INTERVIEW
AH: Not connected to the previous question, but there will be some who say that what you do is wrong as in some cases you’re essentially preventing the prosecution of someone who has broken the law. Do you ever feel bad about that, or even think about it? AK: First and foremost, I strongly believe in road safety. Obviously I don’t condone the breaking of road traffic laws, nor do I campaign against speed limits, want to ban speed limit enforcement or advocate speeding. The law is the law and it’s there for a reason – to keep road users and pedestrians safe. However, I’m only too aware of people who are pursued
for offences they didn’t commit. Sometimes there is no real prosecution evidence, or the evidence isn’t strong enough for a conviction for the offence that has been charged. It seems it is too easy to pick on relatively safe drivers for minor offending, or businesses that are doing their utmost to demonstrate legal compliance. Ultimately, it’s about justice and fairness.
AH: I’ve read in papers cases where prosecutions have been lost over things such as speed camera signs not having the proper border, or yellow lines being the wrong colour or width, or speed limit signs being hidden by overgrowth, is that the sort of detail you look for? Are there loopholes that you see over and over again? AK: I think ‘loophole’ is the wrong word. It’s been bandied around in the press a lot and implies something sly or underhand. As lawyers we deal with facts and evidence. The law is there to protect both sides. If the evidence
is there and mistakes have been made on either side, then people must face the consequences. Sometimes the police don’t follow correct
procedure and sometimes signs have been placed incorrectly or are obscured. If these things have happened then they have to be taken into account.
AH: Do you think people actually know enough about the law? AK: This often surprises me. Next time you are out with friends, try asking them how much they think they can drink before they are over the limit, or what the speed limit is in an urban area with street lights. I bet the answers will differ greatly. Of course, ignorance is no excuse. The driving theory test has become more robust, which is a good thing, but there is more that can be done. Over the years there have always been
some that argue that drivers should be regularly retested. I think the processes of communicating changes in the law to drivers needs to be closely looked at. However, drivers need ultimately to help themselves. A quick search online will show you the laws that you need to abide by, so if you aren’t sure, check.
AH: Are there any major changes to the law coming in 2016, of which we should be aware as drivers? AK: It may seem that we have been talking about mobile phones and driving
for years, but it would seem many motorists still aren’t learning their lesson. In 2014, 21 fatal accidents and 84 serious accidents were caused by motorists committing mobile phone offences. The Government now plans to take further action to reduce these numbers. The revised road safety plan will be
Anton Balkitis says drivers should always be aware of laws they need to abide by
discussed in a series of consultations during 2016 and there is to be a specific consultation which will outline plans to increase fines and penalty points. Fixed penalty fines are likely to rise from £100 to £150 and four points will be added to your licence, up from the current three for private motorists.
business network February 2016 23
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52