Forum menu
That's quite a fine. Assume drink driving fines are now a factor of your weekly earnings but without the limit like the speeding fines.
I'm not sure I've ever watched a whole Ant and Dec TV show but assume from the snipits I've seen that his USP as a presenter is jovial and care-free scamp. Not sure how you'd carry that off to the general public with that as your calling card.
£86,000 is a lot of black cabs/Ubers/chauffeured limos gormless ****ing tight fisted idiot! Why anyone feels the need to drink and drive in London is beyond me.
£86,000 fine and 20 month ban apparently. Shame that money couldn't be put to good use somewhere.
Not a bad result for him all things considered, it's a big lump of cash (which will end up in the public purse eventually) but I doubt it'll put a dent in him, he's worth a fortune (£30m+ apparently) so the fine and getting a driver isn't going to break him, his divorce will cost him a LOT more.
The like of the Sun and for that matter Pop Bitch will do okay out of it. At this point I'm not sure which is more full of shit.
If he can get clean and sort his head out he'll be back on our screens with another £10m contract in his back pockets by the end of 2019. All things considered no one who matters seems to have the knives out for him and he seems to be as beloved by his industry as ITV viewers.
For a man of his wealth the fine is fairly small and not really much of a penalty. I would have thought something that takes his time, probably a lot of community service would be more appropriate.
£86,000 fine
In perspective, 5 days pay.
In perspective, 5 days pay.
I wonder how that is calculated - he only works 1 day a week for 3 months and then 7 days a week for 3 weeks of the year. 😉
I would have thought something that takes his time, probably a lot of community service would be more appropriate.
This. Sentence (fine rather than community service) seems lenient considering the nature of the accident.
As an aside, his income (presumably mainly from shows - and he says it's nett) gives a bit of perspective to BBC salaries.
as ever. the sentencing council guidelines are useful to see how he got what he did:
75 microgrammes of alcohol in 100 millilitres of breath puts him in the third division, with a 17-22mth ban range and a Band C fine.
Band C fine starting point of 150% of weekly income +/- 25% based on mitigation/aggravation.
However, in the definition of relevant weekly income, there is no help in calculating what that would be if you have very lumpy income, so one must assume that his legal advisors submitted something based on 1/52 of his yearly contract income.
Interestingly:
High income offenders
Where the offender is in receipt of very high income, a fine based on a proportion of relevant weekly income may be disproportionately high when compared with the seriousness of the offence. In such cases, the court should adjust the fine to an appropriate level; as a general indication, in most cases the fine for a first time offender pleading not guilty should not exceed 75 per cent of the maximum fine. In the case of fines which are unlimited the court should decide the appropriate level with the guidance of the legal adviser.
But it's not clear whether there was any adjustment in this case.
note that the sentencing guideline is for a "low level community order"
https://www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk/droppable/item/community-orders-table/
Offences only just cross community order threshold, where the seriousness of the offence or the nature of the offender’s record means that a discharge or fine is inappropriate
In general, only one requirement will be appropriate and the length may be curtailed if additional requirements are necessary
Suitable requirements might include:
Any appropriate rehabilitative requirement(s)
40 – 80 hours of unpaid work
Curfew requirement for example up to 16 hours per day for a few weeks
Exclusion requirement, for a few months
Prohibited activity requirement
Attendance centre requirement (where available)
I imagine the judge accepted some kind of promise/demonstration of attendance at a drink problem program under the "rehabilitative requirements" label.
oh look! the post editor machine can't handle urls without *********-up the thread?! There's a surprise. 🙄
Seems like a decent fine, the idiots who drink drive won’t understand the method of calculation so they’ll be under the impression the fine amount is based on the judges attitude at the time.. hope it’s reported that way.. the ban length is the important piece of information here though. That’s lengthy, not disproportionate IMO, whether he lives in London or not that’s quite a long time to be unable to pop in the car to go shopping or pick your mother up.
Using a driver will be a PITA, assume he will be relying on Uber or Black Cabs too, waiting for someone to come pick you up is proper annoying and time consuming.. delays in achieving destination too. Which all things considered will make him think twice when he returns to driving.
Community service, well that would have lead to the media following him around taking pictures of him with kids or picking litter and that’s not fair. He’s been hounded already, pleaded guilty, taken the fine and ban and is now back in rehabilitation and that IMO should be the last we hear of his sorrows.
I’m not a huge fan of him or his sidekick, but when on the telly they do bring a lot of joy to the home bound and bored families of this island.
If he renounces publicly his actions and accepts his sentence then I’d have a lot more respect for him, and I hope he does indeed stand up and make some official comment. Maybe then the media will get off his back and let him deal with his personal issues in private.
£86,000 is a lot of black cabs/Ubers/chauffeured limos gormless **** tight fisted idiot! Why anyone feels the need to drink and drive in London is beyond me.
It wasn't the money, he was supposedly in recovery and his Mum wanted him to drive somewhere and he didn't want to admit to her he was drinking again. They had a massive barney after the crash.
