Safe Speed Forums

Exactly. If the driver knows the number
plate is unreadable, then he/she knows they
have carte blanche to speed past any cameras
they want. The only time it would stop is if they
clean the crap off or get pulled over for it.

When they do get pulled over its a £30 fine?

I can't understand why dropping chewing gum
is a £50 fine, swearing is an £80 fine, but having
a non existent number plate... just £30.

If it could be proven the driver had deliberately obscured his numberplate with the intention of avoiding detection surely this would be perverting the course of justice. A much more serious offence.

I think its probably company reps, because
they are the only group I can think of who would
not clean their car, well, for the simple fact that
it isn't their car and they probably just pocket the
car wash money, its not like their boss is going
to see it when they are 300 miles away.

This would explain why it is BMW's all the time too

When I had a company car (engineer not rep) we were not allowed to claim for washing the car, we had to pay for it ourselves.

Consquentuially they never got washed. The company didn't care since they were all on lease so who gives a damn if 3 years worth of salt causes them to rot before the first MOT.

edited out

_________________
now retired

Lot of companies with lease vehicles are same -- we've been trying to get washing facilities for a long time - got screenwash after an accident, but no de icer and diesels dont heat up properly till on road -

_________________
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

But is it a company car (perk) or required to do the job and you leave it at work at the end of the day?

required for job, but we took it home. Generally I didn't see the office unless there was no work.

There's an element of both for most company cars.
Vehicles that are required to left at work at the end of the day tend to be vans rather than cars and no one person would be taxed in that situation.

Company vans (ie that you can take home and use for personal mileage) have a lower rated tax benefit to reflect the lower level of 'perk' that they give and represent.

In my own case, my company car is both necessary and has a 'perk' element.
I have do have to pay for any extra engine oil used between services, windscreen washer fluid etc, but an errant wheel trim gets paid for.
I keep mine clean (inc. no. plate) as dirty compnay cars get commented on and we don't get any money to put it through a washer.

That's what I was getting at, I couldn't remember the details! I suppose the 'van' type company car would be cleaned at the company's expense. If you have a company vehicle that negates (is that the right word?) you having one of your own then I suppose you have to clean it!

(back on topic...)

Isn't this yet another subtle bad side-effect of camera enforcement?

Ten years ago, I think if you'd asked Joe Public what his attitude was towards "knowingly" dirty / damaged / obscured number plates he'd have generalyl been negative about it, assuming that anyone doing so would have a clear motive of trying to evade detection of some serious motoring offence.

But I bet you wouldn't get that response now. I think it would be more along the lines of "I don't blame them for trying to prevent the cameras nicking them".

I must stress that this is only my opinion, but I reckon this is yet another way in which the age of the camera has encouraged criminal behaviour to become socially acceptable.

_________________
CSCP Latin for beginners...
Ticketo ergo sum : I scam therefore I am!

I think it's total cobblers that anyone could suggest that the "Rich" people get away with smaller punishments than the "poor".

Far from sounding like a grumpy old man, to me LeveL sounds like a very young (mentally at least) man with a poor education, a low paying job and a chip on his shoulder that other people seem to be doing better in life.

I appreciate that this will sound quite brutal.

I payed for myself through university. I worked in low paying manual labour jobs to fund my education and then I embarked on a long, intensive training program. I now have myself a salary which almost matches my age and have bought my first house almost a year ago.

Far from spitting venom at "the Rich" in their high-end cars, I want to get there myself, and to be honest my view of taxation and punishment is the polar opposite of yours, LeveL....

Why on earth is a 7-series BMW committing a greater offense than some crumby clapped out Fiesta with the same defect??

Simply because the 7-series BMW owner works hard for his/her money, gets absolutely humped in taxes to subsidise the bone-idle and generally turns over more money in 2 months than you do in a year does not mean that he/she has committed any greater offense than a "poor" person.

And quite contrary to your comment about Mitsubishi Evo's, I'd argue that it was a car that attracted and encouraged prattish driving.

Put simply - Hands up everyone who's heard an Evo or Impreza at full throttle - and a 4.0 V8 7-series BMW??? Thought so.......

_________________

I can understand people that say this, but still
I disagree completely with the small fines handed
out. If I were a policeman then I would not really
take it as serious if there was a white van with
dirty plates, if they were so bad they were unreadable
then yes in ALL cases I would hand some sort of hefty
fine out.

Like the post by Lum says, some companies make their
employees pay for the car wash which again, if the boss
is probably not going to see the vehicle very often then
thats something I would not blame people for doing, not
getting it washed! I would consider this when pulling anyone
over for the offence.

The car I saw was a BMW with a LAYER of mud over the plate,
its not like it was a thin layer I mean the plate was impossible
to read, I only knew the plate was THERE because I know thats
where the number plate is on that particular car! This is the same
R reg BMW that was weavinf in and out of the other cars like an
idiot.

Like if a land rover was in that condition, I wouldn't just throw
the book at them because they probably live on a farm etc, it
just cannot be helped in that case but I was only on about cast
iron cases like the BMW.

