Swapping penalty points

[Bonefishblues]

So the 'trivial speeders', much discussed, which pwa and myself have said on several occasions are the ones who are marginally over the stated limit, perhaps by 1-2 mph will not appear in those stats, because no SP30 and no points for said trivial offence (and nobody is disputing that an offence is committed, btw).

Your assertion is without evidence.

Totally untrue, they do appear in those stats because the Cohort is those who have points for speeding.

Essex Police for one certainly do not think you are correct as they include 32 mph as a speeding offence!

Green Flag also disagrees with you:

If you are caught at between 31 and 40mph in a 30mph zone you will get three penalty points

But then again you can dismiss them as well.so I can't see any point in adding more


I still await evidence why these people should be exempt from the 30 mph limit, they are speeding and above the legal limit.

There is also still no answer why the same concessions should not be given for drink driving

Once more, and finally, I was addressing solely the statement you made, about which you can obfuscate all you like, but the fact is that 'trivial speeders' will not appear in those stats.

Again, for the nth time, nobody is saying, least of all myself, that speeding is anything other than an offence, capable of prosecution, but despite your citations, the number of SP30s issued for 31, 32 mph, as an example, is vanishingly small under current protocols.

Again, at the risk (well a racing certainty) of repetition, I do not seek to defend the protocol.

Final answer, and all that, so back to you to assert that Mars Black is in fact Titanium White

[Cunobelin]

OK.... so it comes down to the fact that you claim they won't appear, the Police and motoring organisations claim that they do.

Personally as the ones carrying out the prosecutions, and advising their members, I will go with the latter advice.

However at least you are now starting to admit this does happen.

[Cunobelin]

Just to be clear, that "trivial amount" referred to is within, not beyond, to margin for error allowed. I am talking about not being too bothered, when I am cycling, whether a driver is passing at 29mph or 31mph in a 30 zone so long as everything else about it is safe.

Which returns to drink driving, should we care if the driver has 81 or 88 mg of alcohol in their blood as opposed to 80

Like speeding they claim to be "safe"

Again, when I am actually on the bike, cycling down a bit of road and being passed by a car, it makes very little practical difference to me whether the driver is 1mg under the drink drive limit or 1mg over. There is very little practical difference between the two. But I think the drink drive analogy is bogus anyway. There are similarities but there are also differences. I never get into the driver's seat if I might be even halfway to the limit. But I can get into the driver's seat sober, fully intending to drive within speed limits, and still stray over the speed limit momentarily. because even though I mean well I am human. If you drive you stray over the speed limit too, which makes you hypocritical doesn't it?

The comparison is entirely valid, both are arbitrary limits set by research on the safety of drivers exceeding that limit.

What about introducing a 10+2 for drink driving as it is not possible for drivers to accurately assess their blood alcohol and stray over the limit. After all they are only human?

As for hypocritical - the hypocrisy is denying the evidence. I accept that if I am speeding I represent a greater hazard to other road users.

The facts remain that those with points are more dangerous and that cohort included drivers exceeding the speed by a "trivial amount"

[Bonefishblues]

OK.... so it comes down to the fact that you claim they won't appear, the Police and motoring organisations claim that they do.

Personally as the ones carrying out the prosecutions, and advising their members, I will go with the latter advice.

However at least you are now starting to admit this does happen.

That is to misrepresent what I said, as you have done previously.

[pete75]

So the 'trivial speeders', much discussed, which pwa and myself have said on several occasions are the ones who are marginally over the stated limit, perhaps by 1-2 mph will not appear in those stats, because no SP30 and no points for said trivial offence (and nobody is disputing that an offence is committed, btw).

Your assertion is without evidence.

Totally untrue, they do appear in those stats because the Cohort is those who have points for speeding.

Essex Police for one certainly do not think you are correct as they include 32 mph as a speeding offence!

Green Flag also disagrees with you:

If you are caught at between 31 and 40mph in a 30mph zone you will get three penalty points

But then again you can dismiss them as well.so I can't see any point in adding more


I still await evidence why these people should be exempt from the 30 mph limit, they are speeding and above the legal limit.

There is also still no answer why the same concessions should not be given for drink driving

Police forces use these the NPCC guidelines for speeding. Basically speeds less 10%+2 mph are disregarded so how are there any meaningful statistics for people who are 1-2 mph over the limit.

Here are the current NPCC guidelines - page 6

"The guidance to police officers is that it is anticipated that, other than in the
most exceptional circumstances, the issue of fixed penalty notices and
summonses is likely to be the minimum appropriate enforcement action as
soon as the following speeds have been reached:" The following speeds are10% + 2 mph

https://www.npcc.police.uk/documents/Fo ... 202000.pdf

[pwa]

Which returns to drink driving, should we care if the driver has 81 or 88 mg of alcohol in their blood as opposed to 80

Like speeding they claim to be "safe"

Again, when I am actually on the bike, cycling down a bit of road and being passed by a car, it makes very little practical difference to me whether the driver is 1mg under the drink drive limit or 1mg over. There is very little practical difference between the two. But I think the drink drive analogy is bogus anyway. There are similarities but there are also differences. I never get into the driver's seat if I might be even halfway to the limit. But I can get into the driver's seat sober, fully intending to drive within speed limits, and still stray over the speed limit momentarily. because even though I mean well I am human. If you drive you stray over the speed limit too, which makes you hypocritical doesn't it?

The comparison is entirely valid, both are arbitrary limits set by research on the safety of drivers exceeding that limit.

What about introducing a 10+2 for drink driving as it is not possible for drivers to accurately assess their blood alcohol and stray over the limit. After all they are only human?

Do you drive? Because if you do you exceed the speed limit sometimes. Momentarily, by accident. Then you correct your speed and try to refocus. But you probably don't exceed the alcohol limit. It is far easier to stick to that one. You assess what if anything you have drunk before the key goes in the ignition.

[Cunobelin]

So the 'trivial speeders', much discussed, which pwa and myself have said on several occasions are the ones who are marginally over the stated limit, perhaps by 1-2 mph will not appear in those stats, because no SP30 and no points for said trivial offence (and nobody is disputing that an offence is committed, btw).

Your assertion is without evidence.

Totally untrue, they do appear in those stats because the Cohort is those who have points for speeding.

Essex Police for one certainly do not think you are correct as they include 32 mph as a speeding offence!

Green Flag also disagrees with you:

If you are caught at between 31 and 40mph in a 30mph zone you will get three penalty points

But then again you can dismiss them as well.so I can't see any point in adding more


I still await evidence why these people should be exempt from the 30 mph limit, they are speeding and above the legal limit.

There is also still no answer why the same concessions should not be given for drink driving

Police forces use these the NPCC guidelines for speeding. Basically speeds less 10%+2 mph are disregarded so how are there any meaningful statistics for people who are 1-2 mph over the limit.

Here are the current NPCC guidelines - page 6

"The guidance to police officers is that it is anticipated that, other than in the
most exceptional circumstances, the issue of fixed penalty notices and
summonses is likely to be the minimum appropriate enforcement action as
soon as the following speeds have been reached:" The following speeds are10% + 2 mph

https://www.npcc.police.uk/documents/Fo ... 202000.pdf

You forgot to add this from your document:

(Edited)

This guidance does not and cannot replace the police officer's discretion and they may decide to issue a summons or a fixed penalty notice in respect of offences committed at speeds lower than those set out in the table.

Take it up with the Police forces that don't agree with you?

Which ironically includes ACPO!

The document you quote is 20 years old and has had several revisions since then, the advice and quotations are outdated.

The 2013 document defines the tolerance

Where an officer decides to issue a summons or a fixed penalty notice in respect of offences committed at speeds lower than those set out in the table, he or she must consider the tolerances of the equipment used to corroborate their opinion. Police speed equipment are tested and approved to work with a maximum tolerance of +/-2mph up to 66mph and 3% for all speeds higher than 66mph, so it is possible to use these tolerances as a prosecution threshold.

These levels were reiterated in the 2017 parliamentary briefing

The mistaken belief that the "10+2" is a tough threshold for prosecution is a common fallacy. It is the threshold at which an FPN is no longer issued and a formal prosecution takes place

[pete75]

Totally untrue, they do appear in those stats because the Cohort is those who have points for speeding.

Essex Police for one certainly do not think you are correct as they include 32 mph as a speeding offence!

Green Flag also disagrees with you:



But then again you can dismiss them as well.so I can't see any point in adding more


I still await evidence why these people should be exempt from the 30 mph limit, they are speeding and above the legal limit.

There is also still no answer why the same concessions should not be given for drink driving

Police forces use these the NPCC guidelines for speeding. Basically speeds less 10%+2 mph are disregarded so how are there any meaningful statistics for people who are 1-2 mph over the limit.

Here are the current NPCC guidelines - page 6

"The guidance to police officers is that it is anticipated that, other than in the
most exceptional circumstances, the issue of fixed penalty notices and
summonses is likely to be the minimum appropriate enforcement action as
soon as the following speeds have been reached:" The following speeds are10% + 2 mph

https://www.npcc.police.uk/documents/Fo ... 202000.pdf

Take it up with the Police forces that don't agree with you?

Which ironically includes ACPO!

The document you quote is 20 years old and has had several revisions since then, the advice and quotations are outdated.

The 2013 document defines the tolerance

Where an officer decides to issue a summons or a fixed penalty notice in respect of offences committed at speeds lower than those set out in the table, he or she must consider the tolerances of the equipment used to corroborate their opinion. Police speed equipment are tested and approved to work with a maximum tolerance of +/-2mph up to 66mph and 3% for all speeds higher than 66mph, so it is possible to use these tolerances as a prosecution threshold.

