- News
- Reviews
- Bikes
- Accessories
- Accessories - misc
- Computer mounts
- Bags
- Bar ends
- Bike bags & cases
- Bottle cages
- Bottles
- Cameras
- Car racks
- Child seats
- Computers
- Glasses
- GPS units
- Helmets
- Lights - front
- Lights - rear
- Lights - sets
- Locks
- Mirrors
- Mudguards
- Racks
- Pumps & CO2 inflators
- Puncture kits
- Reflectives
- Smart watches
- Stands and racks
- Trailers
- Clothing
- Components
- Bar tape & grips
- Bottom brackets
- Brake & gear cables
- Brake & STI levers
- Brake pads & spares
- Brakes
- Cassettes & freewheels
- Chains
- Chainsets & chainrings
- Derailleurs - front
- Derailleurs - rear
- Forks
- Gear levers & shifters
- Groupsets
- Handlebars & extensions
- Headsets
- Hubs
- Inner tubes
- Pedals
- Quick releases & skewers
- Saddles
- Seatposts
- Stems
- Wheels
- Tyres
- Health, fitness and nutrition
- Tools and workshop
- Miscellaneous
- Tubeless valves
- Buyers Guides
- Features
- Forum
- Recommends
- Podcast
Car wheel at speed copyright Simon MacMichael.jpgFoI request reveals driver on the road with 62 points
A freedom of information (FoI) request sent by the BBC has revealed that one British motorist is still legally allowed to drive despite having 62 points on his licence. The West Yorkshire man is one of 10,000 who are still legally driving in Britain despite having accumulated more than 12 points.
Under normal circumstances, 12 points would result in a ban, but magistrates can choose not to enforce this in "exceptional cases".
Most of the West Yorkshire motorist’s points are reported to have been incurred from repeatedly speeding on a motorway.
Duncan Dollimore, Cycling UK’s Senior Road Safety and Legal Campaigns Officer, said: "It is staggering that every year Magistrates appear to find it harder to distinguish what is exceptional from the predictable inconvenience that follows a driving ban.
“Back in 2013, it was around 7,800 drivers each year with 12 or more points who kept their licence. Last year the figure was reported to be up to 8,600, and now we have over 10,000 drivers avoiding bans because the Magistrates put supposed hardship to the convicted driver above safety of others on the road.”
While most of the 10,000 have between 12 and 18 points, the FoI request revealed that there were also three people driving legally with 51, 42 and 39 points on their licences.
Greater London was the area most affected with 1,385 drivers on the road with over 12 points.
Sheena Jowett, deputy chairman of the Magistrates' Association, the independent charity representing magistrates in England and Wales, said: "Magistrates take decisions under clear guidelines, impartially, and on the merits of each individual case.
"Automatic disqualification can be avoided or reduced in cases of 'exceptional hardship'. The process is a robust one and the concept of hardship must be proved to an exceptional level."
Dollimore, however, questioned how ‘exceptional’ was being interpreted.
“Cycling UK was clear in our response to the Government consultation on motoring offences and penalties; more frequent and longer disqualifications, and closing the exceptional hardship loophole, are far more important than discussions about maximum prison sentences.
“If the Government is serious about making our roads safer, they must listen. In the meantime, it would help if Magistrates could buy a dictionary, look up what the word ‘exceptional’ means, and apply that when drivers beg to keep their licences."
Nick Freeman, the lawyer who calls himself Mr Loophole, said the idea behind the hardship mitigation was to give people who committed trivial offences another chance. “If Parliament doesn't want that situation to continue, the legislation needs changing," he said.
Alex has written for more cricket publications than the rest of the road.cc team combined. Despite the apparent evidence of this picture, he doesn't especially like cake.
Latest Comments
- ktache 24 min 39 sec ago
Isn't it a rights issue?
- antigee 29 min 11 sec ago
I've checked on Facebook and stopping the red light running cyclists was simply revenue raising and police time is better spent chasing real...
- Mikezerodown 1 hour 8 min ago
They were before change all systems, then went downhill due to bad adminstration aka CEO who agree to proceed with the worst system I have seen...
- AidanR 1 hour 14 min ago
Same here - it took me by surprise. 10:30am doesn't feel like a dangerous time to cycle; apparently I'm wrong on that.
- Daddy Feebs 1 hour 28 min ago
If anything, it looks a bit like an SL6
- wtjs 2 hours 4 min ago
Other commenters have different views True!
