Does The Penalty Fit The Crime?

#1
Reading another thread I noticed that someone had commented that parking fines had recently gone up from £60 to £120 which brings a question to my mind.

Why is it that a criminal court, when issuing a fine, takes into account a person's ability to pay but a parking fine does not?

Before everyone starts saying 'if you can afford a car you can afford the fine'. What about the pensioner who is disabled and has leased his car on motability because without it he would be housebound. Can he afford £120. Also, before you start saying as a blue badge holder he can park anywhere, that is not true either.

Does the defendant have the right to go to court and say, yes, I am guilty but I just can't afford £120 and does the court have the right to suspend all or part of that fine or indeed, give him the chance to pay it in instalments?
 
B

Biscuits_AB

Guest
#2
It may sound harsh, but if the sign says don't park....don't park. Whether your 18 or a 118. It's 'no parking' for a reason, whether we agree with sign or not and just because some old codger was at Dunkirk, doesn't give him the right to park wherever he fancies. We all do it, and we accept that there are consquences if we are caught.

As for being unable to pay? No problem. Bailiffs. Property to the value seized. Fine paid.

(has anyone else noticed the adverts which appear on this site when threads like this are started?)
 
#3
Biscuits_AB said:
It may sound harsh, but if the sign says don't park....don't park. Whether your 18 or a 118. It's 'no parking' for a reason, whether we agree with sign or not and just because some old codger was at Dunkirk, doesn't give him the right to park wherever he fancies. We all do it, and we accept that there are consquences if we are caught.

As for being unable to pay? No problem. Bailiffs. Property to the value seized. Fine paid.

(has anyone else noticed the adverts which appear on this site when threads like this are started?)
My point is that parking tickets are not linked to ability to pay whereas every other type of fine is. My other point is why can't you have the option to pay in installments if you genuinely can't afford the full fine?
The reason I'm asking is because I went to the local Clerk of Courts to pay a parking fine and the place was full of guys paying off fines in installments. The guy in front of me pulled out a wad which must have had a couple of grand in it, pealed off a twenty to pay his £1 installment to his fine. I could afford to pay my fine in full but what of those who honestly can't?
 
#4
Easy way of sorting this out.

Fines should not be fixed value but percentages of your daily (or anything up to annual if neccesary) wage/income.

Finland has this system, the most expensive speeding ticket in the world was issued there, coming to some 1200 pounds. To a software designer who was flooring it in his Porsche.

It would add bite where needed, and not kill off pensioners or other vulnerable people who don´t have much cash.

Alternatively a ban of the offending car (for motor offences) or community service.
 
#5
chocolate_frog said:
Easy way of sorting this out.

Fines should not be fixed value but percentages of your daily (or anything up to annual if neccesary) wage/income.

Finland has this system, the most expensive speeding ticket in the world was issued there, coming to some 1200 pounds. To a software designer who was flooring it in his Porsche.

It would add bite where needed, and not kill off pensioners or other vulnerable people who don´t have much cash.

Alternatively a ban of the offending car (for motor offences) or community service.
Excellent post choccie, would be a great way of doing things.
 
#6
chocolate_frog said:
Easy way of sorting this out.
Fines should not be fixed value but percentages of your daily (or anything up to annual if neccesary) wage/income.
Finland has this system, the most expensive speeding ticket in the world was issued there, coming to some 1200 pounds. To a software designer who was flooring it in his Porsche.
It would add bite where needed, and not kill off pensioners or other vulnerable people who don´t have much cash.
Alternatively a ban of the offending car (for motor offences) or community service.
Utterly Choccie, Frog.
Let's penalise the people who dare to have money more than the poorer ones for the same offence.
Very democratic.

Sadly, it seems that the poor commit the most crime. Oh dear. Society's fault, of course.

Your next social-engineering solution, dear?
 
#7
blue-sophist said:
chocolate_frog said:
Easy way of sorting this out.
Fines should not be fixed value but percentages of your daily (or anything up to annual if neccesary) wage/income.
Finland has this system, the most expensive speeding ticket in the world was issued there, coming to some 1200 pounds. To a software designer who was flooring it in his Porsche.
It would add bite where needed, and not kill off pensioners or other vulnerable people who don´t have much cash.
Alternatively a ban of the offending car (for motor offences) or community service.
Utterly Choccie, Frog.
Let's penalise the people who dare to have money more than the poorer ones for the same offence.
Very democratic.

Sadly, it seems that the poor commit the most crime. Oh dear. Society's fault, of course.

Your next social-engineering solution, dear?
Quite right B-S I can't afford to pay my fine, where's yer 'ouse mate, I'll need to knock it over to get some dunza to pay the fine, you're rich, you can afford it.

What you're saying is it's OK for multi-millionaires to park wherever they like because £120 to them is no more than a quid or two to us. After all they are rich and therefore untouchable and we all know it's the poor who commit all the crime. Flog em and then deport them.
 
