Motoring News from Road Law

In this section :-

Police Chief banned for doing 90mph (5 Dec 2007)

Motorists lose case in European Court (29 June 2007)

3 points now for using a mobile (January 2007)

Major review of speed limits (August 2006)

Careless Make-Up Motorist (March 2006)

Speed Cameras on Motorways (April 2005)

Government plans to get tough on motorists (Feb 2005)

Government to get tough on drivers with no insurance (August 2004)

Police charge man for blocking speed gun (April 2004)

Is not signing the NIP an offence? (March 2004)

Tax Disc Fines in the Post (March 2004)

No Speed Cameras in the Wrong Places! (March 2004)

Motorists who cause death could face 14 years in prison (February 2004)

Speed cameras on the way out? (February 2004)

New Road Tax Rules (January 2004)

Worthless Speed Camera Rules (September 2003)

The former Chair of Roads Policing at the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) has been banned from driving for 42 days for speeding at 90mph. Meredydd Hughes, the chief constable of South Yorkshire, apologised after being caught on camera in a 60mph zone on the A5 at Chirk near Wrexham in May, whilst ion holiday in North Wales.

He stood down from his role at ACPO after he was summonsed for the offence. In addition to being disqualified he was fined £350 by Wrexham magistrates. Hughes, 49, did not appear in person before magistrates but entered his guilty plea via his solicitor. The court heard the chief constable was caught driving at 90mph in his Y-reg Audi at 8.17am on 28 May.

Motorists lose case in European Court

Two motorists who took their legal fight against speed cameras to Europe have lost their case. Idris Francis and Gerard O'Halloran argued that current rules forced car owners to incriminate themselves by forcing them to name the driver of the vehicle involved in a speeding offence. They said this was a breach of their human rights.

But judges at the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg voted 15 to two to reject their argument.

Judges acknowledged that both men had been forced to provide information, but threw out their claim that the right to remain silent and the right not to incriminate oneself are "absolute rights".

Their judgement noted that people "who choose to keep and drive cars" have implicitly "accepted certain responsibilities" under UK law. This includes an obligation to name the driver of a vehicle after a road traffic offence has been committed.

The judges also pointed out that UK law made it clear that no offence has been committed if a car owner can prove that he or she did not know, and could not be expected to know, who was driving the vehicle.

Both men were fined and received 3 points for failing to identify the driver of their vehicle at the time of the offences.

3 points now for using a mobile

Transport Secretary Douglas Alexander has confirmed that from February 27 drivers caught using a mobile phone will get three points on their license (previously no points) and a £60 fine, double the current £30.

Mr Alexander also stated that it was "impossible to do two things at once".

Major review of speed limits

A major review of speed limits on A and B roads is to take place. Traffic authorities in England, Scotland and Wales are being asked to conduct reviews which could see 60mph limits coming down on many rural roads, and could also see some limits going up from existing levels if safe, but it will not result in new national limits for motorways or built-up areas.

Ministers want more consistency in speed limits on single and dual carriageways that are not trunk roads. These are commonly in rural areas and typically under local council control, which means varying limits can be set on similar roads in different places .

Under the current system, the default national speed limit is 30mph on lit urban roads, 60mph on single carriageway roads, and 70mph on dual carriageways, as well as motorways.

Careless Make-Up Motorist

A motorist has been fined after being caught by a speed camera taking both hands off the wheel to apply make-up while driving near a north Wales town. Pwllheli Magistrates Court heard on Wednesday how Donna Marie Maddock, 22, from Mold, was caught on camera travelling at 32mph in a 40mph while applying eyeliner with one hand and with a compact in the other.

Maddock was fined £200 after admitting careless driving. The court heard she was banned last week for drink-driving.

The video was shown in court and Maddock, who did not appear for sentencing, could be seen with both hands off the steering wheel. Magistrates imposed six points on Maddock's licence and heard that she was already serving a 20-month driving ban, imposed last week.

Speed Cameras on Motorways

The first speed cameras targeting drivers exceeding the 70mph speed limit on a British motorway are due to be switched on along the M4. All speeding motorists - not just those well above the limit - on the Wiltshire section of the motorway now face at least £60 fines and three penalty points.

The Wiltshire Safety Camera Partnership is putting marked vans along a 40-mile stretch between Bath and Hungerford. It says it hopes they will reduce the high number of deaths on the route. The plan involves installing cameras from junctions 14 - Hungerford - to 18 - Bath - of the motorway.

Government plans to get tough on motorists

Plans to crack down on speeding and motorists who use mobile phones behind the wheel were unveiled today by the government. The road safety bill, which was announced in the Queen's speech last week, will also force the worst drink-drivers to retake their driving test and introduce new measures to tackle uninsured drivers.

Publishing the bill today, the transport secretary, Alistair Darling, said he was determined to reduce the number of people killed and seriously injured on the roads.

The system of fixed penalties for speeding will be made more flexible, with the penalty points range expanded from between three and six, to two to six, to more fairly reflect the severity of the offence.

