Omega Owners Forum
Chat Area => General Discussion Area => Topic started by: zirk on 17 March 2011, 18:38:18
-
Obviously were talking Motorways here, received this via email recently, I read it as, Fixed Penalty rather than a Court Hearing, any thoughts or real life experiences of it?
:-/
“Hi Chris,
Did you know that that ACPO (the Association of Cheif Police Officers) advise Police who stop speeding Motorists on motorways only to prosecute if they are exceeding 96mph?
It's not a well known fact, and we know that on some occasions Police don't follow this guideline.
However, on many occasions they do follow it...
If you are polite and courteous to the Officer and mention something in friendly banter along the lines of:
"Is it true that the ACPO (pron. "ack-poe") guideline is to only summons drivers to court if they are driving at 96mph or more?"
...then you'll be significantly more likely to get a 'slap on the wrist' and simply get a ticket.
...which is surely better than facing a ban and a big fine.
All the best,
Adam
Adam Blair
Managing Director, DriveProtect “
-
Go on, try it, I dare you :)
-
Go on, try it, I dare you :)
Nah, cant afford the petrol let alone the Fine!
-
Certainly I KNOW that in the 1990s, around Hampshire, motorway police only stopped motorists doing more than 90 mph. Below that you would only be stopped if you were driving at that speed in dangerous driving conditions, driving dangerously or recklessly, driving a vehicle that appeared unroadworthy, or the car and the driver were wanted. ;) ;)
-
I wouldn't bother trying to be clever... I am always courteous to the Police, especially if stopped, and can assure you that it's worthwhile ;) ;)
-
I wouldn't bother trying to be clever... I am always courteous to the Police, especially if stopped, and can assure you that it's worthwhile ;) ;)
Tend to agree with you on that one LD, last thing you need is to put them into ‘Obnoxious Driver Mode’
-
Yeah I can just imagine their reaction if, having stopped you for doing 85mph, you quote that to them.. ;D ;D
I suspect you'd be fishing rubber gloves from your backside for weeks!
-
Going by the number of cases that pass through my courts, either for sentence or appeal, as they are mostly dealt with at the Magistrates Courts initially, that information is dramatically incorrect !!
I seen appeals against sentence (after someone has lost their licence) usually for the 3rd or 4th offence of around 80mph and had cases referred up for sentence for similar speeds where the driver has a worse record.
For these cases to get to court they must have been reported by the police initially. I know a lot of the cases stem from camera vans initialy ... but I have watched enough video evidence from following cars to know that not all is from them .. :)
I would not like to take the risk .. :)
-
There has always been the option to ignore/warn/ticket/report for prosecution and dependant on speed detected. Nothing new there.
What may be different is the actual speed in use at any given time. It was always what was termed a Fiscal Guideline up here but in England/Wales, probably some sort of CPS guideline to mirror that.
In my experience, those errant motorists that go off on one, howsoever polite or apparently informed, end up getting the most precise of attentions...... :-X
-
My late brother-in-law was a traffic officer here in Wiltshire, and my wife's ex-hubby was also a copper.
Although both were careful not to endorse routine motorway speeding, they both said independently of each other that traffic officers are not especially interested in speed per se, but take a dim view of speed combined with any of the following:-
Poor road conditions / traffic conditions / visibility;
Apparent inattention to surrounding traffic conditions, highlighted by lack of lane discipline, lack of indication, lack of awareness of following traffic;
Any distraction consuming the drivers attention, like mobile phones, putting on make-up, turning to scream at kids in the back, etc;
tail-gating;
Under-taking;
any attempts to intimidate other drivers to move over.
None of the above means that a motorist behaving sensibly at 85 mph on the motorway won't get pulled, but most traffic officers are motoring / car enthusiasts (thats why the majority of them do the job), and only want to catch and deter the idiots.
The above absolutely chimes with my own personal experience - I frequently travel at 90 mph and occasionally (and for short distances) more on motorways, but I drive in accordance with the list of 'dont's' above. I have NEVER been stopped for speed on a motorway.
-
Probably pretty close to the truth in my experience. :y
-
I find the same - I don't take the pee but will exceed by a little.
But drive carefully
-
I set cruise to 75mph if on a run, probably really doing 72/73.
If stopped NEVER be rude. Traffic officers have leeway to exercise a little discretion depending on the circumstances.
-
My late brother-in-law was a traffic officer here in Wiltshire, and my wife's ex-hubby was also a copper.
Although both were careful not to endorse routine motorway speeding, they both said independently of each other that traffic officers are not especially interested in speed per se, but take a dim view of speed combined with any of the following:-
Poor road conditions / traffic conditions / visibility;
Apparent inattention to surrounding traffic conditions, highlighted by lack of lane discipline, lack of indication, lack of awareness of following traffic;
Any distraction consuming the drivers attention, like mobile phones, putting on make-up, turning to scream at kids in the back, etc;
tail-gating;
Under-taking;
any attempts to intimidate other drivers to move over.
None of the above means that a motorist behaving sensibly at 85 mph on the motorway won't get pulled, but most traffic officers are motoring / car enthusiasts (thats why the majority of them do the job), and only want to catch and deter the idiots.
The above absolutely chimes with my own personal experience - I frequently travel at 90 mph and occasionally (and for short distances) more on motorways, but I drive in accordance with the list of 'dont's' above. I have NEVER been stopped for speed on a motorway.
Why not just drive at the posted limit T?
-
In 36 years on the roads Z, its only in the last year that I have for some reason (middle age ?) reached the point where I can bring myself to do that - in a car at least, the bike is still a bit different. I think that most people are the same - like to feel the enjoyment of using the performance of their engine etc.
I dont have a problem with that as long as its done without reckless disregard for safety, which imo isnt the same thing as speeding.
-
Obviously were talking Motorways here, received this via email recently, I read it as, Fixed Penalty rather than a Court Hearing, any thoughts or real life experiences of it?
:-/
“Hi Chris,
Did you know that that ACPO (the Association of Cheif Police Officers) advise Police who stop speeding Motorists on motorways only to prosecute if they are exceeding 96mph?
It's not a well known fact, and we know that on some occasions Police don't follow this guideline.
However, on many occasions they do follow it...
If you are polite and courteous to the Officer and mention something in friendly banter along the lines of:
"Is it true that the ACPO (pron. "ack-poe") guideline is to only summons drivers to court if they are driving at 96mph or more?"
...then you'll be significantly more likely to get a 'slap on the wrist' and simply get a ticket.
...which is surely better than facing a ban and a big fine.
All the best,
Adam
Adam Blair Managing Director, DriveProtect “
This guy seems to encourage speeding and offering ideas how you can get around the law, he's in my blocked senders list now, the guys an idiot.
-
My late brother-in-law was a traffic officer here in Wiltshire, and my wife's ex-hubby was also a copper.
Although both were careful not to endorse routine motorway speeding, they both said independently of each other that traffic officers are not especially interested in speed per se, but take a dim view of speed combined with any of the following:-
Poor road conditions / traffic conditions / visibility;
Apparent inattention to surrounding traffic conditions, highlighted by lack of lane discipline, lack of indication, lack of awareness of following traffic;
Any distraction consuming the drivers attention, like mobile phones, putting on make-up, turning to scream at kids in the back, etc;
tail-gating;
Under-taking;
any attempts to intimidate other drivers to move over.
None of the above means that a motorist behaving sensibly at 85 mph on the motorway won't get pulled, but most traffic officers are motoring / car enthusiasts (thats why the majority of them do the job), and only want to catch and deter the idiots.
The above absolutely chimes with my own personal experience - I frequently travel at 90 mph and occasionally (and for short distances) more on motorways, but I drive in accordance with the list of 'dont's' above. I have NEVER been stopped for speed on a motorway.
Why not just drive at the posted limit T?
That's a perfectly fair question, Zulu.
Here's my self-justification, which isn't intended to be bullet-proof, merely honest like my original post....
First of all, almost nobody in a modern-ish car drives at the posted limit on a motorway, so I'd suggest that those that do may be posing a more significant hazard than those keeping up with the general velocity on such roads, i.e 80-85 mph.
Secondly, I find I'm less alert in the sense of being less aware of whats going on around me when travelling at or near 70ish on motorways. I ease off mentally in the same degree that I ease off the accelerator. I know, that's my failing, but I'm super-aware when travelling quicker.
Thirdly, as Albs says, why have a large-engined motor designed to chew up motorway miles in comfort if you're never gong to extend it a little now and again?
