PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice Support health workers

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Speeding and Licence not valid
Donald22
post Tue, 13 Nov 2018 - 16:35
Post #1


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 8
Joined: 13 Nov 2018
Member No.: 100,919



Hi. I'm new to this forum and hope someone can help.
I got caught speeding near Bridgwater on 13th March by a mobile camera. I was doing 46 in a temporary 30 limit (normal limit is 40). Ok, my fault. I accept I was in the wrong.
So, after I received the notice from the speed enforcement unit, I sent off my licence on the 6th of April (old green paper one) and paid the £100 fine.
To my surprise I got a letter back from the fixed penalty office saying my licence was not valid and was being returned, with the matter being left with the police.
My licence showed validation dates from 1978 to 2024. I've never had my licence suspended or withdrawn and my last speeding ticket was in 1994.
I rang the FPO who suggested I talked to DVLA. I rang them and was told they hold no details of my licence. They suggested I send them my green paper licence and they would update it to a photo licence. I did this, after photocopying my paper licence.
Next I received a letter letting me make a plea to the magistrate. I pleaded guilty to the speeding offence and not guilty to the licence offence, with mitigation as described above.
Next I received a refund of my £100 fine straight into my bank account, followed by a "Notice of new date hearing" saying my case has been adjourned to 22nd Nov (despite never having an original date), with the reason being "For the police to make checks regarding driving licence offence". The cases are the speeding and driving otherwise than in accordance with a licence...
The letter states I must attend the court.
Any help or info regarding the above very much appreciated.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
2 Pages V   1 2 >  
Start new topic
Replies (1 - 19)
Advertisement
post Tue, 13 Nov 2018 - 16:35
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
cp8759
post Tue, 13 Nov 2018 - 16:50
Post #2


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 38,006
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



Sending your paper licence was very a bad idea. If it's a valid licence it remains valid regardless of whether the DVLA have messed up their records or not. If you had it, you could just rock up to the hearing and say "I have a licence, here it is" and passed it up to the magistrates. They would only be able to convict you if they were satisfied the licence were a forgery or had been obtained by fraud, which would be virtually impossible without rather compelling evidence. There is also no requirement to replace paper licences with photocard ones, your old licence would have remained valid till 2024 had you held onto it.

However if all you have is a photocopy, your chances are not as good, but you should still plead not guilty. All you can do is attend the case management hearing and explain that the basis of your defence is that you held a valid driving licence at the relevant time, if the CPS want to pursue the case you'll be given a trial date and hopefully by then you'll have some sort of reply from DVLA.

Once the DVLA confirms the paper licence was genuine, the licence offence will be dropped.


--------------------
If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Logician
post Tue, 13 Nov 2018 - 16:56
Post #3


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 13,572
Joined: 28 Mar 2010
Member No.: 36,528



It all hinges on the true situation regarding your licence, if it was valid then there is no driving licence offence and since the reason the matter could not be dealt with by a fixed penalty is administrative difficulties and the court should sentence you at the fixed penalty rate.

Try looking up your licence on the DVLA's own system HERE. Failing that keep on at the DVLA for an explanation as to why they have no record of your licence. Even if it has been suspended or withdrawn and you have not been notified they must have a record.


--------------------



Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jlc
post Tue, 13 Nov 2018 - 17:43
Post #4


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 41,509
Joined: 25 Aug 2011
From: Planet Earth
Member No.: 49,223



You will need to remind the bench in regards to the speeding that they should consider a fixed penalty equivalent sentence as that excess will attract more points and a higher fine and costs. It seems like the guidelines should be followed to allow this - presuming the licence situation is resolved. I can dig out the exact wording later. You should not be disadvantaged all things being equal.


