Sep 2009 21

Innocent motorists to have reclaimed legal costs slashed7

It's official: the government have firmly hopped on the anti-driver bandwagon, with more legal discrimination against motorists being proposed. This time it is slashing reclaimed costs for motorists who successfully challenge speeding and other driving penalties in court.

The new proposal has sparked a Downing Street petition, which has already attracted support from over 2,000 protestors, many of whom will have no doubt experienced the pangs of an unjust penalty charge. Indeed, the figures support the complaints that some driving penalties are undeserved. Currently around 400,000 motorists successfully win in court against motoring penalties. This figure equates to about 1 in 4 motorists who challenge their penalties.

With a quarter of drivers being successful, something is surely amiss with the motoring penalty system. Yet instead of addressing these legitimate claims the government wishes to financially punish drivers who are acquitted. Those who suffer the most will of course be individuals of modest means, as they will be forced to accept unjust penalties because they cannot afford the legal bills. Meanwhile the government firmly cement arbitrary and unjust motoring penalties as a means to raise revenue.

The fact that this proposal is a blatant example of legal discrimination is reinforced by the petition being backed by many within the legal world. 15 QCs, the Bar Council, the Criminal Bar Council, the Health and Safety Lawyers Association, and the London Criminal Law Solicitors’ Association have all signed the petition. Every driver should have a fair opportunity to clear their names if they feel they have been hit by an unjust penalty. This opportunity should not just be given to those who can afford to foot high legal bills.

It is clear that drivers are the losers here. They will not only be at risk from unjust motoring penalties (as shown by the high number of motorists who successfully challenge these penalties in court), they are also placed in a position of serious disadvantage within the legal system.

Related Posts

  • Alan in Wales

    Once again a punitive tax on motorists. By making the legal system more expensive than the penalties they show just how much of this is about raising extra revenue.
    One point though. If there are 15 QC’S signing the petition why are they not being more pro-active and challenging the government through the courts ?. Surely it is illegal under the Human Rights Act to deny someone a fair trial on the basis they can’t afford the legal fees ?

  • Alan in Wales

    The real problem in all this though is the motorist. They have only themselves to blame. If every motorist gave up just 1 hour of their time all this crap could be stopped.
    If all motorist joined the motorway at their nearest junction, drove at 50mph (not illegal) just one or 2 junctions, then the whole country would be snarled up within an hour. Business leaders would be screaming blue murder with all their vans and lorries stuck in traffic and, lets face it money talks !!
    One only has to see the effect a 60mph police car has on motorway traffic to see how simple this would be.
    All it takes is a bit of co-operation. Unfortunately British is shorthand for “I am alright Jack so sod you and only when it happens to me will I have a moan.”

  • C Pipe-Wolferstan

    If this measure goes through it will be a charter for gung-ho officers to slap on speeding &c charges to make up their tally of convictions without fear of being challenged.
    We need to know who is behind the decision to try to cut the motorist’s right to reclaim expenses for what is, in effect, an attempt to secure more wrongful convictions.
    Whoever is behind this decision should be named and shamed. They should also be hauled into a radio or TV studio to explain themselves.
    There’s an election coming. It would be interesting to find out the opposition party’s policy on this issue.

  • eileen pohl and alan broomhead

    ONE OF BROWNS FAVOURITE WORDS IS FARENESS
    HE WANTS TO PRACTICE SOME OF IT THEN.

  • eileen pohl and alan broomhead

    once again the supreme soviets in the duma
    number10 that is,have decided to deprive us
    of another of our rights,as democracy in our
    country is gradualy being eroded,when will we wake up to this totalitarian government
    and get them out while we still are allowed
    a vote,because it wouldnt surprise me if this lot were planning to stop that as well,
    as they are so underneath and allways plotting some other scam to releive us of our money nothing would surprise me any more
    what they have in store for us.

  • Andrew – Bucks

    Hold on a moment!
    What this says to me is that the government is trying to stop money grabbing, very expensive lawyers who are generally employed by the very rich, from overcharging.
    Legal aid rates are around £60 an hour while most commercial lawyers on motoring cases charge from £175 an hour for a junior lawyer to £375 an hour, what a rip off!
    The Ministry of Justice is saving us taxpayers money by limiting the level of costs that can be awarded to a reasonable level.
    I presume the 2,000 who have signed the petition so far are all lawyers.
    I think this is a good move!

  • daKlone

    Think about it though Andrew – Bucks.
    Fine, the goverenment want to stop “greedy” lawyers? Pass legislation that caps the amount they are allowed to charge…ah, but they wouldn’t get away with that, would they?
    So instead they punish the defendant by setting rates so low that they won’t be able to find anyone to defend them at all, or have to face paying the difference even if they win. Hardly fair access to justice, is it?
    Its a bit like your insurance company saying “sure, we’ll pay to rebuild your house, but only if you can find a builder that will work for £10/hr”.