PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice Support health workers

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

773 Pages V   1 2 3 > » 

andy_foster
Posted on: Today, 11:37


Member
Group Icon

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


If Beds, Cambs and Herts have combined their SCPs, then unless one of the observations was in another force's patch, they would be dealing with the same SCP regardless.

*If* it can be shown on the balance of probabilities that it was a single continuous offence, but the SCP won't play ball, then the cheapest disposal would seem to be to take a fixed penalty, and defend the remaining allegation on the basis that the prosecution was statute barred having already complied with the fixed penalty requirements for that offence.

An SAC would usually be offered for speeds of up to 86 in a 70 limit (10% +9mph), but as there is no basis in law for that method of disposal, it would be harder to argue that you could not be prosecuted due to completing a course.

If it cannot be shown that it was a continuous offence, if a court found that the offences were committed om the same occasion, they would fine the OP for both but only award points for one.

Alternatively, if the police won't play ball, the OP could expect an offer of an SAC for one observation and a COFP for the other - although unless the timings preclude a continuous offence, that would offend my sense of justice.
  Forum: Speeding and other Criminal Offences · Post Preview: #1812123 · Replies: 6 · Views: 0

andy_foster
Posted on: Yesterday, 22:41


Member
Group Icon

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


QUOTE (Bruce18 @ Wed, 27 Mar 2024 - 22:11) *
2. Do we therefore "disagree with the witness statement" as it cites my husband as the driver?


Possibly. However, as you have seen fit not to trouble us with the contents of the statement, beyond that it "cites [your] husband as the driver" (whatever that means), who knows?

Generally the s. 172 is the "real" charge, with the speeding as either an opportunity for the accused to do a deal if he was the driver, or more cynically a consolation prize if the accused is able to defend the s. 172 but admits to being the driver in the process.

Generally speaking, the speeding charge will have no legs without evidence that the accused was driving.
  Forum: Speeding and other Criminal Offences · Post Preview: #1812069 · Replies: 21 · Views: 0

andy_foster
Posted on: Yesterday, 22:00


Member
Group Icon

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


Were you speeding throughout or did your speed drop to within the speed limit at some point between the two occasions you were recorded exceeding the speed limit?
  Forum: Speeding and other Criminal Offences · Post Preview: #1812061 · Replies: 6 · Views: 0

andy_foster
Posted on: Yesterday, 21:57


Member
Group Icon

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


1. No.
2. Yes
3. Moot


  Forum: Speeding and other Criminal Offences · Post Preview: #1812060 · Replies: 2 · Views: 0

andy_foster
Posted on: Tue, 26 Mar 2024 - 21:58


Member
Group Icon

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


If the [alleged] offence was on a Sunday, and the NIP sent by first class post 11 days later on the Thursday of the following week, it would be deemed to have been served on the Monday (second working day after posting), which would be 15 days after the date of the alleged offence.

Are your details (particularly the address) correct on your V5C? What is the date after the DocRef. No. at the bottom of page 2 of your V5C?
  Forum: Speeding and other Criminal Offences · Post Preview: #1811977 · Replies: 6 · Views: 0

andy_foster
Posted on: Mon, 25 Mar 2024 - 12:13


Member
Group Icon

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


The "rules" regarding SACs, much like the SACs themselves, have no legal basis. The police simply had the wizard wheeze that they could fund the speed camera departments by taking a cut of the course fees for referring "customers" to the SAC;s (many of which are provided by retired senior officers). They have their own internal guidelines, presumably to add an air of legitimacy and avoid a more blatent cash grab.

Unlike fixed penalties, there is no statutory restriction on prosecuting a driver for an offence for which they have taken an SAC as an alternative disposal, but it would seem ot be somewhat of an abuse of process to sell a course as an alternative to prosecution, and then prosecute anyway despite the driver complying with the "rules" for the course.

edit: There are different courses for different "types" of speeding offence, and the 3 year rules only applies to offences of the same "type" - although as the OP has chosen not to trouble us with the details, who knows?
  Forum: Speeding and other Criminal Offences · Post Preview: #1811925 · Replies: 9 · Views: 0

andy_foster
Posted on: Fri, 15 Mar 2024 - 13:27


Member
Group Icon

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


If you squint hard enough, anything is capable of transmitting and receiving data.
For example - a brick. Tie a note around it and throw it through a window. Transmitting data? Well, technically yes. Interactive communication device for the purposes of Reg 110? Don't be a tw*t.

