Cycling UK Forum

the comments are as good

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree ... ding-fines

Well spotted, Tim.
I'd go along with the sentiments in it too - nice to see that the cages of the 'I know best brigade' seem to have been well and truly rattled

Steve

Greybeard wrote:Well spotted, Tim.

i'd like to take the credit, but a friend sent me the link

A good read. Thank you.

I agree with it all, as a driver, too.
I've had speeding fines over the years, the last one was in 1995.

Never again.

Saddly the replies are all too predictable. Yes I am a driver, yes I have had a speeding fine in 2000 but now I cunningly arrange my funny needle thingy to point to the same or smaller number than those big round red disks whilst looking at the road at the same time

It's a shame that the google ads bit between the article and teh comments comes up with "Got A Speed Camera Fine? 100% Guaranteed To Get You Out Of Paying The Fine With No Points!" (or it did for me, I don't know if it does for everyone or google idividualise this feature)

I wonder if speeding fines do make a profit. £88m doesn't sound like a lot (in government terms). It seems quite possible that it costs a lot more than that to bring in the fines.

It's all income for the government, which has no direct enforcement costs. Although digital cameras are cheaper and generally better than the film types they replaced, somebody has to bear the cost of identifying number plates, checking registered keepers, sending the letters etc. Since central govt., changed the funding arrangements, there has been a big drop in enforcement by camera.

thirdcrank wrote:It's all income for the government, which has no direct enforcement costs.

but there must be substantial indirect enforcement costs: the cameras don't come cheap to fit or maintain, many will be by staffed camera vans and some by mobile patrols. Then theres cost of processing, issuing, court procedures where they arise, involvement of the DVLA etc etc.
About 1m fines issued each year? It seems about right - average of £88 each. And the cost of catching and fining speeders bearing in mind all that. I can't imagine a speed camera costing much less than £50 all in. (It must cost a fiver to send out a letter and it requires at least two so thats £10). A mobile patrol must cost £hundreds.

Of course, in one way or another, it's the government or rather the taxpayer who funds the lot, it's just a question of which pocket the money comes out of.

Historically, fines have always gone to the treasury, the theory being nobody should be influenced by filthy lucre into prosecuting people: shades of Jonathan Wild, the thieftaker general (the reality being the Treasury likes to get its sticky mitts on as much lucre as possible.)

When speed cameras were first introduced, there was a lot of reluctance on the part of chief constables to use them, partly because of the expense of processing the pictures (and I don't just mean sending the film to Boots)

So called 'safety partnerships' were formed and they got a cut from the fine money. Some chief constables were reluctant to be involved because they correctly anticipated that speed enforcement cameras would be characterised as cash cows, rather like one-armed bandits in clubs. (They are also often reluctant to upset motorists, who they tend to see as law-abiding supporters of the police.)

Recently the Treasury has decided it cannot stand the thought of losing all that money and the funding arrangements for speed cameras have been changed so the road safety partnerships or whoever is now responsible for the cameras have started to cut back on this type of enforcement.

Those poor motorists.

Victims y'know.

All they do is break the law, get caught and then they have to pay a fine.

It's a crime against human rights, a stealth tax on poor, innocent motorists.

I wish I could avoid paying all taxes by just, y'know, obeying the law.

Gazza

2Tubs wrote:I wish I could avoid paying all taxes by just, y'know, obeying the law.

Gazza

Here! Here!