On the spot fine

vector

If you are caught speeding there is aparently an "on the spot fine" (along with a point or two etc) it is about EUR 80.

If you are pulled over are you really expected to produce EUR 80 in cash immediately? (I use a credit card for petrol so I only carry about 30 in cash)

Interceptor

No, unlike France where you have to have the money on you, in Ireland it is an on-the-spot, pay-it-later fine.

'c

Robbo

You have somewhere in the region of a month to send off a nice cheque to "the member in charge". I do love that phrase.

Krusty_Clown

In fact, you have to call in to a specific Garda Fine payment office...
(Somewhere around Capel Street for Dublin fines).

You also have to call into the correct fine payment office (i.e. can't pay in Wicklow, if you were stopped in Co. Dublin), etc..

Just like the penalty points, it's terribly inconvenient.

Boggle

All the on the spot fine means is that you are giving up your right to a fair trial and the state is allowing the gardai to act as judge and jury. Of course people only give it up as the punishment will be doubled if you dare try to exercise your const right and defend yourself. (And before you start - it doesn't matter what way something is written, it still means the same thing!)

Could be worse, they could be given this power for more subjective 'crimes' such as drunken behaviour..... oh wait, too late!!

Seth Brundle

Boggle wrote:

All the on the spot fine means is that you are giving up your right to a fair trial and the state is allowing the gardai to act as judge and jury. Of course people only give it up as the punishment will be doubled if you dare try to exercise your const right and defend yourself. (And before you start - it doesn't matter what way something is written, it still means the same thing!)

Incorrect. You get two points if you own up and admin guiltand aviod the expense of a trial. If you challenge the decision as you are entitled to then you get the full penalty which is 4 points.
The punishment is not doubled if you go to court. It is halved if you don't.

Boggle

kbannon wrote:

The punishment is not doubled if you go to court. It is halved if you don't.

Like I said, it doesn't matter what way you write it, it still means the same thing. This is designed to discourage people from defending themselves, non??, which is a right not a privilege, non???, or do you not like being able to defend yourself without fear of recrimination???

Exagerated example... what if the punishment for theft is deemed to be 10 years but it is decided that if you plead guilty you get only 6 months. Can you honestly say that innocent people would always take their chance in court? Take a man on 8 points - even if he's innocent and 95% sure of proving his case, do you think he can afford the chance of getting the 4 points? (next thing you'll tell me the gardai and the camera's used are infallable)

Bogger77

Boggle wrote:

Take a man on 8 points - even if he's innocent and 95% sure of proving his case, do you think he can afford the chance of getting the 4 points?

If the guys got 8 points already, it seems to point at a serial offender, as that's 4 on the spot offences.
IMHO, any more than 1 offence per year, and I do over 35K miles/year, is asking for trouble.

Boggle

Bogger77 wrote:

If the guys got 8 points already, it seems to point at a serial offender, as that's 4 on the spot offences.
IMHO, any more than 1 offence per year, and I do over 35K miles/year, is asking for trouble.

Yeah, you are sooo right. Obvoiusly if a guy is on 8 points already (2x4 points or 4x 2 points) he has to be guilty and has no right to defend himself like the respectable folk in the country!!

Bogger77

The guy stands before any judge, with either 2 or 4 convictions, that's what points are in effect, is going to appear not to have learnt lessons.

After 4 convictions for any crime, speeding is an offence, i.e. a crime, you are a serial offender.

Now the guy, can go to court, and fight his case, but he's not standing on solid legs, and unless he's got good grounds, he's in trouble.

If a person had 4 convictions, within 3 years, of assault, what would you expect a judge to do the next time they appeared in court charged with same offence!

Boggle

So guilty or not - because he's done it before he doesn't deserve the right to defend himself???

Bogger77

He has the right to defend himself, I just pointing out, how it will look in court.

Jaeger

It's one of those things in life you just have to accept. Example:

You come in early to work. You do everything you are supposed to be doing in half the time allocated to you. So you find some extra work to keep you busy, all the time amazed at yourself. You take 5 minutes off which is right when the boss walks in, the look on his face immediately shows how disgusted he is at the the work you're obviously not doing right now.

Just in case noone sees the similarity (I started out seeing it but lost track)

The way it looks will always be considered more important than how it is.

If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck and quacks like a duck then it must be a duck right?

Noone ever thinks that it might be a goose? No didn't think so

Seth Brundle

Jaeger wrote:

If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck and quacks like a duck then it must be a duck right?

Noone ever thinks that it might be a goose? No didn't think so

doesn't a goose honk?

Our man in Havana

What were missing here is that if 10% of those caught went to court to fight the entire legal system would be in chaos.

Bogger77

and, just to point out, I've caught speeding once, and I deserved it. Paid the ticket that very nite at the cop shop, so 20 mins after the ticket was issued, I paid it, No excuses, no trying to wriggle out of it. U speed, u gotta be willing to pay the penalty.

Calibos

Bogger77 wrote:

and, just to point out, I've caught speeding once, and I deserved it. Paid the ticket that very nite at the cop shop, so 20 mins after the ticket was issued, I paid it, No excuses, no trying to wriggle out of it. U speed, u gotta be willing to pay the penalty.