If we all accept that motorways are the UK's safest roads, with all traffic heading in the same direction, without junctions or traffic lights, without pedestrians, without cyclists, then surely the motorway is the place for that speed (notwithstanding the caveats in my original post).
I'm not saying I'm right, but this is how it is for me. Am I attempting to justifying the unjustifiable? No. Really, I'm not - this is just an honest answer to an honest question.
-
In 36 years on the roads Z, its only in the last year that I have for some reason (middle age ?) reached the point where I can bring myself to do that - in a car at least, the bike is still a bit different. I think that most people are the same - like to feel the enjoyment of using the performance of their engine etc.
I dont have a problem with that as long as its done without reckless disregard for safety, which imo isnt the same thing as speeding.
Yes I see that son and I agree - it’s a pain in the arse to drive to limits - but in practical terms if people choose which regulations to obey and which ones to ignore where will this stop?
Behaving as One wishes, particularly in the interpretation of traffic laws, has led to an alarming decline in driver responsibility.
In overall terms the road system in this country is populated by an ever increasing number of drivers who are, as Tony rightly pointed out, doing everything but attending to the task in hand. This in my estimation simply makes the use of excess speed ever more liable to the threat of interference from these people - why would anyone wish to take that risk.
Times have changed dramatically to the point where One's desire to express an individual inclination must be tempered by the realisation that One isn’t necessarily the person to cause the problem but rather, in most cases, it's the other individual - ploughing their very own furrow while ignoring the rules to satisfy their own inclinations in the process - who will invariably be the cause of any problem.
-
I wouldn't bother trying to be clever... I am always courteous to the Police, especially if stopped, and can assure you that it's worthwhile ;) ;)
Man after my own heart :y
-
That's a perfectly fair question, Zulu.
Here's my self-justification, which isn't intended to be bullet-proof, merely honest like my original post....
First of all, almost nobody in a modern-ish car drives at the posted limit on a motorway, so I'd suggest that those that do may be posing a more significant hazard than those keeping up with the general velocity on such roads, i.e 80-85 mph.
Secondly, I find I'm less alert in the sense of being less aware of whats going on around me when travelling at or near 70ish on motorways. I ease off mentally in the same degree that I ease off the accelerator. I know, that's my failing, but I'm super-aware when travelling quicker.
Thirdly, as Albs says, why have a large-engined motor designed to chew up motorway miles in comfort if you're never gong to extend it a little now and again?
If we all accept that motorways are the UK's safest roads, with all traffic heading in the same direction, without junctions or traffic lights, without pedestrians, without cyclists, then surely the motorway is the place for that speed (notwithstanding the caveats in my original post).
I'm not saying I'm right, but this is how it is for me. Am I attempting to justifying the unjustifiable? No. Really, I'm not - this is just an honest answer to an honest question.
I can understand that rationale T and I have said in a reply to Albs that I do find constant speed checking (to remain within the posted limit) to be a pain in the arse and in many cases can be dangerously distracting in lower limit areas. (Where there are usually more hazards to negotiate)
The whole issue of speed is quite a vexed one and I do feel that on motorways where the topography supports it there is a case to be made for the increase of the maximum limit to 80/85 mph providing those travelling in excess of the new limit would by adequately sanctioned for doing so.
It is difficult to be realistic where this matter is concerned as many things now conspire to prevent the use of the speeds we enjoyed driving at one time, but with the deterioration in the physical condition of the road network, the marked increase in traffic density and the appalling standard of driving now being seen there must surely be a point at which we have to say that for a driver to decide the speed at which they drive (in excess of the posted limit ) is fast becoming untenable.
-
I wouldn't bother trying to be clever... I am always courteous to the Police, especially if stopped, and can assure you that it's worthwhile ;) ;)
Man after my own heart :y
Why thank you :y
At the end of the day, if I get stopped for speeding I'm in the wrong... Being polite has (on more than one occasion) been the right course of action ;)
-
Anyway in relation to Zirk's OP, ACPO has been an increasing problem within policing for some time now.
The strategic case for the necessity or otherwise to have a national command structure and a unified or more closely linked constabulary for the nation should be a matter for the Home Office and Parliament not ACPO.
The sooner that chief officers within the existing constabulary arrangements concentrate on getting professional, dedicated and capable officers on the ground doing the (realistic) job we're paid to do, the better.
