Legal Loophole Allows Offenders To Stay On The Road
Stable
Mon - Fri : 9am - 6pm Call us: 0151 728 4711

Loophole Allows Serial Offenders To Stay On The Road

Loophole Allows Serial Offenders To Stay On The Road
Posted in Tips On By Connor Clayton

Around 11,000 drivers are still on the roads in the UK, despite the amount of penalty point on their licence perfectly warranting a ban.

Around 11,000 drivers are still on the roads in the UK, despite the amount of penalty point on their licence perfectly warranting a ban.

 

DVLA data does demonstrate just under 11,000 drivers have managed to avoid a ban, despite the face they have over 12 points on their licence. 12 points or more will usually lead to a ban.

 

In one such extreme case, one driver based in the West Midlands has amassed an astonishing 54 points on his licence - somehow he's STILL allowed to drive. FIFTY-FOUR. Just let that sink in.

 

READ MORE: Loose Pets Can Result In Fines!

 

 

The problem with these occurrences is the existence of a legal loophole, which virtually anyone can exploit to dodge a ban, and it works like this.

 

At their court appearance after amassing 12+ points on their licence, if a driver can prove than a ban will cause them "exceptional hardship" for themselves or a family member, they can avoid the due punishment. For example, if a driver showed that the potential ban would not allow him to perform his employment duties or would otherwise be unable to get to his place of work - or would not be able to sufficiently see to the needs of a reliant family member.

 

This is obviously easier than it sounds, given the sheer amount of drivers who have successfully used this loophole. This is rather alarming!

 

If a driver amasses 12+ points, their driving standards or attitudes are clearly not up to scratch, and this is a clear indication that they are potentially a risk to public safety!

 

READ MORE: Warning Other Drivers About Speed Cameras Can Get You A Fine

 

Should drivers who amass 12+ points be given a mandatory ban? Or should the 'exceptional hardship' factor remain but be far more strictly applied? What do you think?

 

Let us know in the comments below!

Categories

Recent Posts