It certainly SEEMS like criminal behaviour has become acceptable
but my take on the Government installing 12,000 speed cameras
is simple - they are the creators of crime. Maybe I should say that
again - the Government is the CREATOR of "criminals". Innocent
people are made to live so that any little thing they do is classed as
a "crime" then of course, when law is adjusted to fine someone £80
for swearing and all these things, then I am afraid that innocent
people are the victims, they are being oppressed by their
Government.

"Crime on the increase" haha, no s**t sherlock! Stop creating
laws that make citizens trying to live a normal life and be left alone
become "criminals".

Its really that simple and speed cameras, which I knew
3 years ago do NOT reduce road traffic fatalities, are
everywhere now, 12,000 of them.

Off topic but NASA has just started a $10 Billion project
over in the USA and it is to have a 62,000 mile cable going
from the Earth to outer space. The theory is, the cable will
act as an elevator. i can tell you without spending a penny
of that ten billion dollars, that the project will not work and
the cable will fall or be pulled back to Earth no matter HOW
you try to do this - but that will still spend $10 Billion trying,
does this not make people slightly curious as to who exactly
is behind the taxation of the public? People are far too trusting.

Look at the hundreds if not thousands of posts here just because
of speed cameras. Now consider ALL the other things that I myself
consider... yes, it is an "orgy of evidence" as one very observant
character once said. It certainly is and speed cameras are the
least of MY worries but then, someone has to worry about cameras
I guess, otherwise who knows the position we would be in right now
if no one ever spoke up about their findings of corruption, however
that may manifest itself, whether its the west supplying Bin Laden
and Saddam with pretty much 100% of the funding those guys ever
got right down to things like speed cameras, its sickening everywhere
you choose to investigate. the faint hearted are best off just not even
investigating but hey thats kooool.... because they never DO investigate

Few years ago - it was a common ploy by trafpols in certain areas with older cars - couldn't pull you for driving/speed - but "Number plate a bit dirty ,sir" - "now while we're at it , have you got etc, lets check lights etc".
All about road safety.
Now the diry plate is all about £££ - cant read plate - SCP cant get funds.

_________________
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

Relax. You ARE coming across with more than a touch of the politics-of-envy here. I suspect that you're probably noticing BMW 7-series cars with dirty number plates more than, say, the Skodas and Fiestas, because you're predisposed to dislike them, alongside the Audi and Mercedeses.

If you've got a point to make (which I think you have), make it. Don't start trying to make two points by conflating your resentment at people who drive great big expensive cars and people who let their number plates get dirty into one great big rant.

FWIW, I live in darkest Wales. Many of the roads are covered in mud and cowshit, and it takes very little time at all for my car to become encrusted with muck. To be honest, I don't even notice the state of my plates, so your contention that people with mucky plates are deliberately doing it to evade the law certainly wouldn't apply in my case (not that it's helped - 20 years' driving with one ticket in 1997, and then 3 tickets in the last 6 months: I need DIRTIER plates, dammit!).


And how is this ANY of YOUR business??


There is a law against it. I'm sure someone here will cite the necessary bit of the Highway Code or RTA, but it is (I think) quite a serious offence.


!
Methinks the poster doth protest too much. I can feel the jealousy coming off you in waves...

Stephen (first post) (oh, and non-BMW/Audi/Merc driver. It's a Toyota Celica).

Saw something like this somewhere else - think there's two offences --

1) no plate(s)
2) dirty /obscured plate.

Any BiB /legal experts confirm?

_________________
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

I'm still waiting for the first person to be found guilty of "Perverting the course of Justice" for having a dirty number plate. It will happen.

_________________
“For every complex problem, there is a solution that is simple, neat, and wrong.” - H. L. Mencken

I'm not a legal expert by any means, however after a bit of reading I conclude the following:

Having a plate so dirty it cannot be read is essentially 'failing to display a number plate' however this is obviously subjective.

Failing to display a number plate means you are breaking the law (not conforming with section 23 of the Vehicle Excise and Registration Act 1994) and counts as an MOT failure.

No MOT or 'Driving an unroadworthy vehicle' carries a £1000 fine, but more importantly may invalidate your insurance.

This is significant because if you were to kill or seriously injure a 3rd party in an accident, for instance, even if it were not your fault, your insurance may become null and void, and at this juncture, I think it's fair to say, you would be in deep poo.

Of course it won't invalidate your insurance. How does a dirty number plate change the insured risk? A vehicle is not 'unroadworthy' if the plate is dirty.
The only way you can invalidate your insurance is by not declaring a material fact when taking out the insurance, or by failing to inform the insurer of anything which might have an effect on the risks being covered. Thus, if your car had a serious fault which you knew about before you got in it to drive off, like no rear brakes, or a snapped road spring, then your cover could be invalidated, but not for a dirty plate.
Also, whatever you do, you are still fully covered for 3rd party costs/damage. The insurer could make a back-claim on you if their loss could be established to have been caused directly by something of which you were fully aware before you drove off on your journey, but even then an insurer would be unlikely to do so. If you had insured a BMW 316, fitted a 3.5 litre/250 bhp engine without telling them, then took it out and rolled it they might not want to pay out as you would have failed to disclose material facts in respect of the insured risks.
Having no MoT does not invalidate your insurance either. If it did you would not be able to take an untaxed and un-MoT'd car for its test.