Safe Speed Forums

The campaign for genuine road safety
It is currently Thu Jul 02, 2026 10:13

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 7 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Sun Feb 26, 2006 02:06 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 06:46
Posts: 16903
Location: Safe Speed
http://driving.timesonline.co.uk/articl ... _1,00.html

The great escape

Speeding drivers are avoiding points by pinning their offences on someone else. One dodger tells Pat Malone of The Sunday Times how easily it is done

Andy Procter has been caught speeding five times in the past three years but retains his driving licence and continues to drive with a cavalier disdain for the Gatso. He is able to do so because he is a “passer off” of penalty points — a driver who pays the fines incurred by his bad habits but gets others to take the points that would otherwise lead to a driving ban.

In Procter’s case the recipients of his points are his very accommodating family. Passing off points is a dodge that is widespread across the country, according to some road traffic experts.

“There’s a huge number of people doing it,” says Paul Smith, founder of Safe Speed, a campaign group against the proliferation of speed cameras. “To some people it’s common sense. If the husband has six or nine points on his licence and faces the prospect of disqualification while his wife has no points, it just seems easier for him to say, ‘Well, you take mine, dear’.”



Exact figures are hard to come by but last year a survey by Churchill Insurance found that 2.2% of the 2,000 drivers questioned admitted to taking points on behalf of their partner. This equates to 726,000 of the 33m licence holders. More worryingly for the police, a third said they would consider asking their partners to admit to their speeding offence if it prevented them losing their licence. The majority of those who had taken the rap for a partner were women.

It is not the only dodge that has come to police attention. Other evasions include naming a fictitious person as driver, altering a driving licence number and using a false address. All are prosecutable offences.

There have even been rumours of drivers passing off points to the recently deceased; scanning the obituary columns in newspapers and naming the driver as a person who would have been alive when the offence took place.

The situation has got to the point where Greater Manchester police have begun issuing notices with their fixed-penalty tickets warning drivers of the consequences of passing off points, which can include jail for perjury.

Such threats cut no ice with Procter, a 54-year-old property developer who lives in the country but has a home in southwest London and drives almost 30,000 miles a year. Unsurprisingly, he doesn’t want his real name known. He has a 5-series BMW and a heavy foot. He was banned twice in the days when three endorsements meant automatic suspension. Today, under the totting up system, drivers usually lose their licence when they have collected 12 or more penalty points. Two of Procter’s more recent speeding offences were spotted by police and as a result he has six points. The other three were less of a problem.

The first involved a Gatso near Yeovil. Procter’s wife, who drives a Nissan Micra and, jokes her husband, gets fly-strikes on the rear windscreen, agreed to confess to being the driver and take the three points. She refused to play the white knight a second time for a similar incident but Procter was able to involve his sister-in-law in return for a substantial present.

A third penalty notice followed a trip to Oxford, and Procter managed to persuade an elderly aunt to take it. “She still has a licence but she’s given up driving,” he says.



But here he almost came unstuck. After he had sent off the form naming the “driver” a summons arrived requesting her appearance in court. “She’s 76 and she walks with sticks,” says Procter. “I knew if she had to be helped into court to answer a charge of driving at 94mph on the A34 shortly after midnight in her nephew’s BMW, they would smell a rat.”

The solution was to have a doctor write a sicknote saying she was unable to attend. In her absence she was fined £200 with £30 costs and awarded six penalty points.

Procter has run out of family conspirators and has been researching the black market in penalty points for when he next feels a flash on the back of his neck. “I’m told some students charge between £500 and £700 for three points. That would be worth it to a lot of people, including me.”

Like many drivers he considers speed cameras to be legal extortion and has no qualms about his actions. “Speed doesn’t kill — if it did, all the deaths would be on the motorways. Bad roads kill, and that’s not my department,” he says.

“There’s no logic to where they put their speed limits. You can look at a stretch of road and have no idea what the speed limit is for it, or why. They change the number at random intervals and if you miss a sign, bingo — gotcha! Well, two can play at that game. But I’ll play by my rules.”

Greater Manchester police beg to differ. Chief Inspector Haydn Roberts, of the force’s traffic network services, says: “Our best-known case was Stewart and Cathryn Bromley who invented a fictitious Bulgarian employee they said had been driving the car and even travelled to Bulgaria to send a postcard from him. They were fined £9,200 with £1,900 costs and would have gone to jail if they hadn’t pleaded guilty.

“We have anecdotal evidence of penalty points changing hands for money, but a lot of it is urban myth — most people who get speeding fines are otherwise law-abiding and don’t want to turn a fixed penalty into a crime of a wholly different magnitude, namely perverting the course of justice.”

Not every driver caught speeding by a camera will be able to pass off the offence. Gatso cameras produce images in which the driver is indiscernible, but forward-facing Truvelo cameras produce clear images. Computers are also programmed to throw up details of cars that seem to have a lot of different drivers.

