PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

1122 Pages V   1 2 3 > » 

southpaw82
Posted on: Today, 11:43


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 29,449
Joined: 2 Apr 2008
From: Not in the UK
Member No.: 18,483


QUOTE (The Rookie @ Thu, 18 Apr 2019 - 12:10) *
You then share your evidence including any witness statements (in correct format) with the court and PF, if the PF doesn't object then the statements are entered and accepted, if they do object the witness will have to attend in person or the court is unlikely to accept the evidence

Is that how it works in Scotland? Section 9 of the CJA 1967 doesn’t apply.
  Forum: Speeding and other Criminal Offences · Post Preview: #1479132 · Replies: 2 · Views: 224

southpaw82
Posted on: Yesterday, 19:06


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 29,449
Joined: 2 Apr 2008
From: Not in the UK
Member No.: 18,483


Probably of more use where the notice is addressed to a company. I doubt anything will come of it if you don’t include that information but I cannot guarantee it is legally bulletproof not to.
  Forum: Speeding and other Criminal Offences · Post Preview: #1479005 · Replies: 10 · Views: 363

southpaw82
Posted on: Yesterday, 17:51


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 29,449
Joined: 2 Apr 2008
From: Not in the UK
Member No.: 18,483


Assuming the TRO was in order, 40mph. However, potentially unenforceable due to not being adequately signposted.
  Forum: The Flame Pit · Post Preview: #1478983 · Replies: 4 · Views: 166

southpaw82
Posted on: Yesterday, 07:31


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 29,449
Joined: 2 Apr 2008
From: Not in the UK
Member No.: 18,483


QUOTE (ConfusedDaze @ Tue, 16 Apr 2019 - 22:14) *
I told him, there's no time limit for issuing a NIP for mobile phone

Or, in fact, any requirement to issue one at all.
  Forum: The Flame Pit · Post Preview: #1478835 · Replies: 11 · Views: 246

southpaw82
Posted on: Yesterday, 07:29


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 29,449
Joined: 2 Apr 2008
From: Not in the UK
Member No.: 18,483


QUOTE (ManxRed @ Mon, 15 Apr 2019 - 14:13) *
Duff, after being told he DID have to be a member of an ATA to access DVLA data (by any method, they too were using manual V888 at the time), paid for a Judicial Review, which he lost.

He was refused permission to make his judicial review, it was never argued on the merits.
  Forum: Private Parking Tickets & Clamping · Post Preview: #1478833 · Replies: 29 · Views: 642

southpaw82
Posted on: Tue, 16 Apr 2019 - 20:25


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 29,449
Joined: 2 Apr 2008
From: Not in the UK
Member No.: 18,483


This is why the old list of exceptions was a good idea. I’m exempt for life under local law, thank god.
  Forum: The Flame Pit · Post Preview: #1478777 · Replies: 9 · Views: 279

southpaw82
Posted on: Tue, 16 Apr 2019 - 16:40


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 29,449
Joined: 2 Apr 2008
From: Not in the UK
Member No.: 18,483


The court date doesn’t have to be within 6 months of the offence.
  Forum: Speeding and other Criminal Offences · Post Preview: #1478702 · Replies: 11 · Views: 543

southpaw82
Posted on: Tue, 16 Apr 2019 - 15:40


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 29,449
Joined: 2 Apr 2008
From: Not in the UK
Member No.: 18,483


QUOTE (TyrionLannister012 @ Tue, 16 Apr 2019 - 08:53) *
I can provide a witness statement from the driver however reading some other defences they have chosen not to name who the driver of the vehicle was under POFA. Should I opt for doing the same or should I tell them who the driver at the time was?

If the driver gives a witness statement then they have to give their name and address. How important is their evidence to your defence?
  Forum: Private Parking Tickets & Clamping · Post Preview: #1478660 · Replies: 34 · Views: 1,025

southpaw82
Posted on: Tue, 16 Apr 2019 - 15:35


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 29,449
Joined: 2 Apr 2008
From: Not in the UK
Member No.: 18,483


QUOTE (notmeatloaf @ Tue, 16 Apr 2019 - 12:06) *
If whoever reported it also got a description of the OP, and they took it to court, I'm not sure ignoring it would do much good. It's not like most of us have multiple people who look very similar driving their vehicle. I don't see why a witness description couldn't be used as evidence of who was driving.

That’s dicing with identification evidence, and dock IDs are frowned upon.
  Forum: Speeding and other Criminal Offences · Post Preview: #1478658 · Replies: 32 · Views: 1,684

southpaw82
Posted on: Mon, 15 Apr 2019 - 22:23


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 29,449
Joined: 2 Apr 2008
From: Not in the UK
Member No.: 18,483


QUOTE (Glacier2 @ Mon, 15 Apr 2019 - 23:22) *
Avon and Somerset have in the past insisted that any S172 reply is made on their form and nothing else.

Are they still using a combined 172/CoFP?
  Forum: The Flame Pit · Post Preview: #1478487 · Replies: 23 · Views: 410

southpaw82
Posted on: Mon, 15 Apr 2019 - 22:08


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 29,449
Joined: 2 Apr 2008
From: Not in the UK
Member No.: 18,483


QUOTE (notmeatloaf @ Mon, 15 Apr 2019 - 23:04) *
Whiteside surely says you can't bugger off somewhere less rainy and reply to speed camera tickets on your return?

IIRC, Whiteside said it was open to the court to convict on that basis, not that it must.
  Forum: The Flame Pit · Post Preview: #1478481 · Replies: 23 · Views: 410

southpaw82
Posted on: Mon, 15 Apr 2019 - 21:59


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 29,449
Joined: 2 Apr 2008
From: Not in the UK
Member No.: 18,483


QUOTE (notmeatloaf @ Mon, 15 Apr 2019 - 22:42) *
The speed camera office will no doubt know the wording of S172 off by heart


laugh.gif

QUOTE
Case law is that you must have a system in place to deal with your post whilst you are away.

Does it? Which?
  Forum: The Flame Pit · Post Preview: #1478478 · Replies: 23 · Views: 410

southpaw82
Posted on: Mon, 15 Apr 2019 - 21:15


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 29,449
Joined: 2 Apr 2008
From: Not in the UK
Member No.: 18,483


I’m not convinced about using a judgment from the Employment Appeal Tribunal (Ladak) in the county court.

Is the driver going to give you a witness statement as to the conditions of the signs on the day and that they didn’t see them?
  Forum: Private Parking Tickets & Clamping · Post Preview: #1478461 · Replies: 34 · Views: 1,025

southpaw82
Posted on: Mon, 15 Apr 2019 - 16:56


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 29,449
Joined: 2 Apr 2008
From: Not in the UK
Member No.: 18,483


Make of this what you will, though it could confirm what some have been saying on here for years. Have to get hold of the judgment when it’s released.
  Forum: News / Press Articles · Post Preview: #1478386 · Replies: 15 · Views: 301

southpaw82
Posted on: Mon, 15 Apr 2019 - 13:59


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 29,449
Joined: 2 Apr 2008
From: Not in the UK
Member No.: 18,483


Shocking that I might know what I’m doing wink.gif
  Forum: The Flame Pit · Post Preview: #1478313 · Replies: 23 · Views: 410

southpaw82
Posted on: Mon, 15 Apr 2019 - 13:59


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 29,449
Joined: 2 Apr 2008
From: Not in the UK
Member No.: 18,483


Specific page - no judge wants to be taken to a page that isn’t relevant.
  Forum: Private Parking Tickets & Clamping · Post Preview: #1478312 · Replies: 53 · Views: 1,683

southpaw82
Posted on: Mon, 15 Apr 2019 - 13:51


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 29,449
Joined: 2 Apr 2008
From: Not in the UK
Member No.: 18,483


QUOTE (DancingDad @ Mon, 15 Apr 2019 - 09:33) *
Is it?
At least in the criminal sense.
From the 1981 Forgery and Counterfeiting Act
"The offence of forgery.
A person is guilty of forgery if he makes a false instrument, with the intention that he or another shall use it to induce somebody to accept it as genuine, and by reason of so accepting it to do or not to do some act to his own or any other person’s prejudice."
Accepted that it would be a false instrument and the intent for it to be accepted as genuine is there but where is the prejudice ?

Forgery and Counterfeiting Act 1981, s 10

QUOTE
(1) Subject to subsections (2) and (4) below, for the purposes of this Part of this Act an act or omission intended to be induced is to a person’s prejudice if, and only if, it is one which, if it occurs—

(c) will be the result of his having accepted a false instrument as genuine, or a copy of a false instrument as a copy of a genuine one, in connection with his performance of any duty.
  Forum: The Flame Pit · Post Preview: #1478308 · Replies: 23 · Views: 410

southpaw82
Posted on: Mon, 15 Apr 2019 - 07:58


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 29,449
Joined: 2 Apr 2008
From: Not in the UK
Member No.: 18,483


QUOTE (Glacier2 @ Sun, 14 Apr 2019 - 23:54) *
Get your son to complete the form as your agent.


The duty is non-delegable.

QUOTE (DancingDad @ Mon, 15 Apr 2019 - 08:10) *
I'm wandering what the repercussions would be if son was to fill it in for you, sign it with a squiggle and post it.
Strictly speaking he should not sign but you are not going to be denying it, no false declaration and are the police even going to query it ?


Forgery.

QUOTE
Could pre-write and sign a covering letter.... Re speeding NIP/S172 number …Date…… (son to fill in blanks) I was the driver on the date and time given. My details are.... licence number, address etc ….. My Son has filled in the NIP with required information and signed on my behalf, please accept this letter as proof of my agreement for him to do this.... signed, dated.


Since there is no requirement to use the form, why not just use this letter as the actual response?
  Forum: The Flame Pit · Post Preview: #1478185 · Replies: 23 · Views: 410

southpaw82
Posted on: Sun, 14 Apr 2019 - 10:14


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 29,449
Joined: 2 Apr 2008
From: Not in the UK
Member No.: 18,483


QUOTE (The Rookie @ Sun, 14 Apr 2019 - 07:17) *
Erm, isn’t that what he said?

Depends on how you read it.
  Forum: The Flame Pit · Post Preview: #1478013 · Replies: 17 · Views: 349

southpaw82
Posted on: Sun, 14 Apr 2019 - 10:11


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 29,449
Joined: 2 Apr 2008
From: Not in the UK
Member No.: 18,483


QUOTE (Redivi @ Sun, 14 Apr 2019 - 04:22) *
1 The Particulars of Claim are inadequate and incoherent
They fail to make clear whether the charges for the alleged contraventions are contractual, for a breach of contract or trespass
They fail to disclose a cause of action


Even if that is the case I don’t believe it’s a defence. If no cause of action is disclosed (and that’s ultimately a matter for the court) then an application to strike out the claim and for summary judgment should be made - which can’t be done in a claim form.

QUOTE
2 Not the driver and the Trust has failed to follow the conditions of POFA to recover payment from you as the registered keeper
Notwithstanding that there are other omissions, you have the reasonable belief that the Trust failed the requirement to obtain the registered keeper's details from the DVLA on each and every occasion
Read it because it says what the Notice must contain and when it must be received
It has nothing to do with the signs


WTF is this “reasonable belief” nonsense? In a defence you simply make the assertion - “the claimant did not”.

QUOTE
A driver cannot possibly form a contract to perform an action that is forbidden


It’s a point to include if the signs reasonably convey that meaning but a court is entitled to look at the meaning of the words and could find that it’s not forbidding at all (in the sense used here).

QUOTE
6 The charge is a penalty that is not disengaged by ParkingEye v Beavis that requires that there is a public interest in the charge and that the parking company to comply with its trade association Code of Practice


Where in the judgment is compliance with a code of practice made a pre-condition to the charge not being a penalty?


  Forum: Private Parking Tickets & Clamping · Post Preview: #1478011 · Replies: 29 · Views: 642

southpaw82
Posted on: Sat, 13 Apr 2019 - 22:44


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 29,449
Joined: 2 Apr 2008
From: Not in the UK
Member No.: 18,483


QUOTE (notmeatloaf @ Sat, 13 Apr 2019 - 23:34) *
SP thanks for your advice. I didn't realise you could ask for costs without making a counter claim. I will do that instead.

Well unless I’m completely misunderstanding what you’re doing, costs are awarded to the winning party in a civil case, subject to the court’s discretion and CPR 44 & 45. You don’t counterclaim for costs.
  Forum: Private Parking Tickets & Clamping · Post Preview: #1477978 · Replies: 29 · Views: 642

southpaw82
Posted on: Sat, 13 Apr 2019 - 22:11


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 29,449
Joined: 2 Apr 2008
From: Not in the UK
Member No.: 18,483


QUOTE (Redivi @ Sat, 13 Apr 2019 - 21:24) *
Saw a report a couple of days ago that she has a meeting to decide if she should be struck off the solicitors register

I’m not sure it can be done via a meeting (unless she’s volunteering to come off), it would require a hearing before the SDT.
  Forum: News / Press Articles · Post Preview: #1477971 · Replies: 278 · Views: 16,052

southpaw82
Posted on: Sat, 13 Apr 2019 - 22:07


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 29,449
Joined: 2 Apr 2008
From: Not in the UK
Member No.: 18,483


QUOTE (Logician @ Sat, 13 Apr 2019 - 22:25) *
You will not get a CCJ for traffic matters, it is a civil remedy, not criminal.

He won’t get a CCJ for a criminal matter either.
  Forum: The Flame Pit · Post Preview: #1477969 · Replies: 17 · Views: 349

southpaw82
Posted on: Sat, 13 Apr 2019 - 22:06


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 29,449
Joined: 2 Apr 2008
From: Not in the UK
Member No.: 18,483


QUOTE (Glacier2 @ Sat, 13 Apr 2019 - 22:24) *
As regards the costs, these need to be in a counterclaim which you will have to pay the filing fee of £25 at least.

Why? You don’t counterclaim for costs, you ask for costs to be awarded if you’re successful.
  Forum: Private Parking Tickets & Clamping · Post Preview: #1477967 · Replies: 29 · Views: 642

southpaw82
Posted on: Sat, 13 Apr 2019 - 17:01


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 29,449
Joined: 2 Apr 2008
From: Not in the UK
Member No.: 18,483


QUOTE (Alphaman101 @ Sat, 13 Apr 2019 - 17:33) *
You basically responded to my question of "Why is the law the law?" by saying "Because it just is".


Well, I did explain the reason behind the law you’re enquiring about, namely s 172 of the Road Traffic Act 1988.

QUOTE
Ok then... So why not also make it an offence to self identify once in custody? Or is that another "because they just don't?"

As a general rule, criminalising someone for not incriminating themselves is a no-no (see Saunders v UK). There are, however, plenty of laws that do it - just two examples being the Insolvency Act 1986 and the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974. These laws generally fall into two types:

1. Failing to provide information, even where it self-incriminates, is an offence but any information so obtained cannot be admitted in any criminal proceedings against you - the vast majority fall into this category.

2. Provision of information is required and it’s an offence not to. The information can be used against you. This can only be done where there is a pressing social need and it’s a proportionate response (see O’Halloran & Francis v UK).

You’d never be able to pass the test in 2 for an offence of murder to make self-incrimination ECHR compliant.
  Forum: The Flame Pit · Post Preview: #1477882 · Replies: 5 · Views: 387

1122 Pages V   1 2 3 > » 

New Posts  New Replies
No New Posts  No New Replies
Hot topic  Hot Topic (New)
No new  Hot Topic (No New)
Poll  Poll (New)
No new votes  Poll (No New)
Closed  Locked Topic
Moved  Moved Topic
 

RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: Thursday, 18th April 2019 - 19:13
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.