Maximum Speeding Fines To Increase…


On April 24th, Magistrates in England and Wales will be given new powers to fine Motorists one and a half times their weekly income for “more serious” speeding offences.

The previous maximum that Magistrates were allowed to fine was 1 weeks income, but on Tuesday this week it was announced that this amount will be increased by 50%

Magistrates will be advised to fine drivers found guilty of “more serious” speeding offences the new maximum penalty.

Here are the speeds at which Magistrates will be told to award the new maximum fines:

20mph speed limit: 41mph or more
30mph speed limit: 51mph or more
40mph speed limit: 66mph or more
50mph speed limit: 76mph or more
60mph speed limit: 91mph or more

70mph speed limit: 101mph or more

The new maximum fines come in to force on 24th April this year.

If you’re not already a Member of DriveProtect, now would be a very good time to join…

You can either give us a call on 01843 232 791, request a callback here or become a Member online here.

All the best,


Join the Conversation


  1. No consultation ?
    No representation?
    Just More CREEPY LEGISLATION unexpectedly imposed on us.


  2. As ever, more clear evidence that this is not about road safety, but rather an extended tax on motorists. Where else do we see income related fines? For a given offence, the fine should be the same for all – irrespective of income – otherwise there is no real deterrent against those already more likely to commit crime … those who are unable to “afford” vehicle duty, road insurance and maintaining their vehicle in a road worthy condition (current MOT).

  3. Why not do as in Finland base it on your annual salary!! If people are so stupid as to exceed the limits by the margins they are proposing then I have no sympathy for them. They get what they deserve.

  4. Can’t disagree with this proposal but the lower speed limits of 30 MPH being imposed at times such as very early Sunday morning with no traffic or pedestrians is OTT and also Gatsos in hidden sites which are predominantly for money grabbing. Another point other than speeding is the timing of traffic light colour changes. There are many crossings with the modern LED computer controlled lights where the time delay from green to red has been reduced. On a large crossing while travelling at less than 30 MPH and very close to the stop line I have experienced the lights changing very quickly from green to red so that I was still on the yellow grid with the light on red. I could not stop safely and would have ended up on the yellow grid. I was then fined for the action and undertook a Politically correct psychological indoctrination course. Another underhanded way of extracting more money.

  5. I have no sympathy for any speeding driver in 20, 30, 40 mph zones. Yes, I agree that it appears that unreasonable restrictions are being applied in some areas for purely financial reasons but around sub-divisions, schools etc. I agree with the restrictions.

  6. There is no doubt that fines are just another tax (especially parking fines) but if your exceeding the limits by as much as the above percentages I question the necessity??

  7. Bone idle police yet again , penalise the motorists & let the pedos , rapists & murderers get away with what they do …..joke

  8. Weekly income?
    Are they aware that a defendant’s income might be used to support a family?
    This amounts to collective punishment as the other members who are dependent on that income will have to suffer as a result.

  9. This could work out a cheaper fine than the usual if I were to be claiming unemployment benefit of £50 per week. In fact it may be prudent to exceed the max speeds by at least the suggested amount so as to ensure that the max fine that could be imposed would be less than what might normally be given, ie £100. Just a thought !!

  10. This isn’t really about speeding (though it would be denied).

    Given that access to the lower civil courts has already been made far more expensive, denying that very access to many,it seems fairly safe to conclude that the new measure is about raking in more money.

    That’s exactly what the victim surcharge is about.

    If anyone thinks I’ve been too quick to draw this conclusion, well then slap my wrist and pick my pocket!

  11. There are always two sides to this:-
    1. The erring motorist.
    2. The Innocent pedestrian or Other Car Driver who had to get out of the way.
    I therefore support the notion that erring motorists should be severely dealt with. Is there anything wrong in a Motorist driving “sensibly?”

  12. If you are a student living off borrowed money and paying to go to work (study) you effectively have a negative income. Therefore, does that mean that if a student caught speeding you will receive a negative fine – interesting!

  13. Once again, the emphasis is on speed, which can be detected by remote policing methods, i.e. cameras. This allows cutbacks to roads policing which can detect the really dangerous driving: drunks, tailgaters, etc., and give the false impression that as long as one is not speeding, then one is a ‘safe’ driver.

  14. This is less about motoring or raising funds for the authorities. What it most certainly is about is to impose on the populace at large the importance of obeying the diktats of the authorities, of building a sense of fear towards authority. The population is being systematically cowed into obedience. Why? Easier to govern a compliant population.

  15. Yet another tax gathering opportunity for the police force! Hope all speedometers are as accurate as the new guideline requirements.
    Unless all cars are equipped with digital speedos how does a driver know if they are travelling at the speeds which are defined by the law. Seems like a heaven sent opportunity for accused drivers to plead not guilty by way of not being able to clearly know their speed!

  16. You will note of course there is still no penalty for exceeding 20 as it cannot be enforced currently (unless you exceed 30 as there is no punishment provision in the Road Traffic Offenders Act.
    Magistrates rarely impose the maximum anyway. But of course those who have no income will not be bothered about this measure.
    However many court appearances are the result of an unsatisfied FPN.
    I do not and cannot condone any illegal activity including speed offences. But two wrongs (alleged ) do not make a right.
    Many detections are the result of inadmissible evidence such has a lack of the necessary corroboration (save for temporary speed limits where it is not required) Or uncalibrated equipment. This requirement is annual. I am told many forces are cutting down on the cost of calibrations to save money. (this was one of my duties when serving) Always insist on seeing the device label if you can, it should be posted on the side of it (it is a requirement) or failing that ask for calibration certificates. Read the Council Of Police Chiefs Guidelines -that’s all they are though (previously ACPO) Quite often they can be and are breached in many ways not least angular across highway beams which lead to false readings caused by ‘beam skid’. Un-certified, inadequately trained and unqualified operatives. Must be regularly employed on these duties. Don’t forget AVERAGE (HADECS1) cameras are just that AVERAGE, it amazes me to see drivers speed up in between them – what part of the word AVERAGE do they not understand! HADECS2 (overhead gantry) are obsolete now they are generally ineffective because of traffic volumes so HADECS3 are being installed, they can ‘see’ (subject to obstructions such as traffic, spray and fog) in between gantries so don’t think you can speed up in between gantries on manage sections you will be caught.

  17. All about making money this is really not good idea especially for business drivers some people jobs just gives silly ideas & makes money I hope no one driving in future because people’s can’t afford keep paying big fines

  18. I think that this is more than fair as speed kills ans as a result if you are speeding over 10 miles an hour over the speed limit you should be banned for 3 years and take a police retest i have never speeded as ive seen personaly what injuries are inflicted my cousin died twice in the ambulance and 3 times on the operating table i was their when it happened so i have no sympathy for speeders you deserve what you get.

  19. When will these clever enforcers nail the other group of halfwits who threaten everyone’s safety? I refer to the mobile phone brigade. This week I couldn’t activate my phone’s camera in time to catch the woman texting with NO HANDS on the wheel and NO EYES on the road. GATSO no help there.

  20. It is more than 20 times more dangerous to drive at 45mph in a 30 limit than drive the whole length of the M4 at 100 mph. The offences are very different but the fine is the same.

  21. Speed does not of itself kill.
    Speed as a cause of accidents is about one quarter as significant as not paying attention to other vehicles in one way or another. Government statistics as judged by Police attending RTAs, and likely to be biased against speeding.
    The answer is to apply common sense. School areas in particular should become 20 mph, no parking and no overtaking zones ONLY during drop off and collection times. Less busy cross roads should have lights on flashing yellow during the night. Then we might all have a bit more respect for the laws.

  22. Never enter the dock of a court, always ask to see the Magistrates oath of office, never give your name, just take your birth certificate into court, Watch some John Harris on youtube and you will learn so much about our corrupt legal system that is not even fit for purpose.

    Our Government, Judges and Police are all corrupt.

    I drive at whatever speed I like always have always will, no one is going to tell me what speed to drive at.

    People need to Grow Some Balls and do as I do, Not as a corrupt Government want me to do.

  23. I frequently see evidence of drivers with too much right foot (on the accelerator) and nothing between their ears. I have no sympathy with a driver who is excessively exceeding a speed limit in a built up area.
    However, Highways England have been quoted as not fit for the purpose. From the evidence of my meetings with their representatives, I am inclined to agree. Their imposition of a 40mph limit on the A20 dual carriageway near Dover and their lack of dispatch in removing that limit beggars belief.

  24. Yes. There are debates to be had about speeding but IF road safety was at the core of thinking rather than revenue then far more would be done to penalise the many drivers who lack adequate road sense awareness, drive with little regard for the road context (despite being within the limit). Speed is not the sole or main reason for accidents – that is not to suggest it is OK – but poor awareness, concentration and driver ability are. Otherwise police trained drivers would not be amongst the best!

  25. Im afraid Im with those who see this merely as a revenue gathering exercise, posing as road safety.

    Of course we need limits in built areas like schools, but why are they operative at 3am in the morning?

    The Germans have a less punitive attitude and do NOT have a worse road safety record than us!!!!!

    Its not so much about speed as the ability to drive well.

  26. Personally I favour the more aggressive treatment of offenders. Anyone stupid enough to drive at the speeds (over the limit, shown) deserve far worse, and the same applies to Morons on Mobiles:
    > 48hrs immediate – yes, IMMEDIATE incarceration (solitary)
    > Doubling of insurance policy for 2 years (first offence)
    > Required to take an enhanced driving test.
    Not one of those as a choice, but all three. Only then will these people start to understand what they are in charge of requires responsibility, focus, care and attention.
    “It’s not guns that kill people. It’s people.”

  27. Based on last week they will have to pay me. I never do ore than 100 MPH without first removing the numberplate on my BMW. I’m not entirely stupid.

  28. money grabbing aside, what is the object of relating fines to income? Work hard and be have excessive fines applied, or be lazy and be let off. What sort of message does this send to our young people?

  29. A week’s wages? How the heck do they work that one out? A roofer on a snowy week makes no money. No fine if you are temporarily unemployed? Some legislation is created by complete idiots.

  30. I left a comment earlier, it seems all the above respondents are blokes???
    Is that connected with the subject only?

  31. Anyone driving at 50% or more above the given speed limit should be automatically banned from driving for three years. THAT would deter most of the idiot speeders out there.

  32. Its actually a lot worse! you can now be fine 50% of your weekly income for going just 1 mile over the speed limit!!! If this is not heavy handed and disproportionate, I am not sure what is!

Leave a comment

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