Swapping penalty points

Vorpal
Moderator
Posts: 15988
Joined: 19 Jan 2009, 3:34pm
Location: Not there ;)

Re: Swapping penalty points

Postby Vorpal » 22 Nov 2018, 3:15pm

Bonefishblues wrote:I had an MOT at a Council Bay a couple of weeks ago. No diagnostics (as in, plugged into the OBD port) were used, nor am I aware that it's part of the test?

Are you perhaps referring to the readout from the rolling road, which is calibrated?

It's not necessarily part of the test but many (most?) technicians use diagnostic & test tools as part of the MOT, either manufacturer ones, or multi-purpose. They can upload certificates from test tools to the MOT Service database.

I had understood that OBDII testing was going to be included in the last update (May 2018?), to bring the UK in line with Europe wide standards, along with WLTP testing standards, but maybe that hasn't actually happened. I have to admit that I have not followed it recently. If I get a chance later I will do a little research.

The only person I know who does MOT Testing uses a diagnostic computer for it. I used to know quite a few people who did MOT testing, but I havenæt kept in touch with most of them since moving away.
“In some ways, it is easier to be a dissident, for then one is without responsibility.”
― Nelson Mandela, Long Walk to Freedom

pete75
Posts: 10274
Joined: 24 Jul 2007, 2:37pm

Re: Swapping penalty points

Postby pete75 » 22 Nov 2018, 3:17pm

Vorpal wrote:
pete75 wrote:The 10% tolerance in the ACPO guideline is nothing to do with speedometer accuracy. The law says that speedometers may over read by up to 10% but must never underead. A perfectly legal speedo can show you're doing 33 when you're actually doing 30 but if it shows 30 mph when you're doing 30.1 mph it's illegal. I don't think anyone ever tests for this though.

They have to test it when the car is manufactured, and demonstrate the test for Type Approval, in order to be able to sell the vehicle in any country that accepts EC Type Approval. Also repairers/service garages are supposed to check it under some circumstances, such as replacing tyres with a significantly different size.

Part of the MOT is that the speedometer is in good working order. Modern vehicles test this electronically, so the calibration is unlikely to be far off if it passes an MOT. For other vehicles, it is somewhat dependent upon the service. There is no legal obligation to check the calibration, but that is often how 'good working order' is verified.


The Mot checks that a speedo is fitted, isn't hasn't got cracked or broken glass, can be easily seen by the driver and, depending on the vehicle, will illuminate. It's possible to pass the MOT with a speedo that doesn't actually work as long as it looks ok.

Bonefishblues
Posts: 5071
Joined: 7 Jul 2014, 9:45pm
Location: Near Bicester Oxon

Re: Swapping penalty points

Postby Bonefishblues » 22 Nov 2018, 3:21pm

pete75 wrote:
Vorpal wrote:
pete75 wrote:The 10% tolerance in the ACPO guideline is nothing to do with speedometer accuracy. The law says that speedometers may over read by up to 10% but must never underead. A perfectly legal speedo can show you're doing 33 when you're actually doing 30 but if it shows 30 mph when you're doing 30.1 mph it's illegal. I don't think anyone ever tests for this though.

They have to test it when the car is manufactured, and demonstrate the test for Type Approval, in order to be able to sell the vehicle in any country that accepts EC Type Approval. Also repairers/service garages are supposed to check it under some circumstances, such as replacing tyres with a significantly different size.

Part of the MOT is that the speedometer is in good working order. Modern vehicles test this electronically, so the calibration is unlikely to be far off if it passes an MOT. For other vehicles, it is somewhat dependent upon the service. There is no legal obligation to check the calibration, but that is often how 'good working order' is verified.


The Mot checks that a speedo is fitted, isn't hasn't got cracked or broken glass, can be easily seen by the driver and, depending on the vehicle, will illuminate. It's possible to pass the MOT with a speedo that doesn't actually work as long as it looks ok.

Agree - unless when it's on the rollers the Tester notices it's not functioning.

User avatar
Cunobelin
Posts: 8474
Joined: 6 Feb 2007, 7:22pm

Re: Swapping penalty points

Postby Cunobelin » 22 Nov 2018, 4:28pm

pwa wrote:
Cunobelin wrote:The facts are that drink driving is drink driving, and speeding is speeding.

Those exceeding by a "trivial amount" are part of the problem. The statistics show that they (along with all those too stupid to drive legally) are greater risk in neither speeding or drink driving is there a distinction of whether they exceed by a trivial amount or not, They exceed the limits and are a proven liability.

The continued attempts to make speeding acceptable or excusable are becoming tedious

So you think someone who does 32 in a 30 zone is exactly the same risk as someone who does 75 in a 30 zone? Really? You may not draw a distinction between those two but I do.

