Top speed 112from 2020

[Quacker]

Originally Posted by Tannaton

You're still missing a few points...

When your wife entered the carpark she will have passed several signs - one saying there is a CCTV, why the system is there and the contact details of the operator of the system (i.e. the data controller in GDPR terms).

There will be another system explaining how the parking scheme works, and that will include a piece on how they will contact the DVLA to establish the keeper details.

You have the option of not using the carpark - but if you do by doing so you are consenting to them collecting personal data (facial image, vehicle number plate).

For a number of reasons, not withstanding the scale and complexity of the I.T. systems need to implement and operate it - tracking of every vehicle will never be implemented on a compulsory basis in the UK by the state.

Actually no. There are no signs outside, only on the inside after the car has passed the cameras inwards, so even if she was to then object and leave without stopping, she would still have been tracked. I've checked it.

You are quite incorrect in your last paragraph. It is very feasible with always-connected cars, which many, including my Volvo already are. It is partly the reason that new state of the art navigation arrays are being launched into space. The car, as now, will never communicate with the satellite and will not track constantly, only sending a short location data stream periodically by 5 or 6G to the taxation centre. Perhaps every couple of miles. It matters no more who the driver is than current systems as far as I can imagine it.

It is an absolute imperative in the fairly near future with an increasing proportion of electrified cars that consume untaxed electricity. They cannot heap the current fuel duty, which is a mileage and vehicle consumption tax, on electricity because electricity is commonly used in private houses and for industry. They must continue to maintain the revenue stream that comes from fuel today. It is absolutely essential to the running of the economy and services and this is the only possible way of going about it.

[Tannaton]

Originally Posted by Quacker

Actually no. There are no signs outside, only on the inside after the car has passed the cameras inwards, so even if she was to then object and leave without stopping, she would still have been tracked. I've checked it.

Then may be unenforceable...

From a CCTV perspective, any commercial operator who is large enough to have to register with the ICO as a data processor (and Tesco definitely is) must display signs where there are CCTV camera's stating the purpose and who controls the system.

With regard to the parking charge notice for staying too long - When you park on private land you enter into a contract with the landowner. Signs that clearly display rules for using the car park give you the terms of the contract. The car park owner can take steps to enforce any of these rules if broken, but if there are no or inadequate signs, there is arguably no contract.

[Tannaton]

Originally Posted by Quacker

You are quite incorrect in your last paragraph. It is very feasible with always-connected cars, which many, including my Volvo already are. It is partly the reason that new state of the art navigation arrays are being launched into space. The car, as now, will never communicate with the satellite and will not track constantly, only sending a short location data stream periodically by 5 or 6G to the taxation centre. Perhaps every couple of miles. It matters no more who the driver is than current systems as far as I can imagine it.

We are at cross purposes - I think you are talking summary data about journey's, I understood the original post to be about driving records - i.e. what speeds are traveled on what roads at what time etc. To collect all of that would lead to an impossible amount of data and a whole raft of issues as to who has access to it.

To collect miles driven or roads used directly by the authority for taxation purposes is a much simpler proposition.

[DangerMUK]

Interesting article on Autocar;

https://www.autocar.co.uk/opinion/in...-slower-future

Quote;
But how many road accidents actually happen at or above 112mph? Gary Baldwin, a forensic collision investigator with the Thames Valley Police, reckons the self-imposed top speed limit’s impact on road deaths will be negligible. “It’s an irrelevance,” he said. “I genuinely think it will have no effect whatsoever.”

[AB-UK]

Originally Posted by Tannaton

When you park on private land you enter into a contract with the landowner. Signs that clearly display rules for using the car park give you the terms of the contract. The car park owner can take steps to enforce any of these rules if broken, but if there are no or inadequate signs, there is arguably no contract.

I believe, but I am willing to be otherwise persuaded by someone legallly qualified, that the "contract" is between the carpark enforcement company and the driver of the car.

In order for the parking penalaty charge to be enforced in the court, they would have to name the driver. The information they obtain from the DVLA is only the details of the registered owner.

Unlike in the cae of local governmnent parking fines, the registered owner is not legally obliged to divulge the name of the driver to the private enforcement company.

[gaby]

Originally Posted by DangerMUK

Interesting article on Autocar;

https://www.autocar.co.uk/opinion/in...-slower-future

Quote;
But how many road accidents actually happen at or above 112mph? Gary Baldwin, a forensic collision investigator with the Thames Valley Police, reckons the self-imposed top speed limit’s impact on road deaths will be negligible. “It’s an irrelevance,” he said. “I genuinely think it will have no effect whatsoever.”

Aha, the investigator "thinks".
The article also mentions "only 8% of Europe’s road deaths happen on motorways" - as if 8% is negligible?
The article is far more opinion that fact and where facts are mentioned, their importance is "diminished".
Just my opinion, of course
As I may have mentioned before, I wouldn't mind if my cars (or bike) were limited to 112mph.
I try not to be emotional about it...

[bobby2000]

When was the last time anyone on here went over a 100mph?
I rest my case.

[uro1]

Originally Posted by bobby2000

When was the last time anyone on here went over a 100mph?
I rest my case.

uhm Thursday, and on Friday the first and....

[bobby2000]

Originally Posted by uro1

uhm Thursday, and on Friday the first and....

Yes but are you in the UK.

[uro1]

Originally Posted by bobby2000

Yes but are you in the UK.

No I try to keep my driving legal