Cycling UK demand crackdown on drivers being allowed to keep licences after conviction.

[Cycleops]

https://www.cyclinguk.org/press-rel...p-loophole-lets-one-five-drivers-escape-ban-0
This is something we should all support. In all too many cases motorists are being allowed to keep their licences after in some cases killing other road users, all too often cyclists.
Cycling UK claim too many are claiming loosing their licence would cause them 'exceptional hardship' and being granted.

 

[Oldhippy]

If people are dumb enough not to learn after getting 12 points they should be banned automatically. Drink driving, deaths, speeding, large excesses should all be automatically banned having to reapply if they want licence back. Ideally though life time ban. They have it way too easy.

 

[figbat]

Perhaps it should be a presumption of losing the licence with a process to apply for reinstatement, rather than not losing the licence at all and simply pleading poverty and keeping it. Default - you have lost your licence. Next steps - wait out the ban or apply for reinstatement, to be heard at a separate time by a separate body.

 

[toffee]

https://www.cyclinguk.org/press-rel...p-loophole-lets-one-five-drivers-escape-ban-0
This is something we should all support. In all too many cases motorists are being allowed to keep their licences after in some cases killing other road users, all too often cyclists.
Cycling UK claim too many are claiming loosing their licence would cause them 'exceptional hardship' and being granted.

Followed the link to the CUK site and there they are directing you to write to your MP. Total waste of time writing to mine he just spouts aload of government b*****t back when you do.

 

[Saluki]

I had an ex BF who was banned, after totting up 12 points. All for speeding. He tried to argue that getting to work would be difficult with a 5am start. The court chap asked where he worked. When he was informed, he said it was less than 10 miles and that it was a distance that a person could reasonably cycle to and suggested that the ex bought a bike. This was the late 80s, early 90s.
It made me laugh. He did buy a bike and got on with it. When he got banned again, a few years later, he just carried on driving while disqualified.

I am of the persuasion that, if your licence is vital to your financial well-being, and for that of your loved ones, that you should drive in a manner that your licence holding is not in question.

 

[Oldhippy]

If they don't let you off for robbing a shop because you are poor why an earth do they if you drive!

 

[Saluki]

If they don't let you off for robbing a shop because you are poor why an earth do they if you drive!

Excellent point.

 

[Arjimlad]

My MP warbled on about exceptional hardship being for exceptional cases but the latest stats showing that 20% of drivers totting up over 12 points are getting away with keeping their licences because of this loophole show that it is far from exceptional. I've emailed him again as per the link, who knows it may do some good. How much rope should these dangerous drivers be allowed?

 

[Alex321]

Perhaps it should be a presumption of losing the licence with a process to apply for reinstatement, rather than not losing the licence at all and simply pleading poverty and keeping it. Default - you have lost your licence. Next steps - wait out the ban or apply for reinstatement, to be heard at a separate time by a separate body.

Well there is a presumption of losing the licence. But that can be overridden by clams of "exceptional hardship" if it is lost.

In cases where it is an accumulations of 12 points, I am totally with Cycling UK here. If it is going to cause you exceptional hardship to lose your licence, then the answer is simple - stop doing the things that accumulate those points. Anybody can make a mistake - but it normally takes 3-4 tickets in 3 years to accumulate 12 points.

It is a little more understandable when it is just one offence, as anybody can make a mistake, but even then, it should be very rare to avoid disqualification.

 

[mjr]

If they don't let you off for robbing a shop because you are poor why an earth do they if you drive!

Crimes against property are generally punished more harshly than crimes against other people, such as endangering them by driving incompetently. Driving while disqualified is a crime against the government, so that is also punished more harshly. It stinks but it's long been this way and reform is slow.

 

[classic33]

If they don't let you off for robbing a shop because you are poor why an earth do they if you drive!

They all but let you off if you put staff in hospital whilst robbing a shop.
A £1 a week/month for any fine received, and fines paid one after the other not at the same time.

 

[classic33]

A driver has got 98 points on his licence after speeding almost every day for a whole month.
Builder Vasile Strajeru, 43, admitted to the batch of speeding offences between November 27 and December 27 in 2020.
Most of the 29 speeding incidents happened on the same stretch of Lincolnshire road as Strajeru drove a Vauxhall Combi van.

https://www.mirror.co.uk/money/driver-fined-10000-after-racking-25663017

 

[Alex321]

If they don't let you off for robbing a shop because you are poor why an earth do they if you drive!

Possibly because robbing a shop is a deliberate criminal action, while the majority of drivers don't generally deliberately set out to break the laws, but have rather been careless or negligent.

Crimes of negligence usually attract lower sentences than crimes of intent.

I still think it should be virtually unheard of to get no disqualification for reaching 12 points, because that takes several mistakes, and you should learn from them.

Even single offences that carry disqualification it should be very rare to not be, because those are always serious enough offences to be more than just an "oops" moment.

 

[mjr]

Possibly because robbing a shop is a deliberate criminal action, while the majority of drivers don't generally deliberately set out to break the laws, but have rather been careless or negligent.

Most of them have made a deliberate decision not to pay attention to the speedo. It only becomes carelessness when they're challenged: "I'm sorry officer, I had no idea I was 20 mph over the signed limit despite the engine noise, having to slow hard for corners and flashing junction speed warning signs."

If it was merely carelessness, those Speed Assist warning systems would cut offending and they didn't.

 

[Oldhippy]

If they don't let you off for robbing a shop because you are poor why an earth do they if you drive!

The point was the non valid excuse of 'I'm poor don't take my licence' is not any excuse worth considering seriously.