Gransnet forums

News & politics

£1,000 fine for Covid rule breaking over the top?

(19 Posts)
winterwhite Sun 20-Sep-20 11:14:45

I find it hard to see that the threatened £1,000 fine makes any sense - and what an omission of failure it is in the first place.
It will fuel even more resentment, esp after the Cummings and Jenrick sanction-free outings.
For mixing - sorry, mingling - in groups it doesn't begin to match the ability-to-pay of those we've been told are the main offenders. The Govt can 'go whistle' for £1,000 from the young unless it's prepared for lengthy proceedings and custodial threats! - £50 cash probably a more effective deterrent.

If something is really thought needed, community orders would surely be more to the point, esp a bout of street sweeping / rubbish picking.

MaizieD Sun 20-Sep-20 11:20:29

The Observer says it's £10,000! Which one is the typo, £1,000 or £10,000 ?

Whichever one it is, it's ridiculous, many people won't have that sort of money.

Oldwoman70 Sun 20-Sep-20 11:21:40

Whilst I agree community orders would be a better idea - how many would abide by those orders. I know someone who has received several community orders over the years - he has never turned up for any of them, always has an excuse and they were never enforced.

MaizieD Sun 20-Sep-20 11:30:33

Have to fine them for not turning up, then... hmm

Pantglas2 Sun 20-Sep-20 11:45:07

The problem with £1000 or even £10000 is that that poorer offenders couldn’t pay and richer ones couldn’t care less.

It’s us middle of the roaders who are the type to pay up - except we’re not breaking the rules!

MaizieD Sun 20-Sep-20 11:58:25

I wouldn't worry too much about it. It's just another dead cat.

EllanVannin Sun 20-Sep-20 12:20:52

They've got to claw it back somehow. Isn't there about £50 million + lost in fraud during the furlough ?

biba70 Sun 20-Sep-20 12:42:20

Maizie, 1st fine £1000, and for recidivists, 10.000

MaizieD Sun 20-Sep-20 13:01:37

Thanks, biba70 👍

Septimia Sun 20-Sep-20 13:07:04

And people who are on low incomes and would find it hard to self-isolate are entitled to a financial incentive.

Jaxjacky Sun 20-Sep-20 13:26:34

Septimia not sure if this is what you meant: £500 for those on low incomes who have to self isolate and punishment for employers who force them to work.

winterwhite Sun 20-Sep-20 17:42:19

The £10k for recidivists is unbelievable. Well, the whole thing is unbelievable. Does the Govt have the powers to introduce such draconian measures on the hoof and without consultation? If it does, very unwise to use them.

growstuff Sun 20-Sep-20 17:49:17


And people who are on low incomes and would find it hard to self-isolate are entitled to a financial incentive.

I hope you realise that virtually nobody will be eligible for the £500, as the threshold for working people claiming Universal Credit is so high. Almost no self-employed will be eligible, so some of them will just carry on and not get tested.

MawB2 Sun 20-Sep-20 19:06:09

How about not breaking the rules - or is that a silly suggestion? hmmhmm

Septimia Sun 20-Sep-20 19:19:53

Yes, Jaxjacky.

growstuff I'm just as cynical about people actually getting it, but I suppose it's something that the idea has been thought of.

Yes, Maw - what a good idea!!

MissAdventure Sun 20-Sep-20 19:47:56

I wonder if a £5 on the spot fine would be easier.
Perhaps the marshalls could issue them?

Grandmafrench Sun 20-Sep-20 19:53:47

No problem if the fine is 5p or £5,000 - since people are not fined. So, who cares? If people were genuinely hit in their pockets each time they broke the law, and they knew that this would absolutely happen, this might enourage them to focus on not breaking the law. There's a novel approach.

M0nica Sun 20-Sep-20 20:08:08

I am with MissAdventure, I think the solution is groups of police, possibly 10-20 at a time, descending on a different local shopping centre or supermarket each day and stopping everyone without a mask and anyone without a provable reason for not wearing one would be fined £10.00 on the spot, going up by £10 for each further offence up to £100.

Large extreme fines are a sign that the government is out of control. It happened during the Roman empire, when it was falling apart, emperors kept making punishments more harsh, but nobody took any notice, and the emperor could not enforce his edicts. The same in the 18th century when the crimes you could be hanged for, grew in number but became more and more trivial - you might as well be hung (for stealing) for a sheep as a lamb - .

Boris may preen himself on his knowledge of the classical world, but somethings he clearly hasn't taken on board.

hondagirl Mon 21-Sep-20 06:56:49

I think it's is necessary to have some form of punishment for those who do not abide by the rules, otherwise people are just going to ignore it. Here in Australia the fines for breaching isolation or quarantine vary from state to state, here in Queensland it's generally up to $13,000 dollars but can be up to $50,000 in some cases for corporations and even a custodial sentence. Maybe those who don't/can't pay should get a custodial sentence. There are also fines for breaching social distancing and restaurants etc can be fined substantially for breaching their Covid safe plan.