Maximum Speeding Fines Set To Increase To £10,000?

The maximum fine that can be imposed by magistrates for speeding is set to rise by up to 4 times under new proposals for England and Wales.

Under the new proposal, the maximum fine for speeding would increase from £2500 to £10,000…

Most offences that get heard in magistrates courts are subject to maximum fine levels.

Speeding is a “level 4”, which has a maximum of a £2500 fine.

We know from experience that magistrates’ tend to be quite trigger happy with convictions by comparison with qualified Judges, particularly when the person doesn’t have good representation.

If you appeal a guilty verdict, and your appeal is not upheld, the penalty is usually increased significantly.

The idea of this is to deter everyone from automatically appealing on the slim hope that they will get off.

The issue in my opinion is that motorists will be put off from appealing a speeding fine out of fear that they could be hit with a £10,000 fine if their appeal is not successful, meaning that more innocent drivers could be struck with motoring convictions and disqualifications…

I’ll update you if it looks like the proposals are going to get through.


Join the Conversation


  1. Is it also true that the penalty for drunk driving is less? and does that apply to speeding drunks?

  2. The proposal is crazy but I don’t understand why the government will be cynical to its own citizens. It sounds like something we hear about the 3rd World countries.

  3. This draconian measure is theft from the tax paying worker and driver, the easy target for the useless pricks running our country – vote UKIP and stop the mafia

  4. Dear Adam,

    The Italians did something similar a couple of years ago. The net result was now you got a much better class of speeder.

    Cheers, and keep up the good work.


    P.S. my laser/radar detector was spotted by a client and as a result is now serving sterling service in Egypt and has already proven very useful. They have very few speed traps which makes drivers there complacent and they end up getting caught speeding regularly. And that means a fine (either official or unofficial).

  5. I guess that someone has to pay for the inflated pay and pensions of our lords and masters.

  6. obviously a London set figure. Here in the north £10000 is like a lottery win.. This will fill the jails up and create more hardship .Just for pushing your foot down a little hard on the gas.

  7. How totally out of touch are these idiots who are putting this proposal forward? Again is rip off the motorist time again….who could afford this sort of fine but the very few..this can lead to marriage/family breakdowns hardship etc…madness…why can this country not take a leaf out of Germany’s book and scrap speed limits on motorways with the exceptions of HGV’s and coaches…Germanys’ accident rate is no worse than ours and probably better…where is all this money ripped off from drivers going to? As they say, at least Dick Turpin had the decency to wear a mask when robbing people….there is NO excuse for this rise in fines, none at all.

  8. It’s crazy, on the one hand, there needs to be high fines for footballers in Maseratis who don’t give a fig, but as you point out, the reality is they will still pay for mega representation and get off (or not, no big deal to them) and it is the ordinary guy who will get tucked up nicely. Again.

  9. What’s got into these people? The road’s are getting safer all the time but instead of penalties falling they’re going up. We’re supposed to be a democracy, but there must be very few people who think this is justified. Why does the government have to keep meddling? Another money-raising racket?

  10. Hi Adam,

    In my opinion you need to get together with ‘FairFuelUK’ and the motoring organisations (AA, RAC) including the likes of the CSMA to coordinate a fightback against this stupidity.
    The national speed limit of 70mph was set when (other than an E type Jag) the fastest thing on the road was a Morris Oxford/Austin Cambridge which would do 0-60 in about three weeks and eventually wheeze up to 90 MPH, and then take five miles to stop. This is no longer the case as technological improvements are being made all the time thankfully. When the current government came to power, there was a reasonably clear intent to ‘raise’ the national speed limit to I believe 90 mph, what happened to that? Might you be able to find out please?

    Finally, I have started a campaign with 38 degrees to protest and potentially stop the requirement initialised by the EU to put a ‘Black Box Journey Recorder and tracker’ in every car sold from 2015 onward. Please would you bring your not inconsiderable influence to bare in getting more people to sign up to the campaign?

    Many thanks.

    Phil Johns.

  11. Yet again this is not about safety but about making money. If they really wanted to impose a motorway speed restriction they could simply use the average speed cameras already in use in 50 mph limits across the network. However this would be so successful in reducing the majority of speed offences whilst being unsuccessful in allowing motorists “to break the law” and thus earn good money for the authorities.

    If they really wanted to do something about safety then they would go after motorists who drove badly and dangerously per se. i.e. driver education should be at the heart of any policy. They then might earn the respect of the motorist rather more than they look as it they will do if this new legislation comes into force.

