Why should motorists pay for criminals wrongdoings?

moist_von_lipwig	This morally unjustifiable act is an attempt to punish people for an act that they did NOT commit, and is wholly reprehensible and and an affront to justice. The sooner gordon is dumped from his privileged position to which he is not suited, the better!

SimonC	The surcharge already applies and has done so for some time to most other criminal fines. So other criminals do already pay. The money goes into a general fund that is used to compensate the victims of all crimes. Motoring offences are still crimes, even though most people don't seem too bothered about them. But they are easily avoidable if you don't want to pay the penalty. Just try parking legally and not speeding... And there could be a victim. What about the victims of the accident caused because drivers' vision was restricted by your badly parked car? Or the disabled driver who could not get to the shops because you blocked their parking space? Or the pedestrian that gets run over because the have to walk on the road when your car is parked on the pavement. Etc. The problem with a lot of selfish, arrogant drivers is that they think they can do what they want with their car, without considering the consequences for anyone else. I would also add, that people who think these fines and surcharges are a hidden tax are way off the mark. I don't have specific figures, but I strongly suspect that the cost of the justice system far outweighs the money brought in by fines. If making money was the sole aim we would have mandatory fines rather than prison sentences for burglary and violent crimes.

Rob Roy	Old Cynic carefully avoids mentioning that people caught breaking the parking regulations and any other of the numerous 'crimes' this useless spendthrift government can dream up will also be liable for the Â£15.00 surcharge. Funny how Labour apparatchiks never tell the whole story isn't it ? Brown and his gang are simply turning the police and traffic wardens into tax gatherers.

Oswald W	They should NOT. The government has led us all into a PIT from which they want any one they can control or Mug to bail them out. Labour has been trusted for far too long. They have no respect or fear of the British Voter, Fancy still trying to convince us to vote them in again .Bloody cheek !!!

ALEX N	another load of b------s from this pathetic apology for a government shifting the blame from the criminal to the motorist just think of it what about the criminals in westminster (expense fiddlers) who are the victims of their crimes ? we are and who are going to compensate us ? we are ,the motorist , ok so that crime will be swept under the proverbial carpet at Westminster and that is most likely not the type of crime but just try and rip off your expenses and a senile old judge will interpret it that way, MOTORISTS OF UK STAND UP AND FIGHT

Scouse	Forget that as a reason it is the usual lie because I BET THEY WILL NOT BE ABLE TO TELL YOU HOW MUCH HAS GONE INTO THAT FUND OR HOW MUCH HAS BEEN PAID OUT. Due to total incompetence and bankers arse licking the government has got us into the worst financial mess in British History. they need the money so they invent taxes

Crow	I think your right. this is just legalised theft, but ya know what. the people of Britain just keep taking this shit. they are too spineless to get on the streets and march to Downing st. SO! once they see the people accept this, they'll quickly serve them with another, as the labour party have been doing for eleven long years.

Old Cynic	Let's explain this properly. This is not a surcharge on motorists, it is a surcharge on fines paid by people guilty of motoring offences. And these people ARE criminals. It seems a good idea to me to make people who accumulate motoring convictions to pay money toward the criminal compensation fund. If you are injured by an untraced driver in a hit and run, you want compensation right? So why shouldn't convicted drivers pay for this. Fines for speeding, insurance, and other motoring offences are completely avoidable, so don't carp about getting caught.

KarenL	Join the club --- American drivers have been paying for "nu-insured motorist" since the late 60's. There is not logic to prosecute a case against a drunken driver who kills someone if that drunk does not have access to funds for a "rigorous" defense. Attorneys and Prosecutors (yes, I repeat myself) have to be paid. Have pity. This is not different than having health employees pay the same premium for their "health coverage" as their over-weight, under-exercised, bing-drinking, promiscuous coworker who had 90 days of drug re-hab, stomach surgery, and repeated treatments for SDT. Hey these people need to be subsidized --- they are employing legal, medical, and claim processing individuals while the health are not. After all --- Drunks/Druggies/and Cell-phone users have a RIGHT TO DRIVE!

JAMES G	Like it or not, we all pay for the criminal actions of others. That's true of every Country in the World

New Labour Voter	Yes & no, if you are fined for dangerous driving etc, your helping pay for the idiot who did hit someone. It's not a clear answer on any level you think about it. Speeding does increase the chance of accidents etc. However if you pay insurance you are already paying for the uninsured through higher costs. the law abiding pay and pay again. Difficult as a basic to say its Ok or not.

Steve V	It is nothing to do with compensation. Labour have completly screwed the economy, this is yet another way to tax us. Brown's economy is reliant on us breaking the speed limit, unreal!

Allen	This takes the piss a lot. The perpetrators fines should cover it, not through the 'crime' of a motoring offence.

time for change	exactly. we are paying for the criminals crimes. how grossly unfair.its time to fight back. refuse to pay.

hoodrich69	the uk is full of progressive taxes. the American people want to stay away from that sort of thing but obama is trying to take us there.