Jump to content

Yet another Tax!


Paul Kennedy
 Share

Recommended Posts

Daily Mail and others have reported the following:

 

Motorists guilty of minor 'crimes' such as parking misdemeanours are to be hit with a ?15 surcharge to help victims of domestic violence or sex attacks.

 

The amount will be added to fixed penalty tickets given out by police for breaking parking regulations, contravening a stop sign, speeding and even having dirty windows.

 

Motorists will be forced by law to pay the charge ? even though their offence has no 'victim'.

 

Currently only those fined in court for more serious offences are liable to pay the surcharge.

 

Ministers say they want to extend the payment to all types of fixed penalties as soon as possible.

 

Matthew Elliott of the TaxPayers' Alliance said: 'If the Treasury wants to raise money from the courts, it should be more honest and call this surcharge a "justice tax".

 

'By calling it a "victims' surcharge" and applying it to minor motoring offences and parking tickets where there are clearly no victims, the Government is making a mockery of the tax system.

 

'This is clearly another stealth tax designed to plug Britain's huge debt.'

 

In a Parliamentary answer slipped out before the Christmas recess, ministers confirmed that they intend to extend the victim surcharge to all fixed penalty notices and, most controversially, 'road traffic offences'.

 

Just a thought, shouldn't those who have committed the violent crimes be the ones compensating their victims, and upon conviction shouldn't a court order be made against their current/future assets and earnings.

 

PS I guess that there will now be a dramatic increase in fixed penalty notices. :wink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hang on a minute. If I speed and someone steps into the road and I kill them, I am guilty of a serious crime. If I do the same speed on the same road and nobody steps out, Paul no longer considers it a crime? You've lost me there, mate. The crime is flying down the road not giving a stuff about the safety of anyone else and I committed it. Only sheer blind luck on the day gives rise to your "victimless crimes". I don't see why lucky criminals should avoid the penalty!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The point is, if you don't hit anyone there is no immediate victim. So who receives your "victim surcharge"? The Treasury. Who might give some of it to some victim support organisation, who in turn will spend most of it on bureaucracy and political correctness.

 

If you do hit someone who steps out in front of you, then you are likely to be found guilty of a far more serious offence - regardless of whether or not your speed was actually a factor in the collision. This offence will then be dealt with by a court, not via a fixed penalty, and the court has the power to impose a compensation payment should it wish.

 

Having said that, there is already over ?40million of unpaid compensation out there which courts have ordered real criminals to pay to real victims, but which no-one in the justice system has bothered to enforce the collection of. So this really does smack of a desperate attempt at revenue grabbing by picking out soft targets.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I tend to agree there LP.. and I also agree with Pauls comment that those committing violent crimes should be paying compensation to their victims but that obviously wont rake in a lot of money especially if they have been locked up. :?

 

Anyway the increase will also apparently apply to fixed penalties for those using a mobile phone while driving, not wearing a seatbelt and also people found scrawling graffiti or being drunk and disorderly.

 

Easy solution is to not do something you shouldn't be doing that way you wont have to worry about the ?15 increase in the fines :wink:

 

How will the increase be implemented for fixed penalties for parking though as round here it is the council who issue the penalties and collect the money not the police.. and there are also the 'private' parking enforcement people too :?

 

I can't see what all the fuss is about as it's only ?15...

I think it's the reason they have given for the increase is what has actually annoyed people :wink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hang on a minute. If I speed and someone steps into the road and I kill them, I am guilty of a serious crime. If I do the same speed on the same road and nobody steps out, Paul no longer considers it a crime? You've lost me there, mate. The crime is flying down the road not giving a stuff about the safety of anyone else and I committed it. Only sheer blind luck on the day gives rise to your "victimless crimes". I don't see why lucky criminals should avoid the penalty!

 

But interestingly the serious criminal, i.e. the one who gets sent to prison doesn't pay the ?15.

 

PS Where did I say that I don't regard speeding as a crime.

Regarding the examples you give, they are of course both crimes, but one is more serious.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Having said that, there is already over ?40million of unpaid compensation out there which courts have ordered real criminals to pay to real victims, but which no-one in the justice system has bothered to enforce the collection of. So this really does smack of a desperate attempt at revenue grabbing by picking out soft targets.

 

You've got it in one Inky P.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think you ladies? need to step outside of your circles and look at the bigger picture.

 

This mob in Whitehall DON'T look at the overall picture and look for cheap hits that can generate revenue.

Whilst I 100% agree that motorists who break the law should be punished, I don't think it is at the top of the pecking order.

Dismayed, you have toooo much money!!!!!!!. :roll:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think you ladies? need to step outside of your circles and look at the bigger picture.

 

What circle is that then Peter.... to say someone needs to 'step out of the circle' usually implies that they should remove themselves from a situation temporarily so that they can calm down and look at facts from every angle. :roll:

 

I can only speak for myself of course but I have no need to calm down as I wasn't getting stressed out about it and I stand by the comment that anyone who does something they shouldn't do can't moan about a fine they receive for doing it :P

 

This mob in Whitehall DON'T look at the overall picture and look for cheap hits that can generate revenue.

Whilst I 100% agree that motorists who break the law should be punished, I don't think it is at the top of the pecking order.

 

I agree but as they are breaking the law they can't complain about having an extra ?15 on their fine.

 

Dismayed, you have toooo much money!!!!!!!. :roll:

 

:roll::roll::roll: Maybe that's cos I don't have to spend it on fines. So the ?15 I will save each time I park my car correctly, or fo stick to the speed limit, or don't use my mobile whilst driving MAY compensate slightly for the many ?thousands I have paid to the government in Corporation Tax today :?:evil: Happy new year :shock::cry:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Welcome to the new era of austerity: the Government is heavily in debt and strapped for cash, and will be seizing any and every opportunity to increase their revenue by any means. So don't look for any logical relationship between crimes and "victims" in all this; and in any event, if you've been caught doing something illegal paying increased levels of fines may serve as a deterent. :roll:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would favour a solution whereby the perpetrator of the crime gets a fine and then his immediate family; if living in social housing or on benefits, gets thrown out and has all their money stopped.

 

If they live in private housing, the house should be seized and sold and the profits given to the victim of the crime and the wife and kids thrown out to rely on charity and handouts from relatives.

 

Now that would make someone think twice if their kids and wife or girlfriend was to get a severe punishment too....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would favour a solution whereby the perpetrator of the crime gets a fine and then his immediate family; if living in social housing or on benefits, gets thrown out and has all their money stopped.

 

If they live in private housing, the house should be seized and sold and the profits given to the victim of the crime and the wife and kids thrown out to rely on charity and handouts from relatives.

 

Now that would make someone think twice if their kids and wife or girlfriend was to get a severe punishment too....

 

No it wouldn't. It would just punish a lot of innocent and decent people who had no idea there was a scumbag in their family. People who commit crimes, by definition, have no interest in the consequences of their actions for other people. You've had too much caffeine again, Baz!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...