How Is This Possible?

[ToraToraTora]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-39053658
12 points = Ban, right? Unless there is exceptional hardship, so this driver has conned the beak up to 16 times! Surely the "exceptional hardship" card should only be playable once!

[Zacs-Master]

Crazy ain't it. I've been driving approx 35 years without a point (ok....been on ONE speeding course) averaging about 25k a year (most i ever did was 52k a year).

[andy-hughes]

The link explains how this is possible - so that's the answer to your question.

[mikey4444]

The answer is that it should be TTT.

Whoever this 62 pointer person is, they should be banned for life, with immediate effect !

[vulcan42]

What this judge is effectively saying to this man is, I'm allowing you to break the speeding law and I will help you to continue doing it. Both should be banned.

[cassa333]

There is no point in haveing a points system if it means nothing.

Hardship is only allowed to be used once in three years yet this man seemed to use it with impunity.

Perhaps he should have a speed restricter on his car. That would stop him doing it.

[ummmm]

That's really annoying. I adhere to the rules of the road because I don't want points or to lose my license.

I wonder what his insurance premiums are...

[youngmafbog]

Yes the link explains how it is legally possible, the question still remains how is it possible to allow a law that can be abused like this.

As TTT points out the liberal beaks have had the wool pulled over.

[hc4361]

Maybe the points were accrued over a very short time and the driver only we to court once

[ToraToraTora]

yes Andy the reason is explained to some degree but when I say "how is this possible" - mean it rhetorically in the sense that the law is clearly flawed. If they do allow the "hardship" excuse surely it should only be once.

[hc4361]

But if the driver was in court only once then that excuse would only be used once.
A few years ago part of a road local to me changed from 40 to 30 and a camera was installed. One woman got caught 6 times a day before she realised.

[New Judge]

There are a number of ways that escaping a ban when considerably more than twelve points have been accrued. Some have been mentioned in the link (such as arranging for a number of offences to be heard at one hearing, meaning only one “hardship” argument is needed). It is also important to note that the facility to argue “exceptional hardship” (EH) has not been properly explained. It is true that the same argument cannot be used more than once in three years. However, there is nothing to prevent a driver putting forward a second but different argument forward within that period. (For example, argument one: “I must be able to drive to take my sick granny to the hospital”. Argument two: “I need to drive to be able to run my company and if I am banned it will go broke and that will jeopardise the jobs of 25 people”). The reasons used for a successful exceptional hardship argument are recorded on court records.

However, none of this explains how somebody with sixty-odd points has managed to remain on the road.. Although figures for the success rate of EH pleas are not available, anecdotal evidence suggests it is around 25%. Parliament’s intention when the totting up rules were passed was that drivers with twelve points should be banned in all but exceptional circumstances. If one in four suffers hardship as a result of a ban that is by no means exceptional. My own view is that the EH facility is widely abused and legislation should be passed to have it withdrawn. It only exists for “totting up” bans (it is not available for bans imposed for a single offence whether that ban is discretionary or mandatory). In those circumstances the driver has no “second chance”. At least two and more usually four offences have to be committed within three years and that should be warning enough.