These levels were reiterated in the 2017 parliamentary briefing

The mistaken belief that the "10+2" is a tough threshold for prosecution is a common fallacy. It is the threshold at which an FPN is no longer issued and a formal prosecution takes place

Possible to use them but rarely - note your quote says "Where an officer decides to issue a summons or a fixed penalty notice in respect of offences committed at speeds lower than those set out in the table" - the implication being that the ACPO table is the default. The threshold for a summons is about 50 in a 30 limit.
Looks at this 2017 stuff form Avon and Somerset Police
https://www.avonandsomerset.police.uk/1 ... guidelines

[Cunobelin]

Police forces use these the NPCC guidelines for speeding. Basically speeds less 10%+2 mph are disregarded so how are there any meaningful statistics for people who are 1-2 mph over the limit.

Here are the current NPCC guidelines - page 6

"The guidance to police officers is that it is anticipated that, other than in the
most exceptional circumstances, the issue of fixed penalty notices and
summonses is likely to be the minimum appropriate enforcement action as
soon as the following speeds have been reached:" The following speeds are10% + 2 mph

https://www.npcc.police.uk/documents/Fo ... 202000.pdf

Take it up with the Police forces that don't agree with you?

Which ironically includes ACPO!

The document you quote is 20 years old and has had several revisions since then, the advice and quotations are outdated.

The 2013 document defines the tolerance

Where an officer decides to issue a summons or a fixed penalty notice in respect of offences committed at speeds lower than those set out in the table, he or she must consider the tolerances of the equipment used to corroborate their opinion. Police speed equipment are tested and approved to work with a maximum tolerance of +/-2mph up to 66mph and 3% for all speeds higher than 66mph, so it is possible to use these tolerances as a prosecution threshold.

These levels were reiterated in the 2017 parliamentary briefing

The mistaken belief that the "10+2" is a tough threshold for prosecution is a common fallacy. It is the threshold at which an FPN is no longer issued and a formal prosecution takes place

Possible to use them but rarely - note your quote says "Where an officer decides to issue a summons or a fixed penalty notice in respect of offences committed at speeds lower than those set out in the table" - the implication being that the ACPO table is the default. The threshold for a summons is about 50 in a 30 limit.
Looks at this 2017 stuff form Avon and Somerset Police
https://www.avonandsomerset.police.uk/1 ... guidelines

Interesting because that is not the current information from ACPO nor the parliamentary briefing, nor is it the information used in the 2017 sentencing guidelines:

[Barks]

So what happens up to these lower limits, does it mean te Police will say to me ‘now you have been a very naughty boy’ as long as I drive at 41mph in a 30 limit or is there any sort of sanction. What does ‘offer education’ actually mean and is there any sanction if the driver refuses or ignores it?

Limit Fixed Penalty Summons

20 32 - 39 mph 40mph +

30 43 – 49 mph 50mph +

40 54 – 65 mph 66mph +

50 65 – 75 mph 76mph +

60 76 – 85 mph 86mph +

70 87 – 95 mph 96mph +

Personally, I would wish FPN to be issued at the 10%+2 point i.e. at 35 in 30mph.

Just seeen post above, that makes much more sense - So why is a Police Authority using a different scale?

[pete75]

Those figures seem a bit iffy as they completely ignore the existence of Fixed Penalty Notices and speed awareness courses. Who or what is squarespace.com which seems to be your source for them.

[Cunobelin]

Those figures seem a bit iffy as they completely ignore the existence of Fixed Penalty Notices and speed awareness courses. Who or what is squarespace.com which seems to be your source for them.

It was simply the site that allowed the table to be posted. The table however does triangulate with others such as the sentencing Council and others

[pete75]

Those figures seem a bit iffy as they completely ignore the existence of Fixed Penalty Notices and speed awareness courses. Who or what is squarespace.com which seems to be your source for them.

It was simply the site that allowed the table to be posted. The table however does triangulate with others such as the sentencing Council and others

Again completely disregarding the existence of FPN and the courses.

[Cunobelin]

But, yet again disproving the fantasy claims

[pete75]

But, yet again disproving the fantasy claims

Hardly. It's you who's the fantasist if you think someone will be taken to court and get a Band A fine for 31 mph in a 30 limit. You yourself quoted " Police speed equipment are tested and approved to work with a maximum tolerance of +/-2mph up to 66mph"
Sentencing Council guidelines have to cover the theoretical full range of the offence an dfor most of teh speed ranges quoted a driver won't get anywhere near a courtroom. The reality is you are very unlikely to get a speeding ticket for under 35 in a 30 limit, a course between 35 and 42 , FPN 42-49 and a summons over 50mph.

Something else here from Kent Police https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/ ... sthrough=1

North Wales Police 23/02/2018 https://www.north-wales.police.uk/media ... otices.pdf
"North Wales Police continue to support the National Police Chiefs Council (NPCC) (which
replaced ACPO) guidance on speed enforcement and follow the 10% plus 2 approach.

Bedfordshire Police https://www.bedfordshire.police.uk/asse ... an2018.pdf

Note their answer is None to the question "3) Can you confirm how many prosecutions or fixed penalty notices were issued to drivers that were below the threshold of speed awareness courses in the ACPO guidance (for example between 31-34MPH in a 30MPH limit or 51-56MPH in a 50MPH limit zone) since 2016 broken down by calendar year. "