But ultimately, says Roberts, all this is detail. “We need to make speeding unacceptable in the public mind. We are slaughtering 3,500 people a year on our roads. I spent a lot of time on the road as a police officer and I remember the dead, particularly the children. Almost all drivers believed they were driving at a safe speed right up to the instant they hit the child.”

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Feb 26, 2006 18:14 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member

Joined: Fri Sep 24, 2004 23:26
Posts: 9268
Location: Treacletown ( just north of M6 J3),A MILE OR TWO PAST BEDROCK
Quote:
But ultimately, says Roberts, all this is detail. “We need to make speeding unacceptable in the public mind. We are slaughtering 3,500 people a year on our roads. I spent a lot of time on the road as a police officer and I remember the dead, particularly the children. Almost all drivers believed they were driving at a safe speed right up to the instant they hit the child.”




right up to the instant they hit the child - which they perhaps did not see because they were either keeping a beady eye on the speedo ,with additional attention on the mirror , leaving the child as a hidden target - cause of accident ==failed safety policy.Of course if we had more police officers insisting on a speed safe for the conditions, not a figure we might get there .But in order to get there we need more drivers SHOUTING for the return of Trafpols.

_________________
lets bring sanity back to speed limits.
Drivers are like donkeys -they respond best to a carrot, not a stick .Road safety experts are like Asses - best kept covered up ,or sat on


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sun Feb 26, 2006 23:18 
Offline
User

Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2004 15:05
Posts: 1225
Location: Glasgow
Quote:
Almost all drivers believed they were driving at a safe speed right up to the instant they hit the child.”


...who was playing chicken on the motorway??

...who stepped out despite the red man being on??

...who was standing behind the reversing lorry in a loading bay?..

Emotive rubbish like that should be countered at every turn. It is idiots like that who, having disproportionately piled responsibility onto the driver, help create the situation where 'the child' has no natural risk aversion and expects everyone else to cater for their safety.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Mon Feb 27, 2006 05:26 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 06:46
Posts: 16903
Location: Safe Speed
r11co wrote:
Quote:
Almost all drivers believed they were driving at a safe speed right up to the instant they hit the child.”


...who was playing chicken on the motorway??

...who stepped out despite the red man being on??

...who was standing behind the reversing lorry in a loading bay?..

Emotive rubbish like that should be countered at every turn. It is idiots like that who, having disproportionately piled responsibility onto the driver, help create the situation where 'the child' has no natural risk aversion and expects everyone else to cater for their safety.


And the two other highly annoying aspects are:

1) A deliberate slight on the 'safe speed' concept (and possibly us (?) ).
2) And the ridiculous suggestion that a speed limit might be more helpful than a speed adjusted to the conditions.

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Feb 27, 2006 09:15 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 11:19
Posts: 1795
Perhaps we should play devil's advocate and say:

Yes, you're absolutely right. What were we thinking? Everyone should do just whatever the limit is, whatever the weather, under whatever the conditions. We drivers bow to the superioror intelligence of council set limits set by someone that probably doesn't even drive. Ice and snow - just do the limit. Kids around - just do the limit. As long as you do the limit then your conscience is clear if you run anyone over, hit anyone, cause any accident or are involved in any accident.

How many children will get run over when everyone is doing 29.5 outside schools with 30 mph limits or 59.5 mph in villages with nsl limits.

How many bunching accidents will happen on the motorway will happen when everyone is doing 69.5 in the outer two lanes?

How many people will fall of rural roads at 60 mph or mash cyclists, pedestrians and others round bends?

Everyone can do the limit with impunity as their speedos all over read slightly so if you keep the needle on the correct line you'll still be doing less than the limit as it is not specified anywhere how much less just that you should 'slow down when necessary'. 2 mph under the limit would obviously be fine past a school.

Are they then going to make prescriptive advice at just how fast one should travel in any limit under differing conditions? If drivers are incapable of setting a safe speed then the advice must come from on high surely?

Somehow I think agreeing with them wholeheartedly with a very sarcastic response might put them off guard as they are expecting vehement disagreement on how drivers know better.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Feb 27, 2006 12:15 
Offline
Member
Member
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 08, 2004 01:48
Posts: 526
Location: Netherlands
teabelly wrote:
Somehow I think agreeing with them wholeheartedly with a very sarcastic response might put them off guard as they are expecting vehement disagreement on how drivers know better.

I like where you're going here, teabelly - I'm not quite sure of the "how", but I think that there could be some useful mileage here.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Feb 27, 2006 12:25 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 06:46
Posts: 16903
Location: Safe Speed
supertramp wrote:
teabelly wrote:
Somehow I think agreeing with them wholeheartedly with a very sarcastic response might put them off guard as they are expecting vehement disagreement on how drivers know better.

I like where you're going here, teabelly - I'm not quite sure of the "how", but I think that there could be some useful mileage here.


There's an excellent example on http://www.safespeed.org.uk/stockportad.html (Keith Jones' email)

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 7 posts ] 

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 13 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You can post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
[ Time : 0.234s | 12 Queries | GZIP : Off ]