- Daclu Trelub 2 hours 18 min ago
Incredibly bone-headed.
- wtjs 3 hours 52 min ago
after I said that if they wouldn't tell me the outcome of a submission I would have to make an FOI request for it...
- Sriracha 4 hours 21 min ago
Lidl have a window poster emblazoned, "Black Friday. Starts Sunday".
Add new comment
26 comments
Speeding on the motorway? Well IMHO it depends - 90mph on an otherwise deserted m'way or where traffic is light is one thing (and easy to do without realising it, momentarily, honestly) - but when it's crowded (the usual state of our roads) that's a different matter (and difficult to achieve without dangerously weaving in and out of traffic).
Speeding in a 20 or 30 or 40 area where there are driveways, other people, kids, bikes etc. that's another thing, and deplorable.
This is what happens when you're allowed to keep your license. You don't learn, do it again, then again another 5 times, still not learning, then end up killing someone.
http://road.cc/content/news/203741-nine-years-jail-texting-driver-who-ki...
Not sure how this works. I assume that he has to have proved exceptional hardship every time he racks up more points. So if every infraction beyond 12 points was worth three points, he may have been let off the hook 16 times.
So as many as 16 opportunities to get this guy off the road.
I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt and also assuming that all his offences were 3 pointers. Surely if they were any more serious then alarm bells should be ringing somewhere deep within the magistrate's ossified brain.
And that is why so called volunteer magistrates are a waste of space and bloody useless. They are self righteous, self important idiots who don't have a clue how the real world operates because they are prominent and privileged members of society who don't see how real world plays out.
I have seen 3 lay magistrates take all morning to deal with 8 or 9 road traffic offences and allow people to keep their licences when they should not.
I have also see a Stipendiary magistrate (a proper lawyer) whizz through about 60 cases in the same time issuing the correct penalties and bans with utmost efficiency.
Seriously they are a waste of time and don't help them justice system at all. This just endorses it.
I can remember when the points system was introduced. There were adverts on tv saying that you could end up losing your job. They shouldn't be allowing job loss as an exceptional hardship case - it's not as if people haven't been warned. If you murder someone you are probably going to jail (unless it's a cyclist and you've done it with your car) and thus lose your job. Are people going to cry exceptional hardship after bumping someone off?
I have never managed to get points. Driving all over the U.K. doing 30k miles a year at my peak. It's not even like I have never exceeded the limit. Everyone does 80 on the motorway if it's not too busy, don't they? But everywhere else, I pretty much pootle. In towns/residential areas twenty is plenty. It is that easy. Tell them next time they are in the dock.
Surprise, surprise, it's West Yorkshire.
Only sixty-two? The guy isn't really trying. On Radio 4 the day this story broke a solicitor admitted she had defended a man with 78. Respect to that fella, he's dedicated to his task.
It's probably the same git, the records just can't keep up. Maybe his brother is a magistrate or something.
I've been driving for over 30 years and have never had a point on my licence, though to tell the truth I ride a lot more than I drive, cars are an expensive family convenience and the sooner they are driven by robots the better.
Quite frankly, this is absurd & disgusting. What is the point of driving laws and road safety initiatives if 1000s of dangerous/incompetant/psychotic drivers can blythely drive around when they clearly should be disqualified. Why are ALL cars not fitted with GPS tracking devices (cost =pennies) which contact police AND insurance companies automatically? Because of "Big Brother" sh*t I expect. Well Fuck that I say....
I wonder if this driver with 62 points has insurance, if they have it must be astronomically expensive.
Can you imagine the conversation:-
Insurer- Do you have any convictions or endorsmentsin the last 5 years.
Driver- Yes, 62 points.
Insurer- did you say 6,
Driver- No, 62,
Insurer- We may have a problem... that will be £6,000 ... a month.
Only if they've declared it - and, if not, any insurance is likely to be void...
Loosely related but I often wonder about the large numbers of modified cars I see when I'm out - have modifications been declared to insurance companies, or are there a lot more driving without valid insurance than people realise..?
Probably not in a lot of cases for younger drivers. I've got a heavily modified car and I have to take a day off work every year to explain the mods, in words of one syllable, to a car insurance salesman just to get a quote. It takes hours and still costs 3 times as much as my other car and the bodywork is still totally standard. I expect a lot of younger lads can't afford it and/or can't be bothered.
The car is currently SORN'd but I still have to go through the annual pain. That's right, I don't currently pay road tax
(except on my other dirty little diesel).
This whole hardship exception is a complete farce. If they know they need their vehicle for their job the penalty points they have should be enough to deter them from getting more points end of story.
Even more so the dirvers in London.... why do you need a car in London to make a living? Oh wait... how many of the 1385 drivers in Greater London who require their car for working are Taxi Drivers?
But it goes back to the same old fact, they would still drive anyway even if they got banned. The number of repeat offenders with driving bans is high, and what do they get as a punishment? That's right another ban.... because the first one worked so well.....
It shouldn't happen in the first place - but if courts are going to allow drivers to keep their licences over 12 points then they should be forced to used GPS tracking devices in their cars and a zero tolerance policy in place for any further events detected by the device.
If they are serious about the hardship that no licence would cause, then they'll drive within the limits (yeah right....).
Personally I'd make tracking units mandatory in all cars but there's not a chancxe in hell of that
When we were youngsters a friend of mine was due in court some distance from home as he had been caught speeding. He already had 11 points on his licence so asked me to drive him in case he couldn't drive back. Another friend joined us for the ride as he had a day off work and nothing better to do.
Anyway, asked if he had any mitigating circumstances, my friend who is a bit of an idiot, stands up and reads out the biggest pile of bullshit I've ever heard in my life. It was a letter that his boss had cobbled together in an effort to help him retain his licence. It was so bad that my other friend and I were fighting to stay in control, I had tears rolling down my face it was so comical.
Needless to say, to magistrate bought it and he was allowed to keep his licence...
What the hell must Mr 62 points have said to be able to keep his licence???
Guy I worked with had a whole rack of points and was up in front of the bench yet again. I did ask him how on earth he managed to keep his license and he winked and told me about his really sick mum that he had to drive to in order to look after her on a frequent basis. I remember thinking that surely anyone with an ounce of sense would cut him slack the first time but then work out that (even assuming his story was correct and I certainly was not sure), if his mum mattered to him that much, he might actually treat his license with a bit more respect.
So if this clown knocks someone over speeding etc, what then?
Doh! Could have been prevented.
Punishment.....without the punishment. A novel way of dealing with things though.
I'm also pretty sure some people don't even undertstand the concept of an average given they brake upon seeing the camera and then speed off again.
What is the point of having the points system at all, if it can clearly be so easily circumvented to allow 10,000 people to be driving with more than 12 points?
Kestevan - I take your point, but frankly if someone's stupid enough to drive past that many average speed check cameras (they're not exactly easy to miss) at more than 50, they deserve to have their licence taken off them.
Thats the thing with speed cameras: they are clearly distinguished and covered in hiviz markings with multiple notifications that they are there prior to reaching them.
They are not hidden or obfuscated so you're caught out.
Also, with rare (given the extent of the road network) exceptions, speed limits are well signposted. Motorways esepcially should be easy, if it's a clear road then an awful lot of modern cars have cruise control, just set that and you're sorted. Really, really easy to avoid speeing fines
Quite agree... not trying to justify this behaviour in any way.
However I can see that type of scenario having more of a claim to an excuse of exceptional hardship, than for example the person who gets caught on 4 seperate occasions doing 40mph in a 30 zone. The motorway speeder may well have racked up the points before the fact he's been caught has even registered.
I know back in the dim and distant past when I got points on my licence (6 in one day on a run to catch a ferry) it slowed me down considerably as I was shit scared of losing my licence, and therefore my job.
I can see how it "could" happen.
Drive from say Leeds to Leicester on the M1 at the moment and you'll probably pass 20+ average speed cameras in the pretty constant road works. If you're doing 70 instead of the posted 50, then you're likely to trigger every single one at 3 points a pop.
Not an excuse, as you've still been speeding, but probably less dangerous than the bellends who regularly do 50+ on the residential roads round here, with little or no danger of ever getting caught.
I believe that can only be treated as one offence, unless it can be proven that you slowed down to below the speed limit and then exceeded it again. Logical really, as it's the number of times you've sped rather than the number of pieces of evidence of your speeding offence.
Your point still stands though, it is possible to rack up enough points in a single journey.
"Exceptional cases"? Not really that exceptional if there are 10, 000 of them.
It is clear that the right to drive is more important than the safety of other road users. If you've accumulated 12 points in three years, with the incredibly low level of enforcement we have, then you are clearly not fit to drive. Only serial offenders manage to get 12 points, and to be caught that many times means that they've committed many more offences.
Surely the hardship of the people they are putting at risk is more important than letting dangerous people drive?