The maximum fine for using a handheld mobile telephone while driving will be doubled from £30 to £60, and for the first time will lead to an endorsement on the licence with three penalty points.

The bill will give the police new powers to collect drink-drive evidence at the roadside and enable the courts to force drivers banned for two years or more to retake their driving tests.

The maximum penalty for careless driving will be doubled from £2,500 to £5,000 while the fine for carrying a child in the rear seat without a seatbelt will be raised from £200 to £500 - the same as if they were in the front seat. The police will be given increased powers to use motor insurance data to detect illegal drivers, while provisions in the serious organised crime and police powers bill will enable them to seize and destroy uninsured vehicles.

The courts will be able to make greater use of retraining courses for the worst drivers while driving instruction and testing procedures will be tightened.

The bill also includes measures to ensure foreign drivers who commit offences on British roads do not escape punishment, tackle vehicle licence fraud and pilot motorway rest areas in order to cut the number of accidents caused by tiredness at the wheel.

But this is just a bill. To become law this bill will need to go through parliament and get on the statute book. With an election looming it may never make it?

Uninsured drivers should face having their cars crushed and larger fines, a government-commissioned report has recommended. It also calls on insurers, the police and government agencies to share more data to help catch uninsured motorists.

Accidents involving uninsured drivers cost £500m a year, adding £30 to average motor premiums.

The Association of British Insurers (ABI) has estimated that one in 20 UK motorists drive without insurance. In addition, recent research from the insurance industry body estimated that one in seven UK motorists have done so at some time in the past.

The Department for Transport (DFT) announced prior to publication of the report that it would be giving police the power to seize and, where appropriate, crush vehicles that are being driven by uninsured drivers. Pilot schemes operating in Cumbria and Liverpool have seen police confiscating and crushing hundreds of vehicles owned by uninsured drivers.

"We plan to give the police the power to seize and destroy vehicles that are being driven illegally and to increase police powers to use new technology to make detection and enforcement more effective," said David Jamieson, road safety minister.

"The message to the small hard core of anti-social motorists who drive without insurance is clear: uninsured driving is unacceptable."

According to the ABI, the average fine for driving without insurance is £150. A DFT spokesman said that larger fines and custodial sentences would act to deter those motorists who believe the present punishment regime represents a cheaper option than actually paying for insurance.

At present, uninsured drivers are usually detected only when they are physically stopped by the police.The report recommends that police should have access to the Motor Insurance Database (MID) which should be integrated with the national computer system used by the police. In addition, number plate recognition technology could be used to track down uninsured drivers.

The question now is will the Government follow up on the reports findings, and if so how quickly?

A thirty year old man from Staines has been arrested by Surrey Police for using a laser jammer device on his car.

It's alleged that when driving through a speed trap on the A308, the man used the jammer to prevent a speed reading being taken. His registration was noted by the recording equipment and police visited his home later that day to confiscate the device and arrest the man. He has been charged with obstructing a constable in the execution of his duty.

Casualty Reduction Officer for Spelthorne PC Mike Pritchard said: “I want to emphasise that these devices are illegal. People are under the impression that the device will jam the laser signal and that’s all. What they fail to recognize is that the police speed detection device identifies that the vehicle is fitted with a laser jammer. The offence is recorded on tape and the vehicles are then traceable through the Police National Computer . "

In the case of Idris Francis the court have said "yes", but they are yet to explain their reasoning. Mr Francis was challenging his conviction for failing to identify the driver of the vehicle in that he failed to sign a notice served on him for speeding.

His barristers argued his conviction should be quashed on a point of law - that there was no legal obligation for him to sign the form.

Mr Francis, a retired company director, was caught speeding on 11 March, 2003, on the A325 in Hampshire, by a speed camera.

When the case came to court, magistrates could not convict him of speeding, as he had not signed the form identifying himself as the driver - rendering it inadmissible in court.

Instead the vintage car owner, of West Meon, near Winchester, was fined £60 with £364 costs and given three penalty points on his licence for failing to identify the driver.

During the hearing, Christopher Parker, counsel for the chief constable, told the judges: "This case hinges on the question of whether it is reasonable for a chief constable to require a form to be signed when requiring information about a driver. He does need to know the identity of the person returning the form whether it is the driver or any other person. In addition the chief constable can quite properly require that the form should be signed, knowing that if it is signed by the driver it can subsequently be used in evidence."

Tax Disc Fines in the Post

Thousands of drivers who failed to renew their tax discs will be receiving an unwelcome surprise in the post - an £80 penalty - under a new enforcement scheme. The Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency (DVLA) says 97,000 penalties are being issued to UK motorists whose discs expired at the end of December.

Until now an untaxed vehicle only led to a fine if it was spotted on the road, for example by a police officer. Ex-owners who fail to notify the DVLA of a sale can also now be fined. Owners who have sent their cars to be scrapped or store them off a public road without informing the DVLA will be similarly targeted. Vehicles without a valid tax disc will also stand a greater risk of being clamped under the new rules.

The new rules are designed to prevent the huge number of untaxed vehicles which are on the road.