As above, there is no specific record for drivers 2 mg over the drink drive limit or 2 mph over the speed limit.... they are simply drivers who speed or drink drive

The compromise for road safety is applied to the whole cohort.....the argument for leeway for exceeding by a ‘trivial amount’ is a red herring, and an attempt to allow drivers to speed, especially given the large amount of error they are already given

User avatar
Cunobelin
Posts: 8474
Joined: 6 Feb 2007, 7:22pm

Re: Swapping penalty points

Postby Cunobelin » 22 Nov 2018, 4:37pm

pwa wrote:
thirdcrank wrote:But the argument that sticking strictly to the speed limit is unnecessary and even wrong is already being pushed by the people testing driverless cars. (We had a thread - perhaps a couple of years ago, where they were lobbying for driverless cars to be able to keep up with the general traffic.)

I'm thinking more of a situation where cars driven by people have to have a speed limiter that is linked to GPS. All new cars.


GPS is not as accurate as some would have us believe... it is reliant on signal strength and can be as inaccurate as a speedometer if you have a poor signal

As a trial, stick your GPS on a window ledge for a few hours, and then download the track ... you will be amazed at how far the unit has travelled

The driverless car is another issue.... there was a “Road Safety Group” called S@feSpeed (and the irony is intended) that used to argue drivers were safer if allowed to choose their own speed according to how the driver judged their own abilities, or failing that, ste speed limit should be set at the 85th centilevof the speed of drivers using that stretch of road.
Last edited by Cunobelin on 23 Nov 2018, 6:32am, edited 1 time in total.

pete75
Posts: 10274
Joined: 24 Jul 2007, 2:37pm

Re: Swapping penalty points

Postby pete75 » 22 Nov 2018, 4:42pm

Bonefishblues wrote:
pete75 wrote:
Vorpal wrote:They have to test it when the car is manufactured, and demonstrate the test for Type Approval, in order to be able to sell the vehicle in any country that accepts EC Type Approval. Also repairers/service garages are supposed to check it under some circumstances, such as replacing tyres with a significantly different size.

Part of the MOT is that the speedometer is in good working order. Modern vehicles test this electronically, so the calibration is unlikely to be far off if it passes an MOT. For other vehicles, it is somewhat dependent upon the service. There is no legal obligation to check the calibration, but that is often how 'good working order' is verified.


The Mot checks that a speedo is fitted, isn't hasn't got cracked or broken glass, can be easily seen by the driver and, depending on the vehicle, will illuminate. It's possible to pass the MOT with a speedo that doesn't actually work as long as it looks ok.

Agree - unless when it's on the rollers the Tester notices it's not functioning.


Last time I went the chap was looking at the roller read out all the time. Don't know if it would fail even if he did notice it wasn't working the testers manual says this http://www.ukmot.com/manual/6.7/Speedometer#MOT .

pwa
Posts: 8613
Joined: 2 Oct 2011, 8:55pm

Re: Swapping penalty points

Postby pwa » 23 Nov 2018, 9:27am

Cunobelin wrote:
pwa wrote:
Cunobelin wrote:The facts are that drink driving is drink driving, and speeding is speeding.

Those exceeding by a "trivial amount" are part of the problem. The statistics show that they (along with all those too stupid to drive legally) are greater risk in neither speeding or drink driving is there a distinction of whether they exceed by a trivial amount or not, They exceed the limits and are a proven liability.

The continued attempts to make speeding acceptable or excusable are becoming tedious

So you think someone who does 32 in a 30 zone is exactly the same risk as someone who does 75 in a 30 zone? Really? You may not draw a distinction between those two but I do.

As above, there is no specific record for drivers 2 mg over the drink drive limit or 2 mph over the speed limit.... they are simply drivers who speed or drink drive

The compromise for road safety is applied to the whole cohort.....the argument for leeway for exceeding by a ‘trivial amount’ is a red herring, and an attempt to allow drivers to speed, especially given the large amount of error they are already given

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.

Bonefishblues
Posts: 5071
Joined: 7 Jul 2014, 9:45pm
Location: Near Bicester Oxon

Re: Swapping penalty points

Postby Bonefishblues » 23 Nov 2018, 5:56pm

pwa wrote:
Cunobelin wrote:
pwa wrote:So you think someone who does 32 in a 30 zone is exactly the same risk as someone who does 75 in a 30 zone? Really? You may not draw a distinction between those two but I do.

As above, there is no specific record for drivers 2 mg over the drink drive limit or 2 mph over the speed limit.... they are simply drivers who speed or drink drive

The compromise for road safety is applied to the whole cohort.....the argument for leeway for exceeding by a ‘trivial amount’ is a red herring, and an attempt to allow drivers to speed, especially given the large amount of error they are already given

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.

