|
A relative who is looking at a ban, after accumulating 12 points, has been sent a letter in which they are invited to make any statement in mitigation, enclose driving licence and a huge form requesting detailed financial information. Quite what this has to do with a court I do not know or is it something to do with setting a level of fine ie less for the poor than the rich? They were required to produce details of income, savings, household costs, savings, amounts spent on holidays, clothes and similar for partner (if any). This strikes me as an unwarranted intrusion on personal privacy - we are talking a motoring offence, not fraud, tax evasion, VAT fraud, fraudulent benfit claims etc. Not wishing to antagonise the court the details were given, rather than a request for an explanation of why this information was needed, its relevance to the matter before the court and information as to where it would be stored, for what purpose and for how long. Relative points out that the information requested is more than their own bank knows about their finacial affairs!
|
|
It's to set the level of fine as you correctly deduced in your second sentence.
|
They use the type of scheme in a number of countries so you all pay a set % of your wage, therefore a factory worker and a company CEO will punished equally.
news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/1759791.stm
|
Mmmm .... so presumably, if you stick a knife in someone, you would get 2 years if you were poor and twenty years if you were wealthy.
|
|
|
"They use the type of scheme in a number of countries so you all pay a set % of your wage, therefore a factory worker and a company CEO will punished equally."
Will be punished UNEQUALLY, I think you mean.
An equal punishment would be one where the factory worker is fined, say, £100 for driving without due care and attention while a company CEO is fined £100 for driving without due care and attention, i.e. equality before the law.
This cretinous idea is based on the politics of envy and the pursuit of being "fair". Why not take this to its logical conclusion and charge everything by number of hours worked? So, a Ford Focus could be charged to everyone at 12 month's work instead of a standard price. In this way, the price of Ford Focuses would be "fair". Sound ridiculous?
V
|
It would be easier not to have financial fines and just have a fine of someone's time. Then it would always be equal. Motoring related crimes would have motoring related community punishments eg pot hole filling, sign cleaning, verge cutting and other menial tasks. Making joyriders and dangerous drivers clean up accident aftermaths and such like would do wonders for attitude adjustment too.
teabelly
|
Hear hear. Pity there isn't the vision to facilitate this level of creativity in sentencing - I'd rather see a much stronger emphasis on restoration/restitution than on punishments which are of little worth.
--
andymc
Vroom, vroom - mmm, doughnuts ...
|
We're back to a rich v poor debate - a rich bloke can hire a good barrister/accountant/finacial adviser to ensure he gets a lesser sentence/tax bill/perceived income.
Man-in-the-street can't.
Having said that, i recall a guy in scandinavia who was a cellphone company executive, getting hammered a few hundred thousand for a speeding fine, based on his 'disposable income'...
|
Having said that, i recall a guy in scandinavia who was a cellphone company executive, getting hammered a few hundred thousand for a speeding fine, based on his 'disposable income'...
If you care to view the link in my post at the top of the page...
|
|
|
|
May it please AS.....
The amount of fine fixed by the Court shall be such as,in the opinion of the Court reflect the seriousness of the offence. In fixing the amount it must take into account the circumstances of the case, including amongst other things, the financial circumstances of the offender so far as they are know or appear to the Court.
Before fixing the amount of a fine to be imposed the Court must enquire into his financial circumstances. On conviction and before sentencing the Court may make a Financial Circumstances Order requiring him to give to the Court within such period specified details of his financial circumstances as the Court may require. Failure to supply can lead to further punishment and also if false details are supplied.
(Powers of Crimininal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000)
Would you have it any other way ....... reaches for the black cap.......
dvd
|
Well.
When I got a motoring offence summons late last year, the paper work clearly said that a means tested form was enclosed. It wasn't.
I rang the Court and they said "Oh it doesn't matter, it's voluntary anyway. Stick something down in a letter if you want to.£
Which I did, but felt under no obligation to.
|
|
Got fined in switzerland once, being under 25 got the fine halved, then was asked what I did back home, told them I was a poor student (I wasn't) and got the fine halved again. Means testing seems a fair system.
|
|
I recall that something like this was 'trialled' (awful word!) here in UK some years ago but it didn't get taken up. The idea was that somebody's disposable daily income was established, by some formula or calculation, and then fines for various crimes were set at so many days pay. It seemed sensible to me and I don't know why the trial failed. Probably something to do with a Government computer system!
|
Possibly because it's a situation in which there is an incentive to fib, those who are in the dock may include some who would find that not at all reprehensible, and thus you have the overburden of establishing the veracity of the claims made.
Could well cost more than it's worth. Anyway, if someone DOES fib, what ya gonna do? Fine them?
|
|
It was more than trialled, it was law for a bit but became an unholy mess. (no change there then)
|
|
Pugugly - the idea seems simple and fair enough - can you tell us why it went wrong and was dropped? I remember that it was but the background escapes me - thanks.
|
If they repealled Section 126 PU why do they still persist with the enquiry at Courts??????
dvd
|
The middle classes complained loudly and it is dropped.
I think a better way to hit the middle classes and other offenders would be with real community service. Not the chain gang... but I know there are many streets where I live that could do with a tidy up
|
|
There were some outragiously stupid and totally eccentric fines. I remember one case, a head-teacher fined for minor motoring offence, guilty plea some ace mitigation (cough cough) find a quid and endorsed. Same court, same offence on self employed builder (not Mr Barrart iykwim) same ace mitigating (variation 3.6) find £200.00 quid same endorsement. No aggrivating circs, purely down to "means" I would hazard a guess that their gross income was within a grand.
|
|
|
|
|
|