No Speed Cameras in the Wrong Places!

A review of the positioning of speed cameras has shown they are all in the right place, the government has said. The review concluded that none of the new yellow cameras should be removed.

It said all but one police force would be in the Safety Camera Partnership - where fines go towards more cameras rather than the Treasury - by 2005.

Transport Minister David Jamieson told the BBC all partnerships had written in and: "The indications are that the cameras are in the right places."

There have been concerns at the siting of cameras, with some motorists complaining they are placed at the foot of steep hills, where it is difficult to keep to the speed limit.

[Our email inbox would tend to suggest differently, with a steady stream of complaints from motorists who are caught by cameras which have not been painted yellow, or are not signposted, or do not appear to be properly sited]

The new maximum term for causing death by dangerous driving is now 14 years, up from 10 years. It is aimed at clamping down on drivers who cause death, be it through driving while drunk or on drugs or "joyriding".

The government has described the changes, first unveiled last year in the Criminal Justice Act 2003, as "the most significant overhaul of the criminal justice system in a generation", but road safety campaigners are sceptical.

There are very few cases in which motorists who have committed the offence have received anywhere near the current maximum sentence, and what angers many of the victim's families is the number who escape without any jail term at all. Some say that rather than increase the maximum, there should be a minimum sentence of imprisonment for the offence.

The realty is that most drivers who commit the offence never consider the consequences, either in human terms or in law.

Of the 400 cameras in London only 260 have film in, but the other 140 still flash when cars break speed limits. Under the plans, police will also have to receive permission from a senior officer if they want to use a mobile speed camera.

Some people think that if they are removed that it could trigger a similar response elsewhere, but the proof of the pudding will be in the eating.

Metropolitan Police Commissioner Sir John Stevens says the cameras should be used to focus on preventing accidents at blackspots, not raising money from drivers.

New Road Tax Rules

The new Road Tax rules, which came into force on 1 January 2004, mean that the keeper named on the Vehicle Registration Certificate (the logbook) is legally responsible for taxing the vehicle until the DVLA has been notified that it is off the road or has been sold, transferred, scrapped or exported.

If you don't tax your vehicle on time you will receive a penalty of up to £80. If you continue to drive without a valid tax disc you could be fined a minimum of £1,000.

Every month the DVLA will carry out computer checks to identify vehicles that do not have a valid tax disc. They don't need to see your vehicle on a public road to find out if its tax disc is up to date. They just need to check their computer, which stores details about every registered vehicle and vehicle keeper in Great Britain. Even if you don't pay for your tax disc - for example, if your vehicle is in an exempt taxation class - you must still display your tax disc and it must be up to date.

If you don't use or keep your vehicle on a public road, you must make a Statutory Off Road Notification (SORN) declaration instead of renewing your tax disc. If you don't you will receive a penalty of up to £80. Before you start to use or keep your vehicle on a public road, you must get a valid tax disc.

By law, you must tell the DVLA if you sell, transfer, scrap or export your vehicle. If you don't, you will continue to be liable for taxing it and will receive all correspondence relating to this and any other offences committed in the vehicle. Tell the DVLA when you dispose of your vehicle and, from January 2004, they will send you an acknowledgement letter which proves you are no longer responsible for taxing it. You should keep this letter safe.

I is your responsibility to keep the details of your Vehicle Registration Certificate - also known as your logbook - up to date. If you move home or change your name, tell the DVLA. If you don't tell them, the information on your Vehicle Registration Certificate will be out of date. This may cause you problems when you come to sell or relicense your vehicle.
(for more information from the DVLA click here).

New Speed Camera Rules are worthless

In December 2001 the then Transport Minister John Spellar announced that safety cameras will in future have to be bright yellow to maximise their visibility to motorists, and he set out strict new guidelines for the visibility and signing of cameras and camera sites.

However before you get too excited the DTLR have confirmed that these regulations do not provide a defence to any speeding prosecution which the police may bring, but are merely a way of regulating the netting-off scheme. Any force which does not comply could be thrown out of the scheme, but you cannot use the breach as a defence to a speeding ticket.

The rules will be binding for every police force in and applying to join the netting-off scheme, where money from fines is re-invested in more cameras at dangerous places. Failure to comply will mean that forces may be thrown out of the scheme. However it has no effect on the motorist caught by an unpainted, hidden speed camera. There were originally 8 police forces in the pilot scheme, but now (Feb 2003) most of the country is covered (45 forces out of 51) These are:

If for any reason highway authorities consider that yellow colouring is not suitable or there are special circumstances for some site locations, for example in areas of outstanding natural beauty, then a case needs to be made to the Safety Camera Netting off Project Board.

The Department (via DOT Circular Roads 1/92) recommends that cameras should be located at the sites which have the worst record for accidents caused by speeding and that, before deploying them, safety checks should be made to identify any other measures which should be carried out first (e.g. improving road layout, anti-skid surfacing, improved visibility, etc.). DOT Circular Roads 1/92 will shortly be updated and will include guidance on camera visibility.

Email us with any comments about this site