...and I was asking for a statement to be evidenced by CB. Still am.

User avatar
Cunobelin
Posts: 8474
Joined: 6 Feb 2007, 7:22pm

Re: Swapping penalty points

Postby Cunobelin » 23 Nov 2018, 6:24pm

pwa wrote:
Cunobelin wrote:
pwa wrote:So you think someone who does 32 in a 30 zone is exactly the same risk as someone who does 75 in a 30 zone? Really? You may not draw a distinction between those two but I do.

As above, there is no specific record for drivers 2 mg over the drink drive limit or 2 mph over the speed limit.... they are simply drivers who speed or drink drive

The compromise for road safety is applied to the whole cohort.....the argument for leeway for exceeding by a ‘trivial amount’ is a red herring, and an attempt to allow drivers to speed, especially given the large amount of error they are already given

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"

User avatar
Cunobelin
Posts: 8474
Joined: 6 Feb 2007, 7:22pm

Re: Swapping penalty points

Postby Cunobelin » 23 Nov 2018, 6:25pm

Bonefishblues wrote:
pwa wrote:
Cunobelin wrote:As above, there is no specific record for drivers 2 mg over the drink drive limit or 2 mph over the speed limit.... they are simply drivers who speed or drink drive

The compromise for road safety is applied to the whole cohort.....the argument for leeway for exceeding by a ‘trivial amount’ is a red herring, and an attempt to allow drivers to speed, especially given the large amount of error they are already given

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.

...and I was asking for a statement to be evidenced by CB. Still am.



... as we await evidence as to what a "trivial amount" actually is, and where the evidence is why they should not be included in the cohort of drivers with points.

Bonefishblues
Posts: 5071
Joined: 7 Jul 2014, 9:45pm
Location: Near Bicester Oxon

Re: Swapping penalty points

Postby Bonefishblues » 23 Nov 2018, 6:36pm

Cunobelin wrote:
Bonefishblues wrote:
pwa wrote: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.

...and I was asking for a statement to be evidenced by CB. Still am.



... as we await evidence as to what a "trivial amount" actually is, and where the evidence is why they should not be included in the cohort of drivers with points.

You seemed perfectly happy to use the phrase to assert their 2x greater likelihood of involvement in an injury accident - why now so coy?

User avatar
Cunobelin
Posts: 8474
Joined: 6 Feb 2007, 7:22pm

Re: Swapping penalty points

Postby Cunobelin » 23 Nov 2018, 6:45pm

Bonefishblues wrote:
Cunobelin wrote:
Bonefishblues wrote:...and I was asking for a statement to be evidenced by CB. Still am.



... as we await evidence as to what a "trivial amount" actually is, and where the evidence is why they should not be included in the cohort of drivers with points.

You seemed perfectly happy to use the phrase to assert their 2x greater likelihood of involvement in an injury accident - why now so coy?


Not at all, I still clearly state that drivers with points for speeding are twice as likely to have an accident,

There is lots of evidence, try :


Lynn, P. and Lockwood, C.R. 1998. The Accident Liability of Company Car Drivers. TRL Report 317. TRL: Crowthorne, Berkshire.
Broughton, J., Baughan, C., Pearce, L., Smith, L., and Buckle, G. 2003. Work-related Road Accidents. TRL Report 582. TRL:
Crowthorne, Berkshire.


Stradling, S., Campbell, M., Allan, I., Gorell, R., Hill, J., Winter, M. and Hope, S. 2003. The Speeding Driver: Who, how and why?
Scottish Executive Social Research Development Department Research Programme Research Findings 170/2003.


The only coyness seems to be explains why some of that cohort should be excluded... what is the evidence for excluding them?

Why should we not allow the same "trivial amount" argument in drink driving as well?

Bonefishblues
Posts: 5071
Joined: 7 Jul 2014, 9:45pm
Location: Near Bicester Oxon

Re: Swapping penalty points

Postby Bonefishblues » 23 Nov 2018, 6:53pm

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.

User avatar
Cunobelin
Posts: 8474
Joined: 6 Feb 2007, 7:22pm

Re: Swapping penalty points

Postby Cunobelin » 23 Nov 2018, 7:03pm

Bonefishblues wrote: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

pwa
Posts: 8613
Joined: 2 Oct 2011, 8:55pm

Re: Swapping penalty points

Postby pwa » 24 Nov 2018, 9:35am

Cunobelin wrote:
pwa wrote:
Cunobelin wrote:As above, there is no specific record for drivers 2 mg over the drink drive limit or 2 mph over the speed limit.... they are simply drivers who speed or drink drive

The compromise for road safety is applied to the whole cohort.....the argument for leeway for exceeding by a ‘trivial amount’ is a red herring, and an attempt to allow drivers to speed, especially given the large amount of error they are already given

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?