A "dumb" mp3 player is not an interactive communication device in any rational sense. A "smart" mp3 player isn't technically a mobile phone but is covered by Reg 110.

The major difference between interactive communication devices and other potential distractions is that there is no specific offence of using other potential distractions and the detriment to the driving must be proven - either by evidencing an actual detriment (e.g wandering in and out of lane), or that the distraction was such that the driver could not have maintained proper control.
  Forum: Speeding and other Criminal Offences · Post Preview: #1811680 · Replies: 34 · Views: 1,479

andy_foster
Posted on: Thu, 14 Mar 2024 - 15:52


Member
Group Icon

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


The site operates on the principle that we take the veracity of the OP's account at face value unless it is abundantly clear that he is being economical with the truth, and advice is provided on that basis.

If you don't believe the OP, and don't think that he deserves your assistance, you are entirely free to ignore the thread.
  Forum: Speeding and other Criminal Offences · Post Preview: #1811596 · Replies: 22 · Views: 736

andy_foster
Posted on: Wed, 13 Mar 2024 - 18:04


Member
Group Icon

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


As regards s. 172 RTA 1988 - the obligation to provide the information is personal, bur performance may be delegated.

Contrary to what many of the baying mob might say, there is nothing wrong with passing the NIP to the driver to complete AS LONG AS THEY DO SO PROPERLY (and also do not assume that completing the form addressed to the company somehow satisfies their subsequent obligation to complete the form sent to them in their own name).

However, if the person to whom the notice is passed decided that completing it truthfully is not in their best interests, the addressee commits the offence of failing to provide the information - the obligation cannot be delegated. At that point, it becomes a very bad idea. Or, arguably, it was always a very bad idea, but the demonstration why it was so had not yet emerged.

The NIP will have stated in large letters that it must be completed by the addressee and not passed to the driver. That is not a legal requirement per se, but you will presumably now appreciate that it is good advice.

How the case came to be heard without the company receiving an SJPN is largely by the by, as it appears that a statutory declaration has been performed.

Perverting the course of justice requires a positive act, and intent (although I am slightly woolly on the exact nature of the intent - not that that appear relevant). On the face of it, the person who filled in the fictitious name is guilty of perverting. Operating a naive honesty system for dealing with NIPs is a long way from the threshold of perverting.

The company has been convicted of a criminal offence. It is not a recordable offence, and the company is not a natural person, so the effect of being convicted (beyond the fine, costs, etc.) is not immediately apparent. If the case has been re-opened following a statutory declaration, then the conviction will have been set aside (as if it didn't happen), but on the face of it, the company do not have a viable defence to the s. 172 charge. The closest to a viable defence would be that it had not been reasonably practicable to provide the information - but the company could easily have nominated the person on the s. 172 form, rather than passing the form to them.

Potentially, the s. 172 offence and perverting the course of justice are separate matters - unless they rely wholly on the same set of facts. The police seem more keen to investigate perverting the course of justice in relation to s. 172 responses than most offences (and the fact that the speed camera partnerships are funded from kick backs from speed awareness courses is purely coincidental). I would suggest that your M.D. would be least displeased if the company were actively assisting the police in investigating the matter.

The issue (so far, and potentially on-going) was caused by 2 factors - the policy of passing the NIP to the driver, and a driver who was the reason why the first factor is a bad idea.
  Forum: Speeding and other Criminal Offences · Post Preview: #1811438 · Replies: 4 · Views: 312

andy_foster
Posted on: Wed, 13 Mar 2024 - 17:15


Member
Group Icon

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


Would setting up such a contrived chain for the express purpose of enabling the driver to avoid criminal liability for any motoring offences constitute a positive act that tends to pervert the course of justice?
  Forum: The Flame Pit · Post Preview: #1811435 · Replies: 11 · Views: 317

andy_foster
Posted on: Wed, 13 Mar 2024 - 16:06


Member
Group Icon

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


You did not get an FPN through the post.

You have told us that you were insured at the time of the alleged offence, have proof that you were insured at the time of the alleged offence, and cannot afford to get the 6 points from the "FPN" as you would lose your licence.

And you ask if you should contest the allegation.

If you need to ask, then there is no point contesting it.
  Forum: Speeding and other Criminal Offences · Post Preview: #1811418 · Replies: 22 · Views: 736

andy_foster
Posted on: Wed, 13 Mar 2024 - 15:32


Member
Group Icon

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


QUOTE (collateral001 @ Tue, 12 Mar 2024 - 20:54) *
If this was in 50 mile temp speed limit zone, is there anything i could ask to delay there process of sending to court etc?


QUOTE (collateral001 @ Wed, 13 Mar 2024 - 15:08) *
<...> I received a final reminder on the 20/02/2024 ( on which it says i have 28 to reply in)


Don't you find that providing relevant information when asking for advice is such a hassle? Surely if the regulars here were any good, they could simply explain how the process works for any imaginable circumstance and you could pick the solution that is applicable to yours.

QUOTE
Does that mean even if there is a challenge of the cameras working properly or not etc > Since it was a temporary spped restriction - roadworks camera) i still have no challenge?


Yeah sure, why not?
  Forum: Speeding and other Criminal Offences · Post Preview: #1811408 · Replies: 21 · Views: 1,143

andy_foster
Posted on: Wed, 13 Mar 2024 - 10:04


Member
Group Icon

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


Simon, we realise that reading what is actually written before explaining why it is wrong is not really your forte. but the date in bold is clearly not the date of the speeding offence, unless 05/10/2023 was the alleged speed.
  Forum: Speeding and other Criminal Offences · Post Preview: #1811359 · Replies: 21 · Views: 1,143

andy_foster
Posted on: Wed, 13 Mar 2024 - 00:05


Member
Group Icon

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


QUOTE (StupidG01 @ Tue, 12 Mar 2024 - 23:46) *
Does anyone have recommendations for advice lines etc as I'm pretty sure solicitors etc won't wanna waste their time when there's not even a nip in play yet.


Not just solicitors.
  Forum: Speeding and other Criminal Offences · Post Preview: #1811324 · Replies: 3 · Views: 209

andy_foster
Posted on: Tue, 12 Mar 2024 - 21:32


Member
Group Icon

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


In theory, how the points came to be acquired - or more precisely anything that tends to make the offending appear to be less serious is irrelevant to an exceptional hardship "plea". That said, magistrates are [mostly] human, and it doesn't hurt to have them sympathetic, but avoid wasting their time by delving into great detail regarding irrelevant matters.

It is "exceptional hardship" not "extraordinary hardship" and "licence" (the noun" does not contain an "s" this side of the pond). Admittedly nit-picking (and spelling of licence irrelevant if reading it out rather than passing the written statement to the bench), but it helps to keep the bench on side...

Exceptional hardship is set out in subsections (1) and (4) of section 35 of the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988.

When a driver tots up to 12 relevant points, the court must ban him for [at least] 6 months unless it find that such a ban would cause exceptional hardship - in which case it can impose a shorter ban, or no ban at all.

Obviously, the intention is to punish the filthy criminal, not his innocent family. Hardship suffered by others is likely to carry more weight than hardship suffered by the filthy criminal.

Where possible have evidence to back up everything you say. Expect to be questioned on everything (although I would be concerned if the court did not immediately grasp that public transport is not going to be viable to a self-employed gardener/handyman). When offering to show documentary evidence to the court, hold it out for the usher to take "I have X here if you would like to see it", rather than "well, I've got it is my bag somewhere if you really want to see it"

Turn up smartly dressed to show respect for the court and seriousness of the situation.

2 thought experiments
1. What will you do if you lose your licence for 6 months? Could your wife drive you to your jobs? Could you employ an assistant/labourer who could drive the van and assist you on the jobs?
2. What would the most cynical magistrate suggest as a solution, and could that work - if not why not?
Hardship that the average man in the street would suffer as a result of a 6 month totting ban is by definition not exceptional. The purpose of a ban is as a punishment to deter offending. If the average man in the street would lose his job, then that in itself is not enough. He seems to have largely addressed this.
  Forum: Speeding and other Criminal Offences · Post Preview: #1811301 · Replies: 9 · Views: 346

andy_foster
Posted on: Tue, 12 Mar 2024 - 19:57


Member
Group Icon

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


For the sake of completeness, the OP ostensibly had 2 questions - whether the sneakily hidden van somehow constituted a defence, and the likely disposal.

The full answer to the first question is obvious if you understand why so many OPs ask it. The full answer is given not so much to educate the OP, but those that give the glib partial answer, including some that are IMHO "better than that".

The NIP Wizard is as much about trying to elicit the relevant information necessary in order to provide meaningful information as it is to provide advice. It is also an illustration of the adage regarding making a system "foolproof" - the bit about the V5/V5C was specifically included in order to address the number of f**ktards who were adamant that they were the RK despite not being named on the V5C, owning the vehicle, or whatever. Unfortunately the perfectly reasonable suggestion to track these people down and enclose them in a secure compound "Hunger Games" style was considered to be "unhelpful".

The ethos of the forum is that the regulars give their time freely to try to help and advise motorists facing legal issues. If the OPs lie to us, they are simply wasting our time. If an OP un uncomfortable about disclosing information on the NIP Wizard, they cam easily add a note to the effect that that particular answer should be disregarded - or alternatively, they can re-enforce the lie by stating that the driving was shared.

Using loopholes to get the best result for the motorist, is largely what we try to do, assuming that there is not a more meritorious defence. Perverting the course of justice is an entirely different kettle of fish.
  Forum: Speeding and other Criminal Offences · Post Preview: #1811286 · Replies: 24 · Views: 742

andy_foster
Posted on: Tue, 12 Mar 2024 - 16:27


Member
Group Icon

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


QUOTE
Please ensure that you enter your details into the ClearPark terminal located within reception


Is the above a term/condition?, or simply a polite request?

If it is a term/condition, is it applicable globally or just to gym members? Does Sport Direct have a "reception"?

If there is ambiguity in terms of a consumer contract, what does the CRA 2015 say?
  Forum: Private Parking Tickets & Clamping · Post Preview: #1811253 · Replies: 12 · Views: 140

andy_foster
Posted on: Tue, 12 Mar 2024 - 16:00


Member
Group Icon

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


As has been stated, there is no requirement for the van to be conspicuous.

Many years ago, Tony Blair, whilst trying to appeal to Mondeo man, said that there was, but he lied.
They did bring in rules (which no longer apply) that in order for the SCPs to retain their "operating expenses", either 85% of the camera sites had to be conspicuous, or if they weren't they could keep the money anyway if they either decided not to report themselves to themselves, or diligently did report themselves to themselves but decided that they still wanted to keep the money.
  Forum: Speeding and other Criminal Offences · Post Preview: #1811247 · Replies: 24 · Views: 742

andy_foster
Posted on: Tue, 12 Mar 2024 - 15:02


Member
Group Icon

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


If you can't remember or work out who was driving, 6 points.
If you name the driver in a timely manner, a fixed penalty (3 points, £100) would invariably be offered for up to 75 in a 50 limit.
  Forum: Speeding and other Criminal Offences · Post Preview: #1811234 · Replies: 24 · Views: 742

andy_foster
Posted on: Tue, 12 Mar 2024 - 14:33


Member
Group Icon

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


QUOTE
He was handed a 12-month prison sentence and will also face a six-month driving disqualification upon his release.


Apparently a 6 month ban to run from when he is released. Unusually this report is quite clear if you read the words. And presumably if you don't assume that sentences must necessarily run concurrently.

N.B. an 18 month ban from date of sentencing would effectively be a 15 month ban from when he is released on licence.
  Forum: News / Press Articles · Post Preview: #1811229 · Replies: 357 · Views: 248,872

andy_foster
Posted on: Tue, 12 Mar 2024 - 14:26


Member
Group Icon

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


On motorways, I often overtake in lane 1 whilst travelling at an indicated 67mph.
Whilst I have also experienced impatient drivers approaching with undue haste whilst overtaking in lane 3, whether flashing