the Great British motorist: an easy target?
The Government risks incurring the wrath of motorists across the
country if proposals outlined become law. By increasing both the
amount and scope of the surcharge to meet Ministry of Justice
funding commitments, the Government is seeking to raise the amount
of money it receives from motoring
offences in the form of the controversial 'victim surcharge'.
The proposals were originally set out by the last Government and it
had been thought likely that a change of Government would see the
end of the proposals. Is this the latest example of the motorist
becoming an easy target?
the victim surcharge
The £15.00 victim surcharge is levied on every fine imposed in
the courts of England and Wales. The original intention in 2007
when the surcharge was introduced was that the sum should be levied
in any case where the court imposed a sentence. The victim
surcharge is now only levied on court fines. The surcharge is
controversial because in motoring cases there is no appreciable
victim. Motoring groups and other opponents argue that it is unfair
to impose a surcharge in this way and that once again the motorist
is pursued because they are an 'easy target'. So are they right? Is
it fair? Certainly the fact that the surcharge is only levied on
fines imposed by courts does seem to be an anomaly given the stated
aims of the surcharge. If the surcharge is to go towards victims of
crime in general rather than in those cases where there is an
actual victim then, it must surely be right for all persons found
guilty of a crime to pay that charge.
The Government has suggested increasing the victim surcharge
from £15 to as much as £30. It is believed that this would raise
£18 million. The Government is also considering widening the scope
of the victim surcharge to include offences that do not even reach
court such as parking tickets or fixed penalties. It is believed
that last year more than three million drivers received fixed
penalties for offences of speeding. We anticipate that this is
perhaps the most controversial aspect of the proposals.
what about other possible measures?
In times of austerity it is important to look at all ways in
which funds can be found. Whilst no one would deny that funding is
necessary for projects that provide vital services for the victims
of crimes such as rape, it is important that thought is given to as
many different ways of raising this money as possible. For instance
at present, it is estimated that the courts are owed some £1.3
billion in unpaid compensation orders and fines. Indeed it won't
have escaped many motorist's attention that motorists are amongst
those individuals who are most likely to pay their fines. In our
view, resources need to be channelled into improving the way in
which money that the courts are already owed is collected rather
than taking what to many motorists is the 'easy option' of
increasing fines in this way.
Given it was only in the last month that The Law Society won its
case for Judicial Review of the Regulations seeking to limit the
amount of costs successful litigants in criminal cases could
recover, the Government would be wise to act carefully when seeking
to legislate in this area. Public confidence in the system /
process is vital and the more the Government seeks to target
motorists without apparently considering other, potentially more
lucrative sources of income, the greater will be the risk that the
trust and confidence will disappear.