  12. This is the first fase of a police state.How many drivers with families can afford £100.00 fine, I would say prisions will fil up more new jails. now what educatived ediot came up with this one.

  13. There are far worse offences than speeding that cause crashes. Speeding only makes them more interesting.

  14. Surely the fine for speeding is out of proportion with the fine for using a mobile phone when driving, which in my opinion is far more lethal than driving too fast.

  15. This is typical of this and every British Government for the past 40 years. We motorists are easy meat especially for corrupt cops. What annoys me more than anything is that modern day cyclists can go through red lights, ride on pavements, go the wrong way up one way streets and use abusive language to other road users, all with impunity from the law enforcers.
    If Cameron or his sidekick Osborne wanted to make a killing financially they should make cyclist pay a road fund licence as we drivers do, then the coffers would over fill if the boys in blue did their jobs properly.
    HOW ABOUT HAVING A CAMPAIGN TO TRY AND MAKE THE CYCLIST PAY FOR THE PRIVILEGE OF USING OUR ROADS AS WE DO! Say at least £20 per year, and carry insurance in order to pay for the damage they cause.

  16. Whilst this is an outrageous amount of money, so is fining a Lambo driver doing 160 on a busy motorway just £2,500. The motorway and dual carriageway speed limit should be raised to 90 and 80 respectively and fines proportionate to the speed with lengthy bans for the nutters. But equally, they need to clamp down heavily on middle lane hoggers, tailgatters, rear fog light users in good visibility and texting whilst driving. Many of our road laws are unenforceable and yet ANPR cameras can identify those cars with no insurance so easily, but so many cars are on our roads without insurance.
    Speed doesn’t kill, it’s the misuse of speed by incompetent drivers. Until the Government applies sensible, robust yet fair legislation, we will continue to get our roads full of inconsiderate idiots. I would also fine people who don’t say/signal ‘thank you’ when you wait ages for them to come through a gap of equal priority. But now I’m getting picky!

  17. if your son or daughter got ran over by one of these idiots maybe you would have a different opion

  18. Yet again “soak the motorist” to fill the coffers is on the cards. This proposal combined with the recent installation of more speed cameras on the motorways demonstrates the unrelenting pressure exerted by those in authority under the pretence of enhancing safety despite statistics which show speed contributes relatively little to accidents – and motorways are supposed to be safer than other roads.

  19. Just another case of using the motorist as a cash cow.other country’s have proved speed is not the problem by increasing the maximum speed.


  21. If the ‘great British public’ continue to put up with BS like this, the Government may as well introduce hanging for driving offences!

    It’s about time this police state stuff was brought to an end and common sense prevailed.

    What a shame that the people are so sheepish to let successive poor governments ruin a once great country!

  22. It was said on sky news the other day that we are a tolerant nation.
    OK, it was a different subject but WTF!! why are we British people so stupidly tolerant?
    Haven’t these idiots in government have anything better to do?
    There does, however, appear to be a small number of protesters who have burnt down a few of these weeds at the side of the road……good luck! Shame it couldn’t happen on a much larger scale.

  23. One can sometimes be excused a speeding ticket. For example I was driving up north in order to go to my late brother’s funeral in Lincolnshire. I had driven up from Cornwall and I knew most of the route (M5 then M42) After that I put the sat-nav on for the final approach. The infernal thing took me off the motorway and onto A and B roads! There was no time to turn back so I had to do my best on roads that had traffic lights and low speed limits. I ended up getting radar trapped somehow on a really good straight road. The safety camera partnership claimed that I had done 58 mph in a 50 limit. (57 mph is almost legal as usually one is allowed 10% plus 2 mph) I wrote explaining the circumstances and they said that they needed more evidence. My sister sent me a copy of the funeral directors bill and I posted this to the Chief Constable. To my great delight I was excused! SO MUCH BETTER than a fine and points or worse still going on a stupid AA Driver Awareness Course. Incidentally I got there in bags of time as when I was lost it seemed that I still had forty miles to do on rubbish roads in about an hour. In actual fact I was a lot nearer and there was even time to have a cup of tea at my sisters before going on to the crematorium. As with so many things if you don’t ask you don’t get. Being let-off was brilliant!

  24. Is this proposed motorway speed fines or does it also apply to our streets as well?

    What I cannot understand is Why on earth do car manufactures continue to produce cars capable of reaching speeds in excess of 100mph, when there’s no road in this country that you’re allowed to do more than 70mph?

    I think the car manufactures ought to be held accountable for their stupidity.