--------------------
RK=Registered Keeper, OP=Original Poster (You!), CoFP=Conditional Offer of Fixed Penalty, NtK=Notice to Keeper, NtD=Notice to Driver
PoFA=Protection of Freedoms Act, SAC=Safety Awareness Course, NIP=Notice of Intended Prosecution, ADR=Alternative Dispute Resolution
PPC=Private Parking Company, LBCCC=Letter Before County Court Claim, PII=Personally Identifiable Information, SAR=Subject Access Request

Private Parking - remember, they just want your money and will say almost anything to get it.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Donald22
post Tue, 13 Nov 2018 - 18:08
Post #5


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 8
Joined: 13 Nov 2018
Member No.: 100,919



Thanks guys.
I really appreciate the replies.
I've emailed DVLA asking why there was no record of my licence and I intend to ask the magistrate for the original fine / points to be given for the speeding offence.
I'll post how it goes, after I've told the grandkids that I have to leave during our break at Centre Parcs to go to court!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
The Rookie
post Tue, 13 Nov 2018 - 19:12
Post #6


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 56,198
Joined: 9 Sep 2003
From: Warwickshire
Member No.: 317



You actually appear to me to have an absolute defence to the speeding charge, you paid the CoFP amount and submitted your valid licence (on the face of it) as such the police cannot (must not) now prosecute you for that offence, it’s barred. If the court accepts your licence was valid then they should accept you are not guilty.


--------------------
There is no such thing as a law abiding motorist, just those who have been scammed and those yet to be scammed!

S172's
Rookies 1-0 Kent

Council PCN's
Rookies 1-0 Warwick
Rookies 1-0 Birmingham

PPC PCN's
Rookies 10-0 PPC's
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jlc
post Tue, 13 Nov 2018 - 19:49
Post #7


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 41,509
Joined: 25 Aug 2011
From: Planet Earth
Member No.: 49,223



That's a good point.


--------------------
RK=Registered Keeper, OP=Original Poster (You!), CoFP=Conditional Offer of Fixed Penalty, NtK=Notice to Keeper, NtD=Notice to Driver
PoFA=Protection of Freedoms Act, SAC=Safety Awareness Course, NIP=Notice of Intended Prosecution, ADR=Alternative Dispute Resolution
PPC=Private Parking Company, LBCCC=Letter Before County Court Claim, PII=Personally Identifiable Information, SAR=Subject Access Request

Private Parking - remember, they just want your money and will say almost anything to get it.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
andy_foster
post Tue, 13 Nov 2018 - 20:09
Post #8


Member
Group Icon

Group: Life Member
Posts: 24,213
Joined: 9 Sep 2004
From: Reading
Member No.: 1,624



It appears that Simon is almost correct. The effect of payment of the Fixed Penalty is provided for in s. 76(2) Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988.
The exception is is subsection (3) - where it appears to the clerk that the criminal scum would be liable to tot up - either from his licence endorsements or his driving record (ghost licence) if he does not hold a licence. IOW the validity or otherwise of the OP's licence does not appear to have any bearing on the defence to the speeding charge.


--------------------
Andy

Some people think that I make them feel stupid. To be fair, they deserve most of the credit.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Logician
post Tue, 13 Nov 2018 - 23:00
Post #9


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 13,572
Joined: 28 Mar 2010
Member No.: 36,528



QUOTE (andy_foster @ Tue, 13 Nov 2018 - 20:09) *
IOW the validity or otherwise of the OP's licence does not appear to have any bearing on the defence to the speeding charge.


But if the licence is not valid, then he has not submitted his licence, so has not complied with the conditions. Is he then a person without a licence, whose driving record needs to be examined?



--------------------



Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
The Rookie
post Wed, 14 Nov 2018 - 09:10
Post #10


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 56,198
Joined: 9 Sep 2003
From: Warwickshire
Member No.: 317



Hence why I said that if they accept he had a licence they must then clear him of the speeding, unless they choose a different set of facts for each of the two charges!


--------------------
There is no such thing as a law abiding motorist, just those who have been scammed and those yet to be scammed!

S172's
Rookies 1-0 Kent

Council PCN's
Rookies 1-0 Warwick
Rookies 1-0 Birmingham

PPC PCN's
Rookies 10-0 PPC's
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Donald22
post Wed, 14 Nov 2018 - 11:41
Post #11


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 8
Joined: 13 Nov 2018
Member No.: 100,919



Just one further point.
Thinking about it I don't see how the DVLA could send me a new full photo licence without the original licence being valid.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
The Rookie
post Wed, 14 Nov 2018 - 12:49
Post #12


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 56,198
Joined: 9 Sep 2003
From: Warwickshire
Member No.: 317



Indeed, but they may well change the details or from date.......

Unfortunately the flakey DVLA IT system has been known to lose licences and entitlements, so when you get it check the entitlements are correct.


