Failed Exceptional Hardship plea, Mobile phone offence, extended ban |
Failed Exceptional Hardship plea, Mobile phone offence, extended ban |
Wed, 29 Jul 2020 - 10:07
Post
#1
|
|
Member Group: Life Member Posts: 247 Joined: 4 Mar 2016 Member No.: 82,764 |
|
|
|
Advertisement |
Wed, 29 Jul 2020 - 10:07
Post
#
|
Advertise here! |
|
|
|
Wed, 29 Jul 2020 - 10:22
Post
#2
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 56,198 Joined: 9 Sep 2003 From: Warwickshire Member No.: 317 |
Not an appeal, it was an defence (or at least an attempted one)!
Second totting ban in circa (possibly less than) 3 years (banned in 2016, this offence April 19), that takes some concerted effort! No wonder they added a couple of months, not sure whether that's for the driving offences are because of the rather inept defence. While it shouldn't strictly have a effect (well unless you make yourself appear an inveterate liar perhaps), I've always said that presenting a hopeless defence isn't going to put the bench in the right frame of mind for an EH plea when it comes to that. I do like the Judges comment QUOTE Disqualification is meant to involve hardship. None of the evidence given by Mr Taylor suggests to us there is anything even approaching the high threshold of exceptional hardship. -------------------- 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 |
|
|
Wed, 29 Jul 2020 - 10:30
Post
#3
|
|
Member Group: Life Member Posts: 247 Joined: 4 Mar 2016 Member No.: 82,764 |
|
|
|
Wed, 29 Jul 2020 - 10:41
Post
#4
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 56,198 Joined: 9 Sep 2003 From: Warwickshire Member No.: 317 |
Personally, reading between the lines, i think the case was reopened in the interests of justice and it was a simple retrial. Costs look like a typo'd simple magistrates defended trial cost of £620.
-------------------- 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 |
|
|
Wed, 29 Jul 2020 - 11:46
Post
#5
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 38,006 Joined: 3 Dec 2010 Member No.: 42,618 |
I don't think you need to read between the lines, he appealed to the Crown Court and the Crown Court dealt with it as a re-hearing, with one judge and two magistrates.
-------------------- If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
|
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: Friday, 29th March 2024 - 02:38 |