-
If memory serves .. ACPO is actually a registered business ... although they try to portray themselves as the "font of all knowledge".. they are little more than a cosy "trade union" of senior officers.
IMHO should be banned .. the Home Office / Government (should) run the police .. NOT ACPO
http://www.acpo.police.uk/documents/ArticlesofAssociation.pdf
and this part is the most worrrying ...
ACPO Doctrine
91. Once the Chief Constables[ch8223] Council or the Cabinet have agreed an item of policing doctrine (Guidance/Practice Advice) it shall be issued to each Chief Constable with the recommendation that he/she should adopt the doctrine and implement it as appropriate in his/her force.
92. The Chief Executive shall maintain a register of current doctrine decisions.
93. A Chief Constable who, for reasons peculiar to his/her force or on other grounds, does not intend or is unable to adopt any agreed ACPO doctrine shall formally notify the President of the fact, with reasons, in writing.
-
Chris the letter that you recived uses the word advices the police not let them off willy niliy, so to back up what others have said already, if you get stopped speeding and your in the wrong hold your hands up to it and apologise.
I was stopped last year on the M23 near gatwick annd i was clocked at 91mph. it was 3 in the morning and i was vertually the only car on the road, the copper who stopped me showed me the video of me at speed and asked me to slow down and to use his words "chill out". He said that although i was speeding he thought that mt driving was very good and he would take it no further.
Then we had a converstion about how they used to drive 3.2 omegas and wish that they could have them back as the diesel volvo he was driving was just a bag of s###.
Lesson learnt. :y
-
If memory serves .. ACPO is actually a registered business ... although they try to portray themselves as the "font of all knowledge".. they are little more than a cosy "trade union" of senior officers.
IMHO should be banned .. the Home Office / Government (should) run the police .. NOT ACPO
http://www.acpo.police.uk/documents/ArticlesofAssociation.pdf
and this part is the most worrrying ...
ACPO Doctrine
91. Once the Chief Constables[ch8223] Council or the Cabinet have agreed an item of policing doctrine (Guidance/Practice Advice) it shall be issued to each Chief Constable with the recommendation that he/she should adopt the doctrine and implement it as appropriate in his/her force.
92. The Chief Executive shall maintain a register of current doctrine decisions.
93. A Chief Constable who, for reasons peculiar to his/her force or on other grounds, does not intend or is unable to adopt any agreed ACPO doctrine shall formally notify the President of the fact, with reasons, in writing.
I agree 100% Nige. This to me is a worrying and at times sinister organistion/company, which as far as I can see has been at the forefront of the politicisation of our police.
They also act as a quasi policy making unit for the govt (as well as the functions you mentioned) and charges the taxpayer a fortune for the privilige. >:(
-
This is a very interesting little article .... :)
http://www.waspsnest.com/2010/01/28/acpo-oversight-or-deliberate-omission
Now .. how do you refer that to the powers that be .... :)
-
Chris the letter that you recived uses the word advices the police not let them off willy niliy, so to back up what others have said already, if you get stopped speeding and your in the wrong hold your hands up to it and apologise.
I was stopped last year on the M23 near gatwick annd i was clocked at 91mph. it was 3 in the morning and i was vertually the only car on the road, the copper who stopped me showed me the video of me at speed and asked me to slow down and to use his words "chill out". He said that although i was speeding he thought that mt driving was very good and he would take it no further.
Then we had a converstion about how they used to drive 3.2 omegas and wish that they could have them back as the diesel volvo he was driving was just a bag of s###.
Lesson learnt. :y
Exactly my point... I was going, well, faster than that when I got a warning from Kent Police in similar circumstances some 11 years ago and should, by rights, have been banned :-[ :-X
I was polite, courteous, and had a genuine reason that I was speeding... Result was a talking to and I missed the ferry :y It made me more sensible behind the wheel and taught me to be respectful when in the wrong... Something that has served me well since :y
-
If memory serves .. ACPO is actually a registered business ... although they try to portray themselves as the "font of all knowledge".. they are little more than a cosy "trade union" of senior officers.
IMHO should be banned .. the Home Office / Government (should) run the police .. NOT ACPO
http://www.acpo.police.uk/documents/ArticlesofAssociation.pdf
and this part is the most worrrying ...
ACPO Doctrine
91. Once the Chief Constables[ch8223] Council or the Cabinet have agreed an item of policing doctrine (Guidance/Practice Advice) it shall be issued to each Chief Constable with the recommendation that he/she should adopt the doctrine and implement it as appropriate in his/her force.
