily - so it seems odd that "hardship" was accepted so easily in this particular case - especially when the understanding is that "the plea of undue hardship has been tightened and you have to prove the hardship extends to a vulnerable member of the family - and his Mum could still be chauffeured by his chauffeur if he had been banned for the 6 month or so duration - As dcb whaley points out - he should not really need a driving licence to administrate as an officer of said company but if he does hold one - then he has a moral obligation by virtue of his position to maintain its cleanliness as best he can - and this means showing he has taken all steps to know who was driving his car legally at any one time and that he has made every effort to identify the culprit if person gets pinged. This would fulfil the obligation which was required of him regardless of his job - but most especially GIVEN his job. That driver (whether the BSM boss or his wife or other) then has all the options for defence available if he or she felt the ping was incorrect - most of which options are mentioned on the pepippo site and as far as I can establish - within the letter of established law.

He may still have compromised his position and be required to stand down - but that would be if the scandal is viewed as undermining the establishment's ethic in the opinion of the rest of the board of fellow directors and officers.




Ernest ... well said. And regards to your in-laws. That sounds like some epic journey for Ma-in-law!

_________________
Take with a chuckle or a grain of salt
Drive without COAST and it's all your own fault!

A SMILE is a curve that sets everything straight (P Diller).

A Smiley Per post
FINES USfor our COAST!

Approach love and cooking with reckless abandon - but driving with a smile and a COAST calm mind.

I would have thought someone directing (he's a joint MD, not merely an administrator) a company would have some sort of experience with what his company is providing, otherwise one would have to question his suitability for that position.

The points alone isn't the sole problem. His refusal to name the driver greatly compounds the issue – for this he has no excuse!

_________________
Views expressed are personal opinions and are not necessarily shared by the Safe Speed campaign

Exactly Steve and given our "submarinated onel" (to use Wildy's private nickname for the person) has bragged on various motoring fora in the past that he has prosecuted folk who asked for advice on not naming driver on pepipoo - this would make his comments on this thread under his two user names as more than hypocritical.

_________________
Take with a chuckle or a grain of salt
Drive without COAST and it's all your own fault!

A SMILE is a curve that sets everything straight (P Diller).

A Smiley Per post
FINES USfor our COAST!

Approach love and cooking with reckless abandon - but driving with a smile and a COAST calm mind.