Leicestershire Live tells me:

Under British law, drivers could be hit with a maximum fine of £5,000 if they are caught driving through a puddle which causes a pedestrian to be splashed.

It is illegal to splash a pedestrian with water from the road while driving your car and you could also be slapped with a public order offence if you are seen to deliberately drive through puddles to target pedestrians.

I have long held the opinion that there are drivers whose intention is to ensure that those walking or standing adjacent to puddles are soaked as a result of their vehicles entering these expanses of water with the perpertrators erupting into classroom titters or convulsed with chortles.

Edited by Willo (23 Dec 2019 4.06pm)

Some simple questions?

Do you understand the concept of interglacial periods?

Do you understand that these events are caused by
fluctuations in Earth's orbit around the Sun?

Do you understand that global warming is inevitable during these periods?

Do you understand that questioning the extent to which humans have affected this natural cycle is not denying climate change?

Did you know that the last interglacial period about 125000 years ago, had temperatures that were at least as hot as today?

I readily admit that I don't have a particular distaste for Traffic Wardens, concluding that they are merely carrying out their duties as per their job specification and acting within certain agreed parameters.
In general if drivers have a FPN affixed to their windscreen they deserve it, although I accept there can be extenuating circumstances.They have to brave the elements in the course of their work so I suspect a further 'Shower' from a roadside puddle might not be too concerning for them!

Sadly I'm paye so not in that league.
I have been a gas engineer for 30 years.
Did the first round of ACOP then corgi now gas safe.
When ppm is used as an argument I know it's all bollox.
The Calirific value of gas can change the emissions from a boiler on the co2 emissions.
Much like any fossil fuel.
Solid and liquid have a different identity of CV but along the same.
Where were these readings taken.
Over what period.
What time of year.
It is all relevant.
I havent denied climate change.
What I question is our input against a cyclical change which is probably millenniums.
Do you see how you maple dont budge but I am prepared to admit we may, it's the amount that I question.
Just prove it without telling me you would notice 65 grains of sugar missing from a bag.
That's probably the difference on the atmosphere in the last few eons.
The bag being our atmosphere and the grains being the change.
Also anyone like me who questions the validity of a dead planet in 10 years is immediately ostracized and put to the sword.

As this was based on the difference between the earnings of climate scientists and gas engineers, it depends on how much you think a jobbing Professor gets paid