    One other thing I’d like to say is most of us don’t even have £10,000.

  25. Once again just another way to fleece motorists.
    Its about time they tightened up on tests to make sure that drivers are able to drive safely at motorway speeds.Also speed limits should be variable (depending of time of day / traffic volume etc) we have the technology.

  26. I think this is disgusting!.the motorists in this country are the scapegoats for a failing police and justice system in this country.if your caught dealing drugs (which kill people who take them) or mugging old people or breaking into houses then you get off with less than this!!!!!!.WHY???????. ILE TELL YOU WHY, because to catch those kind of people takes proper police work!!, not a couple of officers sitting in a car with their coffee and one finger on the vascar button and the only paperwork A LITTLE TICKET, then revenue paid by scared motorists.lets be honest, the road traffic policing in this country is CORRUPT TO THE BONE. VOSA IS A SELF FUNDING GOVERNMENT ORGANISATION AND BEFORE LONG SO WILL BE THE TRAFFIC POLICE BECAUSE MOTORISTS ARE EASY TARGETS ANDGENERALLY LAW ABIDING CITIZENS WHO JUST WANT TO GET FROM A TO B.the system now is making these members of the community pay the price that real criminals should be paying and in the process giving traffic police an easy all for crazy drivers being banned and even jailed for crazy driving but to say someone driving around 75 to even 85mph on a motorway is more serious a crime than those I have mentioned is pure nonsense!.i drove all across Europe last year and the lowest general motorway speed limit all over Europe is 130kmh aroun 84mph!!!!. if that’s a safe speed there, then why does it make you a criminal here with 10,000 pond fines on the cards????.because motorists in this country are being shafted, .the british motorist should revolt against this money grabbing corrupt regime in policing and government.we should take this to European court of human right!!!.why do we have the lowest limits and mst severe money penalties?. STEALTH TAXES.yours angry motorist stevie. ps rant over

  27. Emotional lobby by anti-motorist elements lead to this nonsense … kill or injure a person in a drunken bar brawl abd community setvice results … use a car to speed, fines at nadness level & insurance affected for years ….. no evidence base for this action …. pure income generation

  28. Most speeding fines are to collect revenue. If someone is driving recklessly a custodial sentence would be a good deterrent. Do not impose these draconian financial penalties on the average citizen.

  29. speeding fines are means tested and have to be paid within a year;if someone can’t afford it…….well what then? I can’t see anyone being fined £10k;for serious speeding offences a short ban,say 28 days might be preferable.AS you say though,magistrates do have a maverick approach to appealed cases that are lost.

  30. i think it is yet another money making exercise forced on us by this heartless goverment

  31. Another revenue stream, will do very little for road safety.
    Politions have had a fixation about speed since the red flag of the early 1900s

  32. Fines are based on your income so to achieve this higher fines you woukd have to be well paid like a footballer, jockey or banker in the city.
    Fear not jo bloggs of average income. Scare mongering by the press to sell papers. When was the last time you heard of a speeding fine of £2500? I never have but may have but its likely to be a celebrate. They can afford it. The real solution is don’t break the law and keep within the speed limits. Simple.

  33. I feel it’s a crying shame that the police force(government) feel that it is nessasary to put up the fine to such a high degree. Don’t get me wrong the people who are maimed or killed by the people who just don’t care are the ones who should be punished. Taking the right to drive away for ever and the police enforcing that would be correct thing to do. If caught doing it again then a severe prison sentence is better with No chance of ever driving again. I know it takes a lot to feed and look after people in prison but at the end of the day every one benefits

  34. Fines for whatever offense should, can and do take into account the transgressors ability to pay; so get yourself a lawyer to represent you in court and be absolutely truthful about your capital, your earnings and your outgoings. The Magistrates are not being told that they must quadruple fines; merely that they will have power to up them – the well off should take note and the rest of you, stop panicking.

  35. Yet again another making money idea from the government!!

    Since this was announced I have been travelling with friends along the M1 & M25 which has an increasing number of overhead gantry speed cameras. The question that was asked which opened a good debate was how these cameras work when used alongside the variable speed limits. If the speed limit was reduced to say 50 mph would the camera get you if exceeding this or above 70 mph.

    This could potentially catch hundreds of drivers … maybe that’s the governments objective.

  36. Yet again another making money idea from the government!!

    Since this was announced I have been travelling with friends along the M1 & M25 which has an increasing number of overhead gantry speed cameras. The question that was asked which opened a good debate was how these cameras work when used alongside the variable speed limits. If the speed limit was reduced to say 50 mph would the camera get you if exceeding this or above 70 mph.

    This could potentially catch hundreds of drivers … maybe that’s the governments objective.

  37. Speeding, in and of itself, is not dangerous. Inappropriate speed is. All our speed limits have been calculated on 1950s cars. Drum brakes, no anti-lock system, no power steering, cross-ply tyres, poorer road surfaces…. The list is long.

    The speed limit on duel carridgeways and motorways is ignored by just about everyone. Doing 120mph on a quiet motorway at 3am only really endangers the one car. Doing the same speed at 3pm may be a danger – but the dangerous driving is the right charge.

    Speeding should not be an offence. End of story.

  38. Where have all the national speed limit roads gone? The national speed limit now appears to be 50mph even on parts of the A1 !!. This is causing queues everywhere and I do not see many drivers sticking to the 50 limit, they are all driving now at 40mph on the normal roads. When you try to make progress by overtaking everything (and within the given speed limit of course) all you get now is flashing headlights and the horn.

    Since cars are better made with better brakes, wider tyres etc the speed limits need to be put back up and on motorways as everybody actually drives at 80mph all the time this should be raised otherwise everybody in the country will be paying out these massive fines. It’s the few idiots in the transport department who love controlling whole populations of drivers – they just love the power it gives them. I would actually like to bet that the MP’s do not agree with the way drivers are treated and that would probably include Cameron himself.

  39. I also had to laugh when I saw the cyclist the other day with ‘Pollution free cycling’ on his tee shirt. Do these cyclists know that they breathe out more carbon dioxide than is produced by a car within the given mileage.

  40. Our country is financially stuffed [some-one has to pay for the war in Iraq and to support all these illegal “immigrunts”] …….so once again “dis gubbernment” needs to rake in as much money as possible ……and again,the poor old motorist becomes the cash cow.

  41. Having read all the responses I can’t see anyone pointing out the most obvious side effect of all this – corruption!

    Whilst I have great respect in general for our police I do believe that people are vulnerable to temptation.

    The greater the fine the more likely people are to try to buy their way out of it – faced with a £10k fine I believe people will offer the police money not to be prosecuted – you hear many stories about Europe and people not being prosecuted by paying “on the spot” – surely this legislation will encourage police corruption ?

  42. I was on the M25 yesterday and behind a traffic police car. He was driving in the “middle” lane and when he came up to a slower car in the lane, he would overtake and then have a notice in lights go across the back of the window saying “Don’t hog the lane” and he would carry on driving. Why wasn’t he making the cars move over to the slower lanes or even pulling them over? So much for their talk about fining those driver? The amount of cars going 50mph or 60mph in the middle lane is ridiculous. These drivers should be fined for going too slow.
    The minimum speed limit for cars, on the motorways, should be 60mph so trucks, who are only allowed to go 56mph, don’t have to move from the left hand lane to overtake slower cars.
    It’s not the cars going 70mph, 80mph or even 90mph that cause the accidents on motorways, it’s the ones going 40mph, 50mph or even 60mph in the wrong lanes that are the cause of accidents. A person going 80 or even 90mph is probably more concentrated on what they are doing than someone who is just trundling along at 60mph.
    I also believe that cruise control should be banned on motorways, as a person gets lazy and loses concentration and then when something happens in front of them they are too slow to react and panic.

  43. Great news, perhaps there will be a lot fewer people breaking the speed limit, the existing system is clearly not a deterrent. It is fairly simple, if you don’t want to pay a fine stay below the speed limit.

  44. This is just another example of how we are sliding inexorably into a police state. The ruling elite regard us as cattle to be exploited in every way possible.

  45. As far as I’m concerbed it is propaganda. They say that it is dangerous to break the speed limit, so, using that argument, it is safe not to break the speed limit.

    If I am driving along a clear stretch of dual carriageway on a fine sunny day with no other drivers, it is unsafe if I drive at one or two miles above the posted speed limit. Yet, if I drive along that same stretch of road in rush hour with zero visibility and ice on the road, I am safe as long as I drive at a speed of one or two mph below the posted speed limit!

    That is ridiculous! Even thought there might be only four or five mph difference in the two cases mentioned, the so-called ‘unsafe’ driver would be far safer than the so-called ‘safe’ driver.

    We all know that we should drive at a speed that we know is safe. One of the earlier posts mentioned how modern cars are far safer and have far better road holding and handling than when the 70mph speed limit was introduced.

    Politicians are like a bunch of bananas, they start of green and crooked, but end up yellow and crooked.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *