limeyphil:
I just can’t see the point of being punished twice.
It’s getting like some third world dictatorship.
OK, lets say a police traffic driver gets prosecuted for driving without due care & attention or worse whilst off duty but just manages to keep their licence - do you think that they should be taken out of traffic 
- if yes, is that being punished twice if no, then would it be right for that driver to then judge your driving
The police officer is a public servant. We are not.
However he should be dealt with by the courts or internally. Not both.
If you look at other crime. If a burglar is sent to prison for 12 months does he come out then go to another court for further sentencing? “NO”.
Why should we be any different?
It’s like the TC is saying the courts are not qualified to deal with HGV drivers.
I am not getting into the rights and wrongs without the facts. However I did dig these out which gives one side of the story.
direct.gov.uk/en/Motoring/Dr … DG_4022549
&
opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts1988/uk … pb3-l1g116
which contains:
A heavy goods vehicle driver’s licence may at any time be suspended or revoked by the licensing authority of the area in which it was granted on the ground that, by reason of his conduct (including conduct in Northern Ireland) as a driver of a motor vehicle or of physical disability, the holder is not a fit person to hold such a licence and during any time of suspension such a licence shall be of no effect.
HGV was substituted for LGV on (1.4.1991)
I am now looking for the links to the EU as I would be willing to be a test case for my additional 3 month suspension from Harehills House in 1989 
Does any-one believe that an average Large Goods Vehicle driver and an average car driver have the same amount of general road skills and responsibility and therefore, should be treated the same
If yes, Does any-one believe that what happens to one part of the licence should also happen to the other
If yes, Does any-one believe that if the LGV part of that licence is revoked or suspended for any reason, then the car part should also be revoked or suspended
If yes to the last question, would that make it unfair to LGV drivers
A lot of reading here and a lot of quotes, be careful with them
Double Jeapardy
No one shall be liable to be tried or punished again in criminal proceedings under the jurisdiction of the same State for an offence for which he has already been finally acquitted or convicted in accordance with the law and penal procedure of that State.
This specific optional protocol has been ratified by all EU states except five (namely Belgium, Germany, The Netherlands, Spain and the United Kingdom). Those members states may still have the provision in their respective constitutions providing a prohibition against double jeopardy.
NCADC does not condone criminal activity, but have campaigned vigorously against the ‘Double Punishment’ of a prison sentence followed by deportation for foreign nationals convicted in UK courts. We have supported many campaigns against ‘double punishment’ which have won the ‘Right to Stay’ in the UK.
http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/opinion/article3342518.ece
If you get three points on your licence you can expect an increase in your Insurance Premium of around £150.
This is disgusting because you are being penalised twice. Insurance companies appear to be on to a good thing.
http://www.hmcourts-service.gov.uk/judgmentsfiles/j317/Jones_judgment.htm
I think this an important part of the above link.
Further, it is not right to say, as was submitted, that when Mr. Jones was disqualified on a totting up basis in this case he was being subjected to double punishment, or was being punished in a way that did not fit the crime. That is because Mr. Jones’ offence was two-fold and attracted the attention of the courts potentially in two ways: (1) his offence was the actual act of driving at 92 miles an hour, and the circumstances of that offence; (2) his offence was to repeat a category of behaviour that he had committed over the previous two and a half years. The repetition was one aspect of the seriousness of his conduct, looked at overall. The facts of the instant offence were another aspect. Those will be the circumstances of many motoring offences.
http://www.scotcourts.gov.uk/opinions/LJC3107.html
Again a quote from the above case ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
During the course of the discussion our attention was drawn to the decision of the Court of Appeal in In re R. Hampton & Sons [1966] 1 Q.B. 135, which was concerned with the revocation and suspension of licences under Section 178 of the 1960 Act. In that case the operators accepted that the Transport Tribunal was a disciplinary body, but maintained that, having been punished for certain offences in a criminal court, they had been made to suffer double punishment. The court dismissed their appeal on the ground that Section 178(1) conferred a power to take disciplinary measures, even though they might operate as a second punishment. In his Opinion Lord Denning M.R. at page 144 drew a parallel with the actions which may be taken by professional bodies by way of discipline over their members. In general we agree that a similar parallel can be drawn in the present case although it is important to remember that the discipline is exercised in the interests of the public rather than in the interests of members. In Robinson v Secretary of State for Environment [1973] 1 W.L.R. 1139 the Queen’s Bench Division were concerned with Section 127 of the 1960 Act, under which a PSV licence might be revoked or suspended if it appeared to the traffic commissioners that the licence holder was not a fit person to hold such a licence. It was held in that case that Section 127 did not empower them to suspend or revoke the licence as a penalty for past conduct, but that it required to be related to the question of whether the holder of a licence was at the material time a fit person to hold that licence. We do not consider that that case is of any particular assistance having regard to the very different wording of Section 26 of the 1995 Act and its predecessors.
Like I said, a lot of links and reading in them, what else have you got to do apart from play on TruckNet 
Autrefois convict. 
limeyphil:
Autrefois convict.
Res judicata
Wheel Nut:
limeyphil:
Autrefois convict.Res judicata
Thats it then quote them both to Beverly Bell.
Wonder if she would take note. 
Without all the normal bickering of TNUK
Some of these cases need looking at by a legal beagle but I have cherry picked some headline grabbing quotes from relevant cases to explore our plight.
I dont condone driving with a mobile in my hand nor do I condone driving with a can of lager
But in 1989 I was given a DR10, fined 240 quid and banned for 15 months.
The TC then wrote to me, (many people had to appear) and added a further 3 months.
It gets better !! He’s been done for it before, no points previously for it though.