92. The Chief Executive shall maintain a register of current doctrine decisions.
93. A Chief Constable who, for reasons peculiar to his/her force or on other grounds, does not intend or is unable to adopt any agreed ACPO doctrine shall formally notify the President of the fact, with reasons, in writing.
Yes you're right to be concerned about that E - there is no room for a de facto Star Chamber in the design and implementation of strategic policy where policing is concerned.
-
I had a similar, well documented experience a couple of years ago. I was certain that I was looking at a very long ban, but was polite to the officer, told him I knew the score and was prepared to take what was coming etc.
After he scared the bejaysus out of me, he let me off with 3 points and £60 fine, which in the circumstances I was very happy with.
They arent uniforms, they are human beings, and if given some respect and courtesy, very often respond accordingly.
-
I find £1.42 a litre keeps my speed in check more effectively than any other deterrent :(
-
Going by the number of cases that pass through my courts
What is your role in court, Nige?
I'm guessing since the appeal's have already gone through Mags, you're in a Crown court?
-
Going by the number of cases that pass through my courts
What is your role in court, Nige?
I'm guessing since the appeal's have already gone through Mags, you're in a Crown court?
Correct young man ... 3 days a week I'm an Usher in the Crown Court ... :)
also double as Jury Officer, Jury Bailiff, Court Recorder, District Judge Bailiff and general gopher
Pay is not brilliant but it keeps me off the streets and is very different to what I used to do... :)
Job has many roles.. from swearing in Juries and then looking after them, helping Vunerable Witnesses give evidence on video link, handling exhibits for Juries ( few months ago £25000 worth of cocaine in one bag ... :) ), keeping order in the Public Gallery, chasing up misssing barristers and witnesses, etc etc etc whatever needs to be done to help the Court run smoothly... :)
-
Sounds like interesting work Nige. :y
-
God it takes my disco to reach 75 never mind 96 ;D ;D
-
I find £1.42 a litre keeps my speed in check more effectively than any other deterrent :(
thats so true.
i remember the last fuel blockade in 2000 everyone crawled around at 30 spot on. anyone going quicker that that was obviously on the pink stuff. (price at the time 80p a litre?)
-
The pence per litre induced speed limit is very noticeable.
Guessing the desired 70 mph average among drivers in lanes 2 and 3 to equate to about £1.80 a litre going by the m4 ime.
A case of drivers driving to "conditions" I guess...
-
I had notice that, too - as petrol prices go up, the average speed in the first 2/3/4 lanes goes down.. Which is annoying as that forces everyone who wants to go a bit faster into the one remaining lane :-/
Not as annoying as travelling at 1am and finding some pillock sitting in lane 3 of 4 at 70mph, though, while the other 4 lanes (the 5-lane wide bits of the M25) sit completely empty for miles ::) That should be an offence worthy of mandatory euthanasia if you ask me.
-
In this interesting part of the Kingdom (where the average price is the highest in the UK - BBC News) it hasn't altered habits all that much.
Most drivers seem to be pressing on regardless with truckers, taxi drivers, 4x4 drivers and rep-mobiles being the most prolific.
Motorway speed isn't the whole story however. Over the past 3 weeks I've been taking someone up to a large hospital where they're visiting their husband who is receiving treatment.
This involves 4 journeys per day into the main city - a place I seldom go, so I've had the opportunity to observe the behaviour of many drivers - more so than I have had over the recent past.
It's amazing to me that many of them don't seem to exercise any form of car control or forward awareness. Rapid acceleration and extreme braking (both fuel wasters) seem to be the methods employed in order to maintain some belief that they’re making progress to wherever they’re going.
So, from what I see the price of fuel would need to rise substantially before many of those I speak about would be forced into using lower speeds and displaying a much smoother driving style.
It seems to me that many drivers just accept high fuel prices as a matter of fact now - and something they can do little about - and attempt to carry on regardless rather than make the conscious decision to try to alter their behaviour.
I’m sure the Treasury is most grateful for this display of determination from them.
-
I don't think any prise rise would make people drive any more smoothly, Z.. the majority of people (that I've passengered with, anyway) who drive like that do so simply because they don't understand how to control a car properly.. the controls are entirely digital as far as they know, and the computers (traction control, stability control, ABS) are the only thing that keeps them on the road :(
That's the standard of driving in this country nowadays - and I should add, the people I've driven with passed their test in this country.
-
Some of you on here will no doubt be familiar with the works of the rock band Rush, whose 'Moving Pictures' album contains a song called 'Red Barchetta', basically a futurist anthem to the lure and power of a forbidden old red sports car at a time when all private cars have been banned.
There is a sense of an apocalyptic mindset starting to germinate in the minds of a lot of motorists - "petrol is going to run out, perhaps in my lifetime, it will never get any cheaper, so now is the time to go and buy that M5, that Carrera, that TVR, etc"....
.....and then go and rag the nuts off it.... :)
I have some sympathy with this view... ;D
Also, with scarcity and expense comes cachet and snobbery, so to a lot of people the petrol price is still insignificant, and for an increasing number of people for whom it is significant, they are still out there, buying fast, fuel-inefficient cars and saying "hey, look at me"....
-
I don't think any prise rise would make people drive any more smoothly, Z.. the majority of people (that I've passengered with, anyway) who drive like that do so simply because they don't understand how to control a car properly.. the controls are entirely digital as far as they know, and the computers (traction control, stability control, ABS) are the only thing that keeps them on the road :(
That's the standard of driving in this country nowadays - and I should add, the people I've driven with passed their test in this country.
Yes I think there's the 'extension of personal space' issue here A where drivers continue to exist and behave in their surroundings – in a state of exploiting the familiar - irrespective of wherever they happen to be at the time.
In terms of motoring, the fact that this space happens to exist within a box on wheels appears to be incidental to their obvious intention to get to where they're going, or achieve their objectives, with the least possible inconvenience to themselves.
I think it’s indicative of the tendency of many people nowadays (not just drivers) to retreat behind a barrier of indifference of just how their behaviour may impinge on the wellbeing or sensitivities of others or how much this behaviour may cost them in emotional or financial terms.
-
Some of you on here will no doubt be familiar with the works of the rock band Rush, whose 'Moving Pictures' album contains a song called 'Red Barchetta', basically a futurist anthem to the lure and power of a forbidden old red sports car at a time when all private cars have been banned.
There is a sense of an apocalyptic mindset starting to germinate in the minds of a lot of motorists - "petrol is going to run out, perhaps in my lifetime, it will never get any cheaper, so now is the time to go and buy that M5, that Carrera, that TVR, etc"....
.....and then go and rag the nuts off it.... :)
I have some sympathy with this view... ;D
Also, with scarcity and expense comes cachet and snobbery, so to a lot of people the petrol price is still insignificant, and for an increasing number of people for whom it is significant, they are still out there, buying fast, fuel-inefficient cars and saying "hey, look at me"....
I have no doubt that much of what you say is quite valid T.
For many this seems to reveal a fundamental disconnect with reality as many people appear to exist within the virtual world of on-line activities, celebrity worship and constant communication with their ‘friends’ to discuss, no doubt, such important issues of what they discharged into the lavatory bowl that day or some other such nonsense.
I think that in this modern 'sophisticated ' age many on this planet - and within this country sadly - are on the road to hell in a (perversely) very fuel efficient handcart.
-
Some of you on here will no doubt be familiar with the works of the rock band Rush, whose 'Moving Pictures' album contains a song called 'Red Barchetta', basically a futurist anthem to the lure and power of a forbidden old red sports car at a time when all private cars have been banned.
There is a sense of an apocalyptic mindset starting to germinate in the minds of a lot of motorists - "petrol is going to run out, perhaps in my lifetime, it will never get any cheaper, so now is the time to go and buy that M5, that Carrera, that TVR, etc"....
.....and then go and rag the nuts off it.... :)
I have some sympathy with this view... ;D
Also, with scarcity and expense comes cachet and snobbery, so to a lot of people the petrol price is still insignificant, and for an increasing number of people for whom it is significant, they are still out there, buying fast, fuel-inefficient cars and saying "hey, look at me"....
That's precisely why a friend of mine just went out and bought a late model 911; because he figures that in 10 years or so he probably won't be able to (either because the gov't has made it financially impossible for mortals, or because his eyes have finally clapped out!)..
Kinda why I'm looking at my next project, too, really - a few years and petrol is going to be truly eye wateringly expensive, I'm sure.