Court summons for mobile phone/not providing license Options

[Ashleigh]

Hi guys wonder if you can help out.
Last October my wife was pulled over for using her phones. She says she wasn't but that's not the current issue.
She didn't receive anything in the post until January stating she had ignore the letter. Tried to pay online but as the date has passed it wouldn't let her pay. Got in contact with the station and they reset the payment date and said to send scanned copies of the front and back of license and they would liase with the penalty people to sort. This was done over email and they were a bit vague in where to send it so assumed it was to the address in the attached ncp. So paid fine and send copies of license off and received a letter back saying they don't accept copies even though that's what was requested in the email. Emailed back to state this but never heard anything back until today with court summons for failing to produce license etc.
Any advice on what to do? We don't want to go to court and just want this sorted hence why the fine was paid and license sent off.

[Advertisement]

[BaggieBoy]

It's highly unlikely she has a court summons, more likely a Single Justice Procedure Notice. Please clarify.

[Ashleigh]

It's highly unlikely she has a court summons, more likely a Single Justice Procedure Notice. Please clarify.

Just double checked you are correct.
Anything we can do? Certainly don't want to additional cost or punishment for something we tried to put to bed months ago

[NewJudge]

What charge(s) are there on the SJPN? If she did not submit her licence it means that she did not comply with the Fixed Penalty offer (which I assume was made for the phone offence). If that is the case she will not be charged with failing to produce her licence but with the mobile phone offence.

If that is the charge she can ask the court to sentence her at the fixed penalty level due to the administrative problems which led to the court action.

This post has been edited by NewJudge: Thu, 15 Apr 2021 - 18:38

[Ashleigh]

What charge(s) are there on the SJPN? If she did not submit her licence it means that she did not comply with the Fixed Penalty offer (which I assume was made for the phone offence). If that is the case she will not be charged with failing to produce her licence but with the mobile phone offence.

If that is the charge she can ask the court to sentence her at the fixed penalty level due to the administrative problems which led to the court action.

Yes that is correct its for the phone.
Like I said she seems to have done what was asked and somethings gone wrong somewhere.
How do we ask the court to do that without paying court charges

[Logician]

You plead guilty to the offence on the correct section of the form you have been sent.

In the mitigation section she writes:

I was sent a Conditional Offer of a Fixed Penalty for this offence. Unfortunately I left it too long before trying to deal with this online and the system would not accept my payment. I emailed for advice and was told they would reset the payment date to enable me to pay. They advised me to send photocopies of each side of by driving licence, so I did that. I received an email stating that they could not accept photocopies, I replied that is what I had been instructed to send but I heard no more until the SJPN.
I have there fore been unable to accept the fixed penalty owing to administrative difficulties outside my control, and I therefore request to be sentenced at the fixed penalty rate.

Magistrates have guidance to proceed in that way. She will have to pay the fine to the court. The amount she has already paid to the fixed penalty officer will make its way back to her in the fullness of time. She must not fail to tell her insurers at the right time, either immediately or on renewal, depending on the policy.

[Ashleigh]

You plead guilty to the offence on the correct section of the form you have been sent.

In the mitigation section she writes:

I was sent a Conditional Offer of a Fixed Penalty for this offence. Unfortunately I left it too long before trying to deal with this online and the system would not accept my payment. I emailed for advice and was told they would reset the payment date to enable me to pay. They advised me to send photocopies of each side of by driving licence, so I did that. I received an email stating that they could not accept photocopies, I replied that is what I had been instructed to send but I heard no more until the SJPN.
I have there fore been unable to accept the fixed penalty owing to administrative difficulties outside my control, and I therefore request to be sentenced at the fixed penalty rate.

Magistrates have guidance to proceed in that way. She will have to pay the fine to the court. The amount she has already paid to the fixed penalty officer will make its way back to her in the fullness of time. She must not fail to tell her insurers at the right time, either immediately or on renewal, depending on the policy.

So the most likely outcome will be the 6 points and £200 to the court with the £200 we have paid so far being refunded?
Do we provide any evidence we have? We have the email chain that shows us trying to deal with it and the letter we received where they returned the scanned front and back of license we sent
Just to add we didn't receive the first pcn or whatever it is called. This was sent during the lcokdown periods so guess it went amiss or something

This post has been edited by Ashleigh: Thu, 15 Apr 2021 - 19:27

[Logician]

It will do no harm to attach a print out of the salient messages.

[disgrunt]

So to summarise,
1. you were sent a COFP which got lost in the post
2. You were sent a reminder you hadn’t accepted the COFP but by then the acceptance date had passed
3. You called the police who said you could still have the COFP if you scanned your license, emailed it in and they amended the payment date
4. You made the payment and emailed a scan of your license as requested

So it’s arguable that you have complied with the conditions of the COFP as amended by the police and confirmed by email. Therefore the prosecution is an abuse of process?

What are the more experienced members of this forums thoughts on this defence?

[Logician]

What are the more experienced members of this forums thoughts on this defence?

Do not try an abuse of process argument

[Ashleigh]

So to summarise,
1. you were sent a COFP which got lost in the post
2. You were sent a reminder you hadn’t accepted the COFP but by then the acceptance date had passed
3. You called the police who said you could still have the COFP if you scanned your license, emailed it in and they amended the payment date
4. You made the payment and emailed a scan of your license as requested

So it’s arguable that you have complied with the conditions of the COFP as amended by the police and confirmed by email. Therefore the prosecution is an abuse of process?

What are the more experienced members of this forums thoughts on this defence?

That is pretty much the gist of it. We did receive the scanned copy of the license back with a letter saying they dont accept copies also and replied to the original email asking us to do that saying what had happened and asking what we should do but never had a reply.
To be honest we just want it sorted at the original level it should of been (£200 fine and points) so just need the best way to go about it for that.

[The Rookie]

we just want it sorted at the original level it should of been (£200 fine and points) so just need the best way to go about it for that.

Post #6.

There is no guarantee they will impose a total tariff of £200, it is possible some costs or the surcharge end up on top of that, but that is your best hope.

IMO an abuse of process argument is doomed to failure and frankly ridiculous under the circumstances.

[Ashleigh]

we just want it sorted at the original level it should of been (£200 fine and points) so just need the best way to go about it for that.

Post #6.

There is no guarantee they will impose a total tariff of £200, it is possible some costs or the surcharge end up on top of that, but that is your best hope.

IMO an abuse of process argument is doomed to failure and frankly ridiculous under the circumstances.

Assume points wise max will be 6? seems unfair to hit us with a bigger fine as we did try and do everything asked of us well within all time limits

[NewJudge]

Assume points wise max will be 6? seems unfair to hit us with a bigger fine as we did try and do everything asked of us well within all time limits

That is why Magistrates have guidance which says this:

Where a penalty notice could not be offered or taken up for reasons unconnected with the offence itself, such as administrative difficulties outside the control of the offender, the starting point should be a fine equivalent to the amount of the penalty and no order of costs should be imposed. The offender should not be disadvantaged by the unavailability of the penalty notice in these circumstances.

There should be no problem in persuading a Single Justice to sentence your wife at the Fixed Penalty level. Whilst the court has no discretion whether or not to impose the "Victim Surcharge" (£34) it should compensate for this by reducing the fine to £166. The only suggestion I would make is that she does not say "Unfortunately I left it too long before trying to deal with this online.." According to your opening post the delay was because the Fixed Penalty offer was not received. Saying she left it too long throws doubt on the "...administrative difficulties outside the control of the offender".

[Ashleigh]

Assume points wise max will be 6? seems unfair to hit us with a bigger fine as we did try and do everything asked of us well within all time limits

That is why Magistrates have guidance which says this:

Where a penalty notice could not be offered or taken up for reasons unconnected with the offence itself, such as administrative difficulties outside the control of the offender, the starting point should be a fine equivalent to the amount of the penalty and no order of costs should be imposed. The offender should not be disadvantaged by the unavailability of the penalty notice in these circumstances.

There should be no problem in persuading a Single Justice to sentence your wife at the Fixed Penalty level. Whilst the court has no discretion whether or not to impose the "Victim Surcharge" (£34) it should compensate for this by reducing the fine to £166. The only suggestion I would make is that she does not say "Unfortunately I left it too long before trying to deal with this online.." According to your opening post the delay was because the Fixed Penalty offer was not received. Saying she left it too long throws doubt on the "...administrative difficulties outside the control of the offender".

Thanks for you help

[The Rookie]

seems unfair to hit us with a bigger fine as we did try and do everything asked of us well within all time limits

It may seem unfair but the court are free to do just that.

It is usual to make a zero costs award (which would be £85), but it's also common to fine the £200 to which the surcharge would then be added unfortunately although more courts seem to be catching on to this and, as mentioned, fining at the FP level minus the surcharge.

[Ashleigh]

seems unfair to hit us with a bigger fine as we did try and do everything asked of us well within all time limits

It may seem unfair but the court are free to do just that.

It is usual to make a zero costs award (which would be £85), but it's also common to fine the £200 to which the surcharge would then be added unfortunately although more courts seem to be catching on to this and, as mentioned, fining at the FP level minus the surcharge.

Any idea what costs could be worst case?

[NewJudge]

Any idea what costs could be worst case?

Provided she pleads guilty, £85. The very worst scenario is that she is sentenced in accordance with the normal sentencing guidelines. This would be a third of a week's net income, a Victim Surcharge of 10% of the fine (minimum £34), £85 costs and six points (all assuming a guilty plea). But as I said, there is no reason why she should not see a fixed penalty equivalent sentence imposed.