Using a driver will be a PITA,
It's not really going to be a PITA though is it when your worth or earning millions.
I had to do a 2 month job just off Oxford Street Last year, the small road round the back of the building always had a que of Rolls Royces sat on the double yellows with the drivers in them 'waiting' for their employers who were presumably shopping or working. If you can afford a full time driver (which I don't imagine is the best paid job in the world anyway) then it's definitely going to be less hassle than actually having to walk from Fortnum and Mason to the NCP.
gives a bit of perspective to BBC salaries.
They work for ITV.
If he renounces publicly his actions and accepts his sentence then I’d have a lot more respect for him, and I hope he does indeed stand up and make some official comment.
He already did.
I’ve been chauffeured in a previous job I had whilst in another country, it’s a proper PITA calling them up and waiting or them just not being where they said they would be.
YMMV
he was supposedly in recovery and his Mum wanted him to drive somewhere and he didn’t want to admit to her he was drinking again
Spineless and stupid. What a class act.
He already did.
Good for him, shows just how much I take notice of anything he says.
They work for ITV.
I think you missed my point.
Well, Ants salary has no bearing on a BBC salary, or yours, or mine so please enlighten me to your point or just admit you got a fact wrong.
I may have just missed your point i admit, but i re read your post 3 times now and maybe im just thick but i still dont see it.
Well, Ants salary has no bearing on a BBC salary, or yours, or mine so please enlighten me to your point or just admit you got a fact wrong.
Eh? What fact wrong? Just saying that after the fuss about overpaid BBC presenters a while back, that the earnings in the commercial light entertainment sector seem a lot higher, possible multiples of. Which kind of puts things in perspective.
What's my salary got to do with it?
He earns as much as they are producers too some of the shows they do are done by their own production company, he’s not just the presented. Still doesn’t do any BBC work though.
vinnyeh - Your post cam across you were having a pop at the BBC salarys whereby implication is of Ant's salary which is paid by ITV - or at least that's how it cam across to me. It could just be me though!
What’s my salary got to do with it?
My point here is that Ant's salary isn't paid by the public purse, so his salary is no more your business as mine is to you, or your salary is to me. If Ant's earning in excess of £80k pw on average I'd say well done & well negotiated by his management team, its a great success story.
Anyway, oh come on Sky news, you faked this photo, surely...
Apologies I have Energy Gel on my "e" key, gone now.
vinnyeh – Your post cam across you were having a pop at the BBC salarys whereby implication is of Ant’s salary which is paid by ITV –
No it didn’t.
He said it puts BBC salaries into perspective
Meaning they aren’t as big as people make them out to be, when you compare them to non BBC salaries, like Ant’s.
Pretty obvious what he meant I reckon
.or at least that’s how it cam across to me
.... too quick to try and pick fault maybe. ?
So, one of the biggest fines on record and still people on here aren't satisfied?
…. too quick to try and pick fault maybe. ?
Maybe. Don't start having a bash at me though or put words in my mouth, I've made several attempts to downplay his comment into my interpretation of it. How I read it is how I understand it, I'm not saying I'm not wrong.
...or just admit you got a fact wrong.
😂 👍
[i]Stoner wrote:[/i]
High income offenders
Where the offender is in receipt of very high income, a fine based on a proportion of relevant weekly income may be disproportionately high when compared with the seriousness of the offence. In such cases, the court should adjust the fine to an appropriate level; as a general indication, in most cases the fine for a first time offender pleading not guilty should not exceed 75 per cent of the maximum fine. In the case of fines which are unlimited the court should decide the appropriate level with the guidance of the legal adviser.
What a load of balls. With high income offenders, a fine based on a proportion of relevant weekly income hurts them far less than it does somebody on a normal income. The fine should be adjusted up, not down, that would make things more proportionate. Though I suspect any fine the court could get away with would just be pocket change to him.
[i]MoreCashThanDash wrote:[/i]
So, one of the biggest fines on record and still people on here aren’t satisfied?
As above, I'm not sure of the relevance of it being one of the biggest fines on record - he's doubtless one of the highest earners to be sentenced for this. I don't know what would be satisfying, but whilst it's a whopping big headline figure I doubt he will be counting the pennies to pay for it - he probably spent more on his lawyers.
It's tricky, because I don't know what the appropriate punishment is - ultimately he will be hurt far more by how it has affected his life outside the courtroom. I'm not particularly after severe punishment either - if he's properly remorseful and won't do it again then job done - it's just that the sentence will ultimately affect his life far less than the sentence handed out to most people who've done a similar offence.
He will probably get his money back many times as he sells his sad story to the tabloods and the glossy crap mags.
He did wrong, he got upset, he got banned, end of story, its not like hes a workmate or freind,he was just an overapaid, media celebrity.
agreed aracer
So, one of the biggest fines on record and still people on here aren’t satisfied?
If you look at ability to pay, it wont even make the top 50,000- many people take years to pay of their court fines and many cannot afford to. Ant will barely notice this payment as he has a disposable income that measures millions [ and wealth of a similar magnitude]