--------------------
There is no such thing as a law abiding motorist, just those who have been scammed and those yet to be scammed!

S172's
Rookies 1-0 Kent

Council PCN's
Rookies 1-0 Warwick
Rookies 1-0 Birmingham

PPC PCN's
Rookies 10-0 PPC's
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
bill w
post Wed, 14 Nov 2018 - 13:30
Post #13


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 294
Joined: 8 Oct 2007
Member No.: 14,341



QUOTE (The Rookie @ Wed, 14 Nov 2018 - 13:49) *
Indeed, but they may well change the details or from date.......

Unfortunately the flakey DVLA IT system has been known to lose licences and entitlements, so when you get it check the entitlements are correct.



Indeed, hearsay only I know, but the (now retired) teacher of a friend of mine sent off her paper licence for a replacement, without photocopying it first.
I don't know why she sent it off, but when the replacement failed to arrive, she obviously chased it up.
DVLA informed her that they had no record of her ever having passed her test, or having had any sort of licence, and that she could no longer drive until she had successfully passed a new test.
I understand she couldn't face it, and thus sold her car and is now reliant on public transport.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Donald22
post Wed, 14 Nov 2018 - 14:04
Post #14


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 8
Joined: 13 Nov 2018
Member No.: 100,919



Bill w. That is awful. I feel so sorry for the lady being put in that position.

As far as my own case goes I've had an email back from DVLA! They say "I can confirm, there is nothing showing on our records to indicate the licence would not have been valid." They also told me to look on the back of my new photocard licence where there is a <symbol. After this symbol there is a date that indicates when the old red licence transferred to the computerised system. The date shown on mine is March 1975 and is valid until the date I'm 70.
So armed with a copy of the email I feel happier at the prospect of appearing in court, although I'd much rather not go at all!
I liked 'The Rookies' response that I could get away with the speeding fine, but I'm not sure I can see that happening.
I'm still thinking of asking for the original fine plus the 3 points and no costs as suggested by Logician.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
The Rookie
post Wed, 14 Nov 2018 - 14:48
Post #15


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 56,198
Joined: 9 Sep 2003
From: Warwickshire
Member No.: 317



QUOTE (Donald22 @ Wed, 14 Nov 2018 - 14:04) *
I liked 'The Rookies' response that I could get away with the speeding fine, but I'm not sure I can see that happening.

Why not, you complied with the requirements for accepting the CoFP, as noted in Andy F's link
QUOTE
(8)A conditional offer [F13sent to an alleged offender who is the holder of a licence] must indicate that if the following conditions are fulfilled, that is—
(a)within the period of twenty-eight days following the date on which the offer was issued, or such longer period as may be specified in the offer, the alleged offender—
(i)makes payment of the fixed penalty to [F14the appropriate person], and
(ii)where the offence to which the offer relates is an offence involving obligatory endorsement, at the same time delivers his licence and its counterpart to [F14the appropriate person], and
(b)where his licence and its counterpart are so delivered, [F14the appropriate person] is satisfied on inspecting them that, if the alleged offender were convicted of the offence, he would not be liable to be disqualified under section 35 of this Act,any liability to conviction of the offence shall be discharged.

So you have no liability to conviction for the offence of speeding. 'Its's the law'.

This is not a defence as such, as the case should never have been bought in the first place. In plain English, the Police screwed up. You paid, you sent the licence and were not liable to a disqualification for totting, as such they could either endorse as they should or by returning the licence and £100 they chose not to be able to prosecute you.

Personally I'd be using it, the law is black and white, it doesn't matter what they 'think' should happen here.

This post has been edited by The Rookie: Wed, 14 Nov 2018 - 14:52


--------------------
There is no such thing as a law abiding motorist, just those who have been scammed and those yet to be scammed!

S172's
Rookies 1-0 Kent

Council PCN's
Rookies 1-0 Warwick
Rookies 1-0 Birmingham

PPC PCN's
Rookies 10-0 PPC's
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Logician
post Wed, 14 Nov 2018 - 16:29
Post #16


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 13,572
Joined: 28 Mar 2010
Member No.: 36,528



You may have to make the point forcefully and persistently, the magistrates will be relying on their legal advisor and the legal advisor will not be at all used to the situation. If you lose, ask immediately for an appeal form.


