Originally posted by tim123
View Post
- Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
- Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!
Reply to: So that's all right then ??
Collapse
You are not logged in or you do not have permission to access this page. This could be due to one of several reasons:
- You are not logged in. If you are already registered, fill in the form below to log in, or follow the "Sign Up" link to register a new account.
- You may not have sufficient privileges to access this page. Are you trying to edit someone else's post, access administrative features or some other privileged system?
- If you are trying to post, the administrator may have disabled your account, or it may be awaiting activation.
Logging in...
Previously on "So that's all right then ??"
Collapse
-
Good points! Isn't that exactly some people's opposition to speeding offences, though? Precisely the fact that they are absolute offences, independent of risk or consequences? I.e. if I'm driving dangerously, do me for driving dangerously. If I'm not, don't do me.
-
But that is exactly how it works.Originally posted by Chantho View PostI can't get my head round this "it was illegal, but it wasn't intentional wrongdoing so don't do it again (wrist-slap smilie)" concept, it's either illegal or not FFS.
Some offences are "absolute" offences, you are guilty simply by committing the offence.
But others, the ones that imply a degree of dishonesty, are not. They require proof of 'intent to commit' before you can be found guilty.
Speeding is an absolute offence. This is for various reasons. I think that you can see it would be virtually impossible for someone to prove that you intended to speed, but it is also because speeding isn't a 'dishonest' act.
I am sure that people would be well peeved if dishonest acts became absolute offences and you ended up risking six months in pokey because you absently-mindedly walked home from work with a pen still in your pocket.
tim
Leave a comment:
-
In Leeds, on the bins it says £75 for dropping litter. I would say that is not small given that it is only £60 when you are caught speeding. If you have no cash, £75 is pretty big
Leave a comment:
-
If she'd been in trouble and had to resign, it might just have put some pressure on Hariett Harman who did the same thing over a much bigger sum of money.Originally posted by BrilloPad View PostBelong to the Liebour party and you can do what you want.
A knighthood for the head of the Electoral Commission, I hear you say?
Leave a comment:
-
Yes, but you will get a small fine rather than 3-5 years in prison. Same here - small issue, but she won't lose job over it: at the end of the day it is the voters who should decide if particular politicians are crooks or not.Originally posted by Chantho View PostHere you get a fine for throwing rubbish, I don't think arguing about the semantics of whether it was intentional or not will do you much good if you're caught.
Leave a comment:
-
Here you get a fine for throwing rubbish, I don't think arguing about the semantics of whether it was intentional or not will do you much good if you're caught.Originally posted by AtW View PostDonation is small, you don't get shot for throwing rubbish on street - just a slap on a wrist.
Leave a comment:
-
Donation is small, you don't get shot for throwing rubbish on street - just a slap on a wrist.
Leave a comment:
-
So that's all right then ??
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/7232516.stm
I can't get my head round this "it was illegal, but it wasn't intentional wrongdoing so don't do it again (wrist-slap smilie)" concept, it's either illegal or not FFS.
If only speed cameras and the like were administered by the Electoral Commission....Tags: None
- Home
- News & Features
- First Timers
- IR35 / S660 / BN66
- Employee Benefit Trusts
- Agency Workers Regulations
- MSC Legislation
- Limited Companies
- Dividends
- Umbrella Company
- VAT / Flat Rate VAT
- Job News & Guides
- Money News & Guides
- Guide to Contracts
- Successful Contracting
- Contracting Overseas
- Contractor Calculators
- MVL
- Contractor Expenses
Advertisers
Contractor Services
CUK News
- Business expenses: What IT contractors can and cannot claim from HMRC Jan 30 08:44
- April’s umbrella PAYE risk: how contractors’ end-clients are prepping Jan 29 05:45
- How EV tax changes of 2025-2028 add up for contractor limited company directors Jan 28 08:11
- Under the terms he was shackled by, Ray McCann’s Loan Charge Review probably is a fair resolution Jan 27 08:41
- Contractors, a £25million crackdown on rogue company directors is coming Jan 26 05:02
- How to run a contractor limited company — efficiently. Part one: software Jan 22 23:31
- Forget February as an MSC contractor seeking clarity, and maybe forget fairness altogether Jan 22 19:57
- What contractors should take from Honest Payroll Ltd’s failure Jan 21 07:05
- HMRC tax avoidance list ‘proves promoters’ nothing-to-lose mentality’ Jan 20 09:17
- Digital ID won’t be required for Right To Work, but more compulsion looms Jan 19 07:41

Leave a comment: