Would You Take Driving Points For Someone Else?

WildCat said:
You lose points from a speed camera? And they rely on the honor system to determine who was driving?

Such a stupid law deserves to be gamed.
Click to expand...

No, if you don't tell them who was driving you lose more points. If you lie about it you go to jail.

Simple.
 
Professor Yaffle said:
Wildcat, Agatha's post gives a good summary of how the system works.
Click to expand...
I understand that, but I'd be shocked if the practice of taking points for others isn't widespread.

What's the point (no pun intended) of assigning points for speed camera violations? Just take the money, that's the purpose of the cameras anyway.
 
Captain_Swoop said:
No, if you don't tell them who was driving you lose more points. If you lie about it you go to jail.

Simple.
Click to expand...
Yeah, good luck ever figuring out someone lied about it. Best case scenario is the he said/she said example in the OP, and I doubt that's enough for a conviction.
 
Professor Yaffle said:
Nigel Farage considering whether to stand in resulting by election.
Click to expand...

andyandy said:
Intestingly I think UKIP have the most to lose from the election - short of winning (unlikely ) then it might puncture some of the UKIP bubble if they limp home with 5% of the vote.....
Click to expand...

Well, if they get 5% of the vote now then they haven't got a chance any other time.

It wouldn't be surprising to see UKIP trying to ride the wave of a backlash against a crappy coalition that almost nobody wants, when combined with a very feeble Labour Party.
 
Reminds me a little of a friend of mine who got caught on camera for speeding. He received a photograph in which he couldn't be identified and argued that it wasn't him driving. They asked him what cigarettes he smoked and then handed him an enhanced photograph that not only clearly showed his face but also the pack of Marlboro Lights on his dashboard.:p
 
As to the question of whether I would take driving points for someone, I would consider it, for the right price. I haven't driven in over a decade anyway. I don't own a car so it wouldn't affect my insurance. Unfortunately since I allowed my license to lapse it wouldn't work in my case.

It seems that in this case the only way they were caught is because one of the co-conspirators admitted it. The fool. I guess a divorce can make people get really nasty.

I don't see this as a major crime. "Perverting the course of justice" sounds important, but it's only a speeding ticket.
 
It can be a bit hard to pick whether you're doing it or not here in Aust.

If you get a speeding fine from a speed camera a month or two after the infringement and it's on a day that both of you were using the car, picking the infringer can be a real challenge. It's quite possible that I've picked up points belonging to my spouse or vice-versa, but I wouldn't know for sure.
 
Puppycow said:
Would people be so vindictive if it were just a regular bloke instead of a politician?
Click to expand...

I doubt whether people would be so vindictive but it is likely that the courts would treat him just the same:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-17365818

The story relates to people who have done it more than once but in the worst case a 7 year prison term resulted.

Here's a story from the Daily Fail about a woman jailed for getting her aged Mum to take her speeding points:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/a...-I-did-I-live-consequences.html#axzz2K0XaIgPk
 
WildCat said:
Yeah, good luck ever figuring out someone lied about it. Best case scenario is the he said/she said example in the OP, and I doubt that's enough for a conviction.
Click to expand...

You're correct, unless the picture is unequivocal then it is possible to get away with someone else taking your points for you. Clearly you're relying on no-one letting the cat out of the bag and the authorities will take a little more interest in the case where someone other than the registered keeper is claiming to be the driver but the chances of being caught are relatively low.

Some points to note however:

  • The authorities will take more of an interest if the same vehicle is caught several times, many different drivers are claimed and the vehicle is not a pool vehicle
  • Insurance in the UK is more restrictive than it is in the US. It is not unusual to only have one or two named drivers on the insurance for a vehicle and increasingly being insured comprehensively on one vehicle does not confer third party insurance cover on any other vehicle (it used to). As a result the person taking your points may find themselves prosecuted for driving without insurance
  • If you plan to be a repeat offender you'll have to find more than one person to take your points. These days insurance premiums can rise markedly for even a single speeding conviction.
 
WildCat said:
I understand that, but I'd be shocked if the practice of taking points for others isn't widespread.

What's the point (no pun intended) of assigning points for speed camera violations? Just take the money, that's the purpose of the cameras anyway.
Click to expand...

Because if you only take money you are just taxing speeding. Rich people will just pay the fines and keep speeding.

At the moment the fine is £60 not a huge amount in the scheme of things and is as much to cover costs as it is a punishment. Points on your license are the punishment and disincentive.
 
Darat said:
Because he knew he was guilty and was hoping he could use some procedural stuff to avoid prosecution.
Click to expand...
Nothing wrong with that IMO.

Did anyone see that Huhne was caught a couple of weeks later using his mobile phone while driving and got banned anyway?
 
WildCat said:
You lose points from a speed camera?
Click to expand...

Speed camera's around here are bright yellow and are signposted in advance. If you miss them there is the question of what else you are not paying attention to.

And they rely on the honor system to determine who was driving?

Such a stupid law deserves to be gamed.
Click to expand...

The limited number of people who are going to be insured on a car (allowing an uninsured driver to drive your car is itself an offence) means that the practical ability to trade points is limited.
 
He is (was!) a lawmaker. He should expect to be held to the highest standards of probity.

Pillock.

Rolfe.
 
angrysoba said:
Well, if they get 5% of the vote now then they haven't got a chance any other time.
Click to expand...

That's probably true - however, there probably is an opening for being England's 3rd biggest party up for grabs - and UKIP have been certainly getting quite a bit of publicity to that end after some opinion poll figures. But to actually establish as a 3rd party needs people to genuinely believe you can win - any big loss now will completely puncture that bubble. Give them another 2 years of hype and maybe they'll have a chance....(I think it's still slim - but not zero - especially with the likely implosion of the Lib Dem vote)
 
Darat said:
That his lawyers couldn't get certain evidence ruled out. I am flabbergasted that if he could have had certain text messages ruled inadmissible he would have continued to plea not-guilty.
Click to expand...

well when you think about it, all cabinet ministers/senior politicians are professional liars - every time they go on tv, face an interview they toe a party line they've been told to say, use facts they know are misleading or downright wrong. They are prepared to tell lies to further their own careers - if they weren't, if they had principles they'd probably be languishing on the back-benches. We have a political system which requires as a pre-requisite both an exceptional ability to lie and a lack of morals about doing so.

So, really he was doing what he has been doing for years.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom