PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Single Justice Procedure 86mph
Helpneeded1
post Mon, 2 Oct 2017 - 22:24
Post #1


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 7
Joined: 27 Sep 2017
Member No.: 94,241



Hello, hoping you can help.

Back in August I was pulled over by an officer that had used a hand held speed device to indicate the above speed in a national speed limit zone.

From my readings, I understand the SJP takes the place of a full court room and saves time and cost for all involved. That is, unless a disqualification is considered, when the case would then be referred to court.

I've seen that the penalties recently changed, and understand the indicated speed seems to sit on a threshold. The penalty appears to be either 4-6 points and a fine or a 7-28 day disqualification.

The whole audial has stressed me out for the five weeks it took for the SJP to arrive. I expected that the penalty would be shown at this point, but I hadn't really understood it all previously.

Whilst points, and hence increased insurance premiums as well as fines will do my family no favours, a ban would be horrendous for us, and panics me further.

I've read the witness statement from the officer. I did not realise that everything we had discussed would be used as evidence in the statement. He did caution me, but only at the end shortly before I left the vehicle. I did sign the TOR, but at that time I didn't realise I did not have to. The statement says that I accepted the speed on the display. It also says the reason I gave for the speed was "he stated that because of the vehicle he was using he didn't realise how fast he was going".

The witness statement also specifies the colour as grey, but the car is black. It wasn't especially dirty and didn't look grey.

I haven't written these details in the hope that they invalidate the offence in any way, just observations from the statement. Happy to post the statement up, if it will help with advise.

Many thanks in advance

This post has been edited by Helpneeded1: Mon, 2 Oct 2017 - 22:25
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
 
Start new topic
Replies (1 - 14)
Advertisement
post Mon, 2 Oct 2017 - 22:24
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
cp8759
post Mon, 2 Oct 2017 - 22:34
Post #2


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 4,604
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



Is there anything in the statement that you disagree with?
The problem you face is that even if he hadn't cautioned you at all, that would not invalidate his testimony as to the speed shown on the hand held device. Once he confirmed your identity, he had all the evidence he needed. Even if you had simply handed over your licence and refused to utter a single word, he would still have sufficient evidence for a speeding conviction.

Do you have any real grounds to challenge the speed alleged? If you do, the fact that you signed the TOR is neither here not there (in the sense that if you can somehow show you weren't speeding, the signed TOR does not negate your defence), but you don't seem to suggest the speed reading was incorrect.

This post has been edited by cp8759: Mon, 2 Oct 2017 - 22:34


--------------------
I am not on the "motorists's side", nor am I on the "police/CPS/council's" side, I am simply in favour of the rule of law.
No, I am not a lawyer.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Logician
post Tue, 3 Oct 2017 - 03:55
Post #3


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 11,456
Joined: 28 Mar 2010
Member No.: 36,528



Nothing you have said indicates a defence, so best just to plead guilty and hope the single justice considers that points will suffice.


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



Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
The Rookie
post Tue, 3 Oct 2017 - 06:57
Post #4


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 39,415
Joined: 9 Sep 2003
From: Warwickshire
Member No.: 317



Signing the TOR is a nicety for them, its not an admission of any sort and failing to sign wouldn't have helped you at all.

As noted above the officer had all the evidence needed to convict the driver before he stopped you and all the evidence needed to convict you once he had ID'd the driver, showing you were constructive at the scene won't help you a lot, but certainly won't make it any worse.

What speed limit? For a 60 or 70 limit the penalty from the guideline hasn't changed AT ALL, only for above 90 in a 60 or 100 in a 70 has it changed despite what the dreadful reporting in the press at the time may have suggested.


--------------------
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 8-0 PPC's
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Helpneeded1
post Sat, 7 Oct 2017 - 11:56
Post #5


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 7
Joined: 27 Sep 2017
Member No.: 94,241



Thanks all for the responses.

QUOTE (cp8759 @ Mon, 2 Oct 2017 - 23:34) *
Is there anything in the statement that you disagree with?
The problem you face is that even if he hadn't cautioned you at all, that would not invalidate his testimony as to the speed shown on the hand held device. Once he confirmed your identity, he had all the evidence he needed. Even if you had simply handed over your licence and refused to utter a single word, he would still have sufficient evidence for a speeding conviction.

Do you have any real grounds to challenge the speed alleged? If you do, the fact that you signed the TOR is neither here not there (in the sense that if you can somehow show you weren't speeding, the signed TOR does not negate your defence), but you don't seem to suggest the speed reading was incorrect.


There isn't much to disagree with, minor differences, but I guess the reading on the hand held device is what it is. Whilst I was a bit surprised the speed was as high as it was, I don't really have any grounds to suspect it's hugely inaccurate. The car accelerates relatively quickly and is quite refined, and there quite easy to be going faster than you think in only a few seconds.

QUOTE (Logician @ Tue, 3 Oct 2017 - 04:55) *
Nothing you have said indicates a defence, so best just to plead guilty and hope the single justice considers that points will suffice.


I really hope this is the case. Gutted just not even begin to cover the emotion.

QUOTE (The Rookie @ Tue, 3 Oct 2017 - 07:57) *
Signing the TOR is a nicety for them, its not an admission of any sort and failing to sign wouldn't have helped you at all.

As noted above the officer had all the evidence needed to convict the driver before he stopped you and all the evidence needed to convict you once he had ID'd the driver, showing you were constructive at the scene won't help you a lot, but certainly won't make it any worse.

What speed limit? For a 60 or 70 limit the penalty from the guideline hasn't changed AT ALL, only for above 90 in a 60 or 100 in a 70 has it changed despite what the dreadful reporting in the press at the time may have suggested.


It was a 60mph national speed limit on country roads.




Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Helpneeded1
post Sat, 7 Oct 2017 - 12:25
Post #6


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 7
Joined: 27 Sep 2017
Member No.: 94,241



I guess the next, and more important question is:

Is there anything I can say to convey how sorry I am and help the magistrate to come to the conclusion that a more lenient penalty would suffice?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
fedup2
post Sat, 7 Oct 2017 - 12:30
Post #7


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 3,343
Joined: 27 Feb 2007
Member No.: 10,873



QUOTE (Helpneeded1 @ Sat, 7 Oct 2017 - 13:25) *
I guess the next, and more important question is:

Is there anything I can say to convey how sorry I am and help the magistrate to come to the conclusion that a more lenient penalty would suffice?


Begging just ups their ego's.Theres nothing to say that wont make things worse.

Just imagine them naked and get your moneys worth..........
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jlc
post Sat, 7 Oct 2017 - 12:44
Post #8


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 28,793
Joined: 25 Aug 2011
From: With Mickey
Member No.: 49,223



QUOTE (Helpneeded1 @ Sat, 7 Oct 2017 - 13:25) *
Is there anything I can say to convey how sorry I am and help the magistrate to come to the conclusion that a more lenient penalty would suffice?

They will follow the guidelines closely - whilst there is some scope it will be between 75% and 125% of your post deduction weekly earnings. (33% discount for a guilty plea)

Costs of £85, surcharge of 10% of the fine (min £30). 5 or 6 points is most likely outcome.


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

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
Helpneeded1
post Sat, 7 Oct 2017 - 13:40
Post #9


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 7
Joined: 27 Sep 2017
Member No.: 94,241



Thanks again. That does bring us onto the topic of MC100 (statement of means form).

The letter advises you must complete and send the enclosed MC100. I assume there is also an online version to support the SJP process as this is online?

I only have until Tuesday to respond (as I was out of the country when the SJP was posted).

I'm also not too sure how to compete it (might sound daft). In reality the net income vs. outgoings are pretty similar. Both my wife and myself contribute towards joint bills, etc so I'm not sure whether I should be adding the total mortgage payment, or (as I assume) my part to the form. Wasn't sure if this was checked, etc.

I'm also not sure if the 'in vs. out' are pretty close whether this influences the magistrates decision. I.e. Favours a ban over a fine as doesn't look the flexibility to cover a fine?

Is any money that my wife has taken into consideration if it's in a joint account? This wouldn't be very fair on her. Equally we both have certain bills in each name, as seemed the best financial decision at the time, etc. However in the circumstances surrounding the speeding allegation and form requirements do not allow for this. Equally there is a single box for partners income, but this does not allow for outgoings, hence I'm unclear whether I should be completing joint or single outgoings, etc.

Possibly over thinking it, but am confused.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Helpneeded1
post Sat, 7 Oct 2017 - 14:53
Post #10


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 7
Joined: 27 Sep 2017
Member No.: 94,241



^ upon reflection I guess the form is intending to assess total household income vs. outgoings but it’s not laid out very clearly to show that.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jlc
post Sat, 7 Oct 2017 - 15:28
Post #11


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 28,793
Joined: 25 Aug 2011
From: With Mickey
Member No.: 49,223



You are over thinking it - your net income is the key input for the fine. You may have outgoings but you can't net one against the other and think you are at 'zero'.

This post has been edited by Jlc: Sat, 7 Oct 2017 - 15:42


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

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
southpaw82
post Sat, 7 Oct 2017 - 15:39
Post #12


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 28,557
Joined: 2 Apr 2008
From: Not in the UK
Member No.: 18,483



It's net income (gross - tax) that matters. Expenses are only considered if exceptional.


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


Any comments made do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon. No lawyer/client relationship should be assumed nor should any duty of care be owed.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Helpneeded1
post Sat, 7 Oct 2017 - 15:56
Post #13


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 7
Joined: 27 Sep 2017
Member No.: 94,241



Cheers guys. Why do they want employer details? ohmy.gif Really hope there is no employer contact.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
southpaw82
post Sat, 7 Oct 2017 - 18:42
Post #14


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 28,557
Joined: 2 Apr 2008
From: Not in the UK
Member No.: 18,483



In case they have to make an attachment of earnings order to enforce the fine.


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


Any comments made do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon. No lawyer/client relationship should be assumed nor should any duty of care be owed.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Helpneeded1
post Fri, 27 Oct 2017 - 18:18
Post #15


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 7
Joined: 27 Sep 2017
Member No.: 94,241



SJP returned... 5 points and £400 discounted.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

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: Wednesday, 19th September 2018 - 08:07
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.