 |
By *arlo82 OP Couple
over a year ago
the gym and random places |
https://www.express.co.uk/life-style/cars/952205/New-driving-laws-2018-UK-fines-rules-punishments?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=DrivingFines&utm_term=DrivingFines&utm_content=DrivingFines
Now I get a lot of the safety requirements but some of these are ridiculous.
New drivers no one under 25 unless supervised... what if it's their kid and they have to go to hospital? You gonna ban/fine people for adulting? Or what if their job role sees an element of late evenings or early mornings? Excluding back shift and day shift staff from driving to work.
Really think government should spend time focusing on real issues and not money making exercises |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
The big pain is the constant reliance on technology to implement their never ending stream of cash cows.
Remember how the bus lanes rapidly became a money source catching unwary drivers? Similarly speed (sorry, safety) cameras? Then they chucked in "average speed" traps as motorists got wise to the hidden cash generators.
Thousands of motorists have already been milked by the "smart motorway" cameras with the constantly changing speed limits.
Now we get the sending of an automatic penalty if a camera catches you in a red "X" lane (no I'm not condoning driving in said lane) so if you get "boxed" (and on a busy motorway it does happen) and infringe even just the start of an "X" lane bingo: £100 gone without even any human intervention. No chance of a mobile police patrol using his/her discretion and maybe pulling you over for a "chat".
These penalties hit the poorest the hardest. A £100 fine (payable within X days) can be the start of an overdraft/payday-loan nightmare to those just about managing (remember T May's JAMs anyone?)
The biggest problem is that these rules/laws are formulated by committee/city dwellers and ministers with chauffeured cars who never face the consequences (often the unplanned consequences) of their actions.
No drivers at night eh if under 25 unless supervised? Who cops the blame for an accident then: youngster or supervisor?
Does the "Supervisor" sit around in the car waiting for youngster to return after night out eh? Then what? Supervisor decides youngster is unfit to drive. Youngster has own key and decides to drive home anyway.
Supervisor now has to decide whether or not to call the police and have youngster stopped. Doesn't make the call? Now what happens when youngster crashes and kills someone else?
Better make sure all those young workers/apprentices/students can get their work/study changed to fit in with daylight hours too. Nurses on shift work?
The powers that be never listen. The classic car movement was mostly against the 40 year MOT exemption (after all if a 39 year old vehicle needs an MOT then how come it is O.K.to leave it to my discretion re its roadworthyness once it reaches forty?) but government went ahead anyway.
It was very probably to save costs (older MOT testers who are old vehicle savvy are retiring) and avoid having to build in allowances for older vehicles in the new computerised test coming into force soon. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
