Means testing fines - Page 3

Hank Silver · 4th April 2012, 10:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by haway

But then again, should I be punished for earning more in a court of law? Personally, I'd be happy to see most things means tested, but not fines from the courts.

It does make you think that they will just take more where they think they can get away with it. My solicitor suggested that I should expect a fine of between £1 @ £2k whereas others would be fined maybe £200 / £300 for the same offence. Is that right? If it was a custodial sentence then life expectancy (ability to pay) would not be relevant.

Morse · 4th April 2012, 10:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hank Silver

Again I'm not complaining and will take my punishment if found guilty but I don't see why the harder you work the higher the fine. It's another reason not to bother getting up in the morning.

Rich people necessarily work harder than poorer people?

Let's see if a GP would trade places with a coal miner.

haway · 4th April 2012, 10:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hank Silver

It does make you think that they will just take more where they think they can get away with it. My solicitor suggested that I should expect a fine of between £1 @ £2k whereas others would be fined maybe £200 / £300 for the same offence. Is that right? If it was a custodial sentence then life expectancy (ability to pay) would not be relevant.

I don't think it is, no.

I can see the argument for discounts in leisure clubs or whatever for poor people (JUST) but I really think it's wrong that a court would do it.

---Nemo--- · 4th April 2012, 10:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hank Silver

Well I have a court appearance in May for a speeding offence from the day of the league game against Arsenal. With the summons.....

Why a summons? I thought it was a fixed penalty option to pay, or take a course.

Morse · 4th April 2012, 10:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by haway

OK, so should a trucker who gets 12 points on his license and will lose his job if he loses his license get an exemption?

I personally just don't buy it. The millionaire shouldn't be punished any more just because he's rich.

The millionaire isn't getting punished at all, that's the point. It's nothing to him/her.

Maybe fines should be abolished...

Hank Silver · 4th April 2012, 10:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Morse

Essentially, it seems you have a chip on your shoulder about the unemployed, Hank. Just tell me if I misunderstand you.

I think that's a seperate subject you've touched on, you can't base justice on prejudice.

Fines are punitive, whether someone contributes or not it has to hurt. A seemingly paltry 20 quid fine could mean a single mother has to go without food so her kids eat.

People who think the unemployed are living it up are living in another reality. The ones that have cash are either conning the system or fraudulently claiming while working. There's the honest folk on the dole who are rock bottom.

I have nothing but good wishes for the genuine unemployed. My issue is the blatant way the system said 'if you're an addict or on benefits we'll fine you less'. Just doesn't seem right to me.

FunkyIguana · 4th April 2012, 10:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Morse

The millionaire isn't getting punished at all, that's the point. It's nothing to him/her.

Maybe fines should be abolished...

Hence, why it depends on the aims of sentencing. It's not purely punitive, and it's not purely deterrence. Having higher fines for higher earners puts more money into the pot for reforming programs like teaching courses and the like.

That's the theory, anyway!

haway · 4th April 2012, 10:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Morse

The millionaire isn't getting punished at all, that's the point. It's nothing to him/her.

Maybe fines should be abolished...

But then well done the millionaire for having enough money to be able to afford the fine.

It strikes me as the same principle as saying 'millionaires should have to pay extra for XYZ because they're rich'...

But no? Surely the entire point of a progressive taxation system is the rich pay much more to society in taxes- and then on consumption should pay the same as everyone else.

Surely the same should apply to fines? Surely if I was on the poverty line I wouldn't risk parking on a double yellow line, but if I was a billionaire I would- and no amount of fine will realistically change that.

D.A · 4th April 2012, 10:31 PM

If you can't afford to pay your fines, don't commit the crimes.

P.s, just lie. I know how the system works.

haway · 4th April 2012, 10:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ---Nemo---

Why a summons? I thought it was a fixed penalty option to pay, or take a course.

Depends how fast you're going - over 45% above the speed limit (I THINK) and you get a summons and are looking at 6 points. Much more than that and it's probably an outright ban.