Disproportionate Harbour Speeding Fines?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Deleted User YDKXO
  • Start date Start date
D

Deleted User YDKXO

Guest
I know there will be plenty of people applauding these verdicts but I can't help feeling a little uncomfortable with the level of fines and costs levied on 2 boaters recently caught speeding in Chichester harbour. One was fined £500 + £450 costs and the other £600 + £450 costs
Compare that to speeding in a car and you are likely to get fined £60 or even compare it to the driver who skidded on ice in a car having 3 bald tyres and killed 4 cyclists and was fined £180 recently. In an age when you can mug an old lady and maim her for life and get community service, these speeding fines seem grossly disproportionate. I would have thought £100 on the spot fine would have had an equal deterrent effect on these and other speeding boaters. It seems to me that the jobsworths wanted their high profile day in court
It also sets a precedent for these unnecessary proposed drink boating regulations. If you're going to get fleeced £1000 or more for speeding, then what are you going to get for having 1 beer too many on your boat? Thousands, I bet
 
I agree entirely. If you hadn't mentioned old ladies, muggings and fines, I would have done so.

It seems that in this country (and maybe Spain, which of course Magnum will attest to!) they like to show just how "tough" they are on criminals by criminalising people who aren't criminals, and letting the real bad lads get away with it because its so much like hard work.

Our politicians repeatedly fail to deal with the real issues in our society, yet also repeatedly get stuck into the ordinary bods just to show how "tough" they really are.

Bunch o' feckin' wasters every man Jack o' them! /forums/images/graemlins/mad.gif
 
3 1/2 times the speed limit was £500, over 4 times the speed limit was £600, both plus costs. Seem pretty cheap.

What would be the equivalent car fine + points for doing 100+ in a 30 zone or 125+ in a 30 zone - think it would be a touch more than £60
 
The car driver/bike rider is an easy target as they can be banned - as yet the boater can't, unless they start clamping the RIBs and JetSki's...

Probably the usual case of do the first few caught as heavily as possible and then just have a fixed fine for the rest.
 
[ QUOTE ]
Totally different - it is unlikely a crocodile of children are going to be mown down while the cross chi harbour (unless God has been very promiscuous of late).

[/ QUOTE ]You tell that to the guy trying to help 10 kids in Oppies that have just been swamped.....

Do take your point though..... it does seem like a bit of an easy target.....
 
anything more than 30mph over the speed limit is (most likely) going to give you a driving ban - the exact length and any fines are dependant on the circumstances. Doing 100+ in a 30 should see a long time driving ban & retest ...

Speeding in Chi harbour is dealt with harshly as it is in an AONB - this needs to be protected for the enjoyment for everyone. There is at least one seal in the harbour - if everyone was allowed to speed then it could well end up hacked to death by props - at a slower speed it has a good chance of getting clear.

As there are (currently) no driving licences for boats you cannot exactly disqualify someone from driving a boat - so in these cases I believe the levels of fines are OK.

You could also argue that if you can afford a vessel for leisure persuits then you can afford the fine when you are caught speeding.

I agree that "real criminals" do seem to get off lightly ... but why ease up on the sentences for water offences?
 
Maybe we'll end up with the system of fines being linked to the value of the offending boat/RIB/JetSki like some of the foreign car fine systems?

If you cannot ban the driver then surely a higher fine would seem to be the way to go? The fine is supposed to be a punishment so should "hurt" in some way. £60 fixed penalty for speeding in a £100K+ boat would not hurt much, at least not as much as the fuel bill.

As long as speed limits stay above 1 1/2 knots I'm not in any danger of doing four time them anyway /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif
 
Bring back hanging for muggers etc etc ... it'd get my vote ...

Ok ok - guilty until proven innocent ... but there is obviously no deterrant. With legal aid (ok - everyone should get a fair trial) and the hoops that the police have to jump through just to get a case to court is it not supprising that Billy Backstabber is quite happy to go around mugging old biddies - safe in the knowledge that even if he does get caught he's likely to be better off than before.
Long gone are the times when a Policeman catching you "up to no good" would have you quaking in your shoes ... and unfortunatly a lot of that stems from the freedom for parents to bring up children how they see fit - the removal of the right of school teachers to discipline pupils fully, the belief that if you have loads of money you can pay for a top rate solicitor to "get you off on a technicality"

Isn't about time we sent another load of criminals to Oz ?? /forums/images/graemlins/laugh.gif
 
As I posted on SB:

From a local source, it would appear that the RIB driver had been warned about his speed on a number of occasions and ended up telling the Harbour Patrol what to do with the speeding ticket. Hardly surprising he got prosecuted with an attitude like that!!!!

On the roads I think he would have been looking at a bit more than a £500 fine!!!
 
Perhaps the offending Rib/Jetski drivers should be forced to do community service around the harbour ... I'm sure there are some grotty jobs that they could do ... like cleaning the barnicles off the pontoon floats ... /forums/images/graemlins/laugh.gif
 
[ QUOTE ]
What I want is a sense of proportion. What I demand is that politicians actually deliver on what they promise and that, in itself, will deliver a fairer and more just Britain for all.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sigh - if only

what a wonderful pipe dream.
 
[ QUOTE ]


ended up telling the Harbour Patrol what to do with the speeding ticket. Hardly surprising he got prosecuted with an attitude like that!!!!

[/ QUOTE ]

Anyone speeding will no doubt have an attitude problem /forums/images/graemlins/wink.gif

Are you saying he had the opportunity to pay £500 fine without the court involvement.

I fear this story is already twisted so we will learn little from it /forums/images/graemlins/confused.gif
 
Fortunately, in this country, we have a system of the punishment fitting the crime rather than the pocket and thats absolutely as it should be. It would be impossible to manage a justice system in which the level of every fine was adjusted according to the wealth of the perpetrator apart from being manifestly unfair
 
Some (slightly more) informed comment!

Fines are set by magistrates based on ability to pay - if you are speeding your fine is based half, one, or one and half weeks net income after mortgage costs. This is the A, B or C classification and depends on how serious the original speed was.

However this is reduced by 1/3 if a guilty plea is made at the first opportunity.

Speeding in a vehicle also carries points and/or a ban. For example 76 or more in a 50 and the guideline is a 14-28 day ban plus a C fine. Whilst this does not carry any points a court is quite capable, if someone already has 6 or more points, of only applying 6 points but disqualifying for a longer period on the basis of totting up. A re-test can only be ordered for dangerous driving or if a driver earns 6 points within 24 months of passing his/her test.

My guess is that, magistrates generally being reasonable people, the person involved, didn't plead guilty early, had had previous warnings, shot his mouth off at the time, possibly shot his mouth off in court and defended himself (a risky thing to do!). Frankly there are guidelines to how they must sentence in any particular circumstance and, no matter what appears in the media, there is generally good resoning behind a sentence whether it is superficially harsh or lean. You need to have heard all the evidence.

The real surprise was the court costs which seemed incredibily high - certainly by Yorkshire standards! Normally prosecution costs are £40, £100 if its a council tax case.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top