How far you have not moved

I SUSPECT that there is confusion between what the GPS recording system is expected to do and what it is not. CaRT has no need to prove how far you have moved, be it 20 miles or 200. What they do need to do is to identify those who appear not to have moved (enough), writes Mike Todd.

 

These two are not plain opposites and the latter is clearly less expensive than the former, which they do not need. Whilst the system is clearly struggling to support the rapidly changing requirements and patterns of demand, it is inevitable that it may well be only approximate.

Be sufficient

Given that there is no absolute requirement on CaRT to prosecute every single overstaying infringement and that they are mainly focused on long term problems, the current system may well be sufficient should upgrading it be overly expensive.

In any event, there is clearly a benefit for CaRT not pursuing a boater until there is substantial evidence. Part of our legal system is that people are able to rebut claims as well as there being a threshold that evidence must exceed.

Re-training

It may well be that some 're-training' of some enforcement staff is in order (!). In particular, if the system does not provide strong evidence then they should disconnect recording from the issuing of notices. That is, notices should only be issued when the evidence exceeds that threshold, not when a weak case appears.

This is not unlike, albeit on a different time-scale, the need for car parking enforcers to wait a few minutes to ensure that the driver cannot mount a defence that they were waiting not parking (different criteria).

However good—or bad—an enforcement system is, it is only ever as good as the people who operate it!