Same Here. I really deserved it too! Not because of the speed I was doing (36 in a 30 or something) but because about 10 minutes earlier I had sniggered to myself as I saw some bloke stopped on the dualer for a speeding offence by a motorcycle garda. Arrived back in my home town and was about 300metres from home when I got stopped by a motorbike garda for the aforementioned speeding offence. Served me right! :D

With regard to the original posters excuse of the new car, its not as ridiculous as it sounds. Just got a new car a few months ago with a 2.0l TDI engine while my old car was a 1.6 petrol. It took a few days to get used to and on my first trip on the motorway I found that my speed had crept up to 100mph. The reason being that the tdi at that speed was virtually silent whereas the 1.6 would be screaming at that speed. I was only doing 100 for a few seconds before I realised and slowed right down. As soon as I got home I dug out the car manual and set the DIS to bleep at 70mph so it wouldn't happen again. Of course everyone is still correct in saying that this excuse wouldn't wash in court.

Boggle

Bond-007 wrote:

What were missing here is that if 10% of those caught went to court to fight the entire legal system would be in chaos.

So what? If you defend yourself and your guilty you pay the costs. This is deterrent enough for anyone, there is no justification for doubling the punishment. Personally, I dont like any erosion of my constitutional rights JUST to make it easier for the govt.

Your day in court is a right, not a privilege.


When this will matter is the one time you are caught but you know you are innocent...

unkel

Calibos wrote:

set the DIS to bleep at 70mph

I've this set as well - it does help!

Our man in Havana

I am with you 100% Boggle. I dont agree with the system of being guilty till proved innocent. I would demand my day in court.

cheapthrills

I am with you 100% Boggle. I dont agree with the system of being guilty till proved innocent. I would demand my day in court.


At this moment there is a speeding/penalty points ticket in the glove box of my car, I am accused of the heinous crime of doing 41mph in a 30 zone, i have no recollection of the so called offence. I have not and will not be paying this fine, thereby accepting my guilt. Instead I await my summons as it is still(as far as I am aware) my right to defend myself against any allegation.
I may end up receiving 4 points but not without a fight.

I believe the penalty points system is a good idea in principal, it is the manner in which it is being enacted (like another road tax) which makes my blood boilllllllllll.



140,000 penalty points were handed out last year, wouldn't take long to clog the courts at that rate.

unkel

cheapthrills wrote:

140,000 penalty points were handed out last year, wouldn't take long to clog the courts at that rate.

Yes, if everyone would contest the points in court, the whole points system would collapse

Andrew Duffy

heinous crime of doing 41mph in a 30 zone

You realise that that 11mph is the difference between a pedestrian walking away and dying, yes? Although if you can't remember exceeding an urban speed limit by 35% I doubt you care about that.

Boggle

cheapthrills wrote:

I believe the penalty points system is a good idea in principal, it is the manner in which it is being enacted (like another road tax) which makes my blood boilllllllllll.

In principal communism is a good idea .... (but yes I do agree its a good idea ... the points that is!!!)

unkel wrote:

Yes, if everyone would contest the points in court, the whole points system would collapse

Typical of our illustrious leaders to set up a system without providing the infrastructure to support it! Doesn't this lend weight to the argument that the govt is trying to intimidate you into not using your right to defend yourself?!?!?

cheapthrills - does your ticket reference the right act and do you have a printout?
Push come to shove, if you can argue that the doubling of the penalty is unconstitutional then I reckon the whole bill becomes obsolete and will have to be re-written. (this will be my case if I ever get caught - regardless of whether I'm guilty or not!!)

Our man in Havana

cheapthrills - does your ticket reference the right act and do you have a printout?
Push come to shove, if you can argue that the doubling of the penalty is unconstitutional then I reckon the whole bill becomes obsolete and will have to be re-written. (this will be my case if I ever get caught - regardless of whether I'm guilty or not!!)

I could be argued that the police have no constutional power to issue fines in the first place, thats the job of the judge and the courts to punish people.

cheapthrills

I have a number of ideas as to how to defend the case, unconstitutionality would be a final resort as the legal implications(challenging in a higher court etc.) could prove financially ruiness. I simply wish to exercise my right to face my accusers and examine their evidence.

When I receive an unsolicited letter telling me that I have won a grand prize and all I need do is submit the appropriate fee to claim it. Should I send the fee? Despite having no memory of ever entering the competition. Such scams only survive on those who unwittingly pay up. If no one paid there would be no scam!



Why is that the roads are now straighter, wider, better marked and maintained than ever and yet the traffic moves more slowly?

vector

cheapthrills wrote:

...Why is that the roads are now straighter, wider, better marked and maintained than ever and yet the traffic moves more slowly?

Because there are more cars on the road and by next week, next month, next year, there will be even more.

Boggle

Why is that the roads are now straighter, wider, better marked and maintained than ever and yet the traffic moves more slowly?

Why is it that you encounter so many people (micra's mainly) doing 40 in a 60 while driving out to the white line holding up huge lines of traffic and making it impossible to overtake.... (unless up the inside but that's another argument...)
Drives me nuts to say the least.

Seth Brundle

Boggle wrote:

Why is it that you encounter so many people (micra's mainly) doing 40 in a 60 while driving out to the white line holding up huge lines of traffic and making it impossible to overtake.... (unless up the inside but that's another argument...)
Drives me nuts to say the least.

Because most people in Ireland cannot drive with due care and attention!

Boggle

kbannon wrote:

Because most people in Ireland cannot drive with due care and attention!

thanks for clearing that up!

Our man in Havana

Boggle wrote:

Why is it that you encounter so many people (micra's mainly) doing 40 in a 60 while driving out to the white line holding up huge lines of traffic and making it impossible to overtake.... (unless up the inside but that's another argument...)
Drives me nuts to say the least.

That micra thing started back in 97 when the goverment had the scrappage scheme and all the farmers bought micras. They then proceeded to drive everywhere at 40 mph. I used to call it 97 micra syndrome:)