--------------------



Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jimzzr
post Wed, 14 Nov 2018 - 19:23
Post #17


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 299
Joined: 14 Mar 2005
Member No.: 2,564



QUOTE (Donald22 @ Wed, 14 Nov 2018 - 15:04) *
Bill w. That is awful. I feel so sorry for the lady being put in that position.

As far as my own case goes I've had an email back from DVLA! They say "I can confirm, there is nothing showing on our records to indicate the licence would not have been valid." They also told me to look on the back of my new photocard licence where there is a <symbol. After this symbol there is a date that indicates when the old red licence transferred to the computerised system. The date shown on mine is March 1975 and is valid until the date I'm 70.
So armed with a copy of the email I feel happier at the prospect of appearing in court, although I'd much rather not go at all!
I liked 'The Rookies' response that I could get away with the speeding fine, but I'm not sure I can see that happening.
I'm still thinking of asking for the original fine plus the 3 points and no costs as suggested by Logician.


Someone will correct me if I'm wrong but I don't believe asking for the fine at the fixed penalty level is restricted to a not guilty plea, and so not a lot too lose by trying.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
andy_foster
post Wed, 14 Nov 2018 - 20:09
Post #18


Member
Group Icon

Group: Life Member
Posts: 24,213
Joined: 9 Sep 2004
From: Reading
Member No.: 1,624



QUOTE (Logician @ Tue, 13 Nov 2018 - 23:00) *
QUOTE (andy_foster @ Tue, 13 Nov 2018 - 20:09) *
IOW the validity or otherwise of the OP's licence does not appear to have any bearing on the defence to the speeding charge.


But if the licence is not valid, then he has not submitted his licence, so has not complied with the conditions. Is he then a person without a licence, whose driving record needs to be examined?


There is no requirement in law to submit a licence if the alleged offender is not the holder of a licence (see s. 75(8A) RTOA 1988)


--------------------
Andy

Some people think that I make them feel stupid. To be fair, they deserve most of the credit.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
NewJudge
post Wed, 14 Nov 2018 - 20:10
Post #19


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 4,746
Joined: 29 Oct 2008
Member No.: 23,623



QUOTE (Jimzzr @ Wed, 14 Nov 2018 - 19:23) *
Someone will correct me if I'm wrong but I don't believe asking for the fine at the fixed penalty level is restricted to a not guilty plea, and so not a lot too lose by trying.

I assume you mean "...I don't believe asking for the fine at the fixed penalty level is restricted to a not guilty plea"

Requesting a fixed penalty equivalent in court would not be received too well when a defendant pleads not guilty and is found guilty following a trial. When a fixed penalty is offered normally it is on the basis that the driver accepts the allegation as it stands. If he is taken to court because of circumstances unrelated to the offence that makes him unable to accept a fixed penalty offer the court may sentence him at the FP level. Pleading not guilty means he disputes some aspect of the allegation.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
andy_foster
post Wed, 14 Nov 2018 - 20:13
Post #20


Member
Group Icon

Group: Life Member
Posts: 24,213
Joined: 9 Sep 2004
From: Reading
Member No.: 1,624



QUOTE (NewJudge @ Wed, 14 Nov 2018 - 20:10) *
Pleading not guilty means he disputes some aspect of the allegation.


Not necessarily. He may well have a purely technical defence such as [respectfully] pointing out that the court have no jurisdiction to try the information as the proceedings are unlawful.

edit: I have found a candid approach such as "Your worships, I feel that I ought to apologise for running a purely technical defence, however that would be somewhat hypocritical" goes down well.

This post has been edited by andy_foster: Wed, 14 Nov 2018 - 20:16


--------------------
Andy

Some people think that I make them feel stupid. To be fair, they deserve most of the credit.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

2 Pages V   1 2 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



Advertisement

Advertise here!

RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: Thursday, 28th March 2024 - 21:02
Pepipoo uses cookies. You can find details of the cookies we use here along with links to information on how to manage them.
Please click the button to accept our cookies and hide this message. We’ll also assume that you’re happy to accept them if you continue to use the site.
IPS Driver Error

IPS Driver Error

There appears to be an error with the database.
You can try to refresh the page by clicking here