#9
chocolate_frog said:
Easy way of sorting this out.

Fines should not be fixed value but percentages of your daily (or anything up to annual if neccesary) wage/income.

Finland has this system, the most expensive speeding ticket in the world was issued there, coming to some 1200 pounds. To a software designer who was flooring it in his Porsche.

It would add bite where needed, and not kill off pensioners or other vulnerable people who don´t have much cash.

Alternatively a ban of the offending car (for motor offences) or community service.
What about all the dodgy folk in the UK who seem to be on benefits but always seem to have money to run a car?

Not to mention the criminals with no legal wage/income?
 
#10
Markintime said:
Quite right B-S I can't afford to pay my fine, where's yer 'ouse mate, I'll need to knock it over to get some dunza to pay the fine, you're rich, you can afford it.
What you're saying is it's OK for multi-millionaires to park wherever they like because £120 to them is no more than a quid or two to us. After all they are rich and therefore untouchable and we all know it's the poor who commit all the crime. Flog em and then deport them.
No, I'm just saying that the penalty should fit the crime. Nothing more than that.

The fact that someone can afford to pay for an offence more easily than someone else is, IMO, irrelevant. The Law declares a penalty .. pure and simple.

Let's take another case for debate. OJ Simpson will lose much, much, more from his prison sentence than some feral chav for whom, like "Norman Stanley Fletcher ... " regards imprisonment as a hazard of his profession. Should OJ therefore get a lesser prison sentence because he's wealthy? These things work both ways.
 
#11
blue-sophist said:
Markintime said:
Quite right B-S I can't afford to pay my fine, where's yer 'ouse mate, I'll need to knock it over to get some dunza to pay the fine, you're rich, you can afford it.
What you're saying is it's OK for multi-millionaires to park wherever they like because £120 to them is no more than a quid or two to us. After all they are rich and therefore untouchable and we all know it's the poor who commit all the crime. Flog em and then deport them.
No, I'm just saying that the penalty should fit the crime. Nothing more than that.

The fact that someone can afford to pay for an offence more easily than someone else is, IMO, irrelevant. The Law declares a penalty .. pure and simple.

Let's take another case for debate. OJ Simpson will lose much, much, more from his prison sentence than some feral chav for whom, like "Norman Stanley Fletcher ... " regards imprisonment as a hazard of his profession. Should OJ therefore get a lesser prison sentence because he's wealthy? These things work both ways.
We aren't talking about Kidnap and Armed Robbery we're talking about parking! BTW I'm sure that the judge will take into account what OJ is losing and maybe give him a month or two less but I also think that the judge will also have in mind that this guy got away with murder.
 
#12
Fixed Penalty = Fixed Penalty.

Your notional Disabled Pensioner knows that ... as does everyone else. That's why I don't exceed the speed limit or park illegally. I don't give a sh1t whether the fine is £120 or £45,000 - I don't break the Law.

FFS, the Courts are bogged down enough already. :roll:

Bloody LibDems - they get everywhere these days :wink:
 
#13
Markintime said:
blue-sophist said:
Markintime said:
Quite right B-S I can't afford to pay my fine, where's yer 'ouse mate, I'll need to knock it over to get some dunza to pay the fine, you're rich, you can afford it.
What you're saying is it's OK for multi-millionaires to park wherever they like because £120 to them is no more than a quid or two to us. After all they are rich and therefore untouchable and we all know it's the poor who commit all the crime. Flog em and then deport them.
No, I'm just saying that the penalty should fit the crime. Nothing more than that.

The fact that someone can afford to pay for an offence more easily than someone else is, IMO, irrelevant. The Law declares a penalty .. pure and simple.

Let's take another case for debate. OJ Simpson will lose much, much, more from his prison sentence than some feral chav for whom, like "Norman Stanley Fletcher ... " regards imprisonment as a hazard of his profession. Should OJ therefore get a lesser prison sentence because he's wealthy? These things work both ways.
We aren't talking about Kidnap and Armed Robbery we're talking about parking! BTW I'm sure that the judge will take into account what OJ is losing and maybe give him a month or two less but I also think that the judge will also have in mind that this guy got away with murder.
I don't think it's going to matter very much. The minimum sentence in the USA for kidnap is 15 years.
 
#14
.
Of course it does.

Everyone knows that being promoted to the House of Lords & given a(nother) post in Government is a suitable punishment for the twice-disgraced P Mandelson Esq.
.
 
B

Biscuits_AB

Guest
#15
Markintime said:
Biscuits_AB said:
It may sound harsh, but if the sign says don't park....don't park. Whether your 18 or a 118. It's 'no parking' for a reason, whether we agree with sign or not and just because some old codger was at Dunkirk, doesn't give him the right to park wherever he fancies. We all do it, and we accept that there are consquences if we are caught.

As for being unable to pay? No problem. Bailiffs. Property to the value seized. Fine paid.

(has anyone else noticed the adverts which appear on this site when threads like this are started?)
My point is that parking tickets are not linked to ability to pay whereas every other type of fine is. My other point is why can't you have the option to pay in installments if you genuinely can't afford the full fine?
The reason I'm asking is because I went to the local Clerk of Courts to pay a parking fine and the place was full of guys paying off fines in installments. The guy in front of me pulled out a wad which must have had a couple of grand in it, pealed off a twenty to pay his £1 installment to his fine. I could afford to pay my fine in full but what of those who honestly can't?
Like I said mate....baillifs and 'goods to the value of'. Sorry, that's just how it gets sometimes.
 
#16
blue-sophist said:
chocolate_frog said:
Easy way of sorting this out.
Fines should not be fixed value but percentages of your daily (or anything up to annual if neccesary) wage/income.
Finland has this system, the most expensive speeding ticket in the world was issued there, coming to some 1200 pounds. To a software designer who was flooring it in his Porsche.
It would add bite where needed, and not kill off pensioners or other vulnerable people who don´t have much cash.
Alternatively a ban of the offending car (for motor offences) or community service.
Utterly Choccie, Frog.
Let's penalise the people who dare to have money more than the poorer ones for the same offence.
Very democratic.

Sadly, it seems that the poor commit the most crime. Oh dear. Society's fault, of course.

Your next social-engineering solution, dear?
Hmmm, you don´t seem to grasp what I insinuate here. Am I a low paid person? Would I be hammered under this scheme? I dare say that I would actually prefer the fixed fee of 120 quid, compared to a variable rate.

If we take 120 as the base line, and guess that an "average" worker works 8 hours a day for 6 days at 6 quid. Assume that and the average about 40 quid.

So 3 days fine for wrongful parking. I happen to know that the fine I would pay would be quite obscene when taking in to accound my military salary and other incomes (ie rent on property).

I still feel it is better this way, as that way my grandparents who don´t earn so much wouldn´t be starving, house bound and freezing in order to pay the fine.

Not social engineering BS, just common decency. If we leave people behind, then we end up like America.

Regards OJ. That was a custodial crime. So seeing aas rich or poor you only have a finite number of days to give, there is no point in adjusting them.

The whole point of a punishment is to punish. If it cripples one person but barely touches another then it is not a fair system and nor does it punish all.
 
#17
I think Biccies got it spot on.

Biscuits_AB said:
It may sound harsh, but if the sign says don't park....don't park. Whether your 18 or a 118. It's 'no parking' for a reason, whether we agree with sign or not and just because some old codger was at Dunkirk, doesn't give him the right to park wherever he fancies. We all do it, and we accept that there are consquences if we are caught.

As for being unable to pay? No problem. Bailiffs. Property to the value seized. Fine paid.

(has anyone else noticed the adverts which appear on this site when threads like this are started?)
If you can't pay the fine, don't do the crime no matter how much you have in the bank.
 
#18
£120 fine equates to what a Hepatitis Ridden smack head would get for shop lifting to support their pathetic habit. Whats fair about that!!!
But by god if you park in the wrong place or go over the speed limit by a few miles per hour, we will hit the, in the most, law biding citizens in the pocket as they are the mugs who will pay the fine, wont go to jail to pay off the fine which in turn, hits the hard working tax payer in the pocket.
On the other hand the shoplifting smack head piece of crap wont pay the fine and in turn be given bed for a few days at our expense languishing in their local holiday camp which is prison .
Anyone still think its fair to have a £120 fine for parking in the wrong place???
 
#19
gunner7 said:
£120 fine equates to what a Hepatitis Ridden smack head would get for shop lifting to support their pathetic habit. Whats fair about that!!!
But by god if you park in the wrong place or go over the speed limit by a few miles per hour, we will hit the, in the most, law biding citizens in the pocket as they are the mugs who will pay the fine, wont go to jail to pay off the fine which in turn, hits the hard working tax payer in the pocket.
On the other hand the shoplifting smack head piece of crap wont pay the fine and in turn be given bed for a few days at our expense languishing in their local holiday camp which is prison .
Anyone still think its fair to have a £120 fine for parking in the wrong place???
£120 also equates to what a 'hepatitis-ridden smack head' would receive as a fine if he/she parked their car illegally. As for law-abiding citizens exceeding the speed limit by a few miles per hour - they are hardly law-abiding then are they? Yes, it is still fair to have a £120 fine imposed for parking in the wrong place.

PS. I also think that the government and the police are using the motorist as a bit of a cash cow, but you don't get fines if you park properly and don't speed.
 
#20
Bonzo_Dog said:
PS. I also think that the government and the police are using the motorist as a bit of a cash cow, but you don't get fines if you park properly and don't speed.
I will go all sanctimonious and publicly declare my only motoring conviction ... exceeding the speed limit [42 in a 30 zone] for which Brentford Magistrates charged me £4 in 1963.

It's really quite easy to comply with the Law, and the fine for doing that is NIL. :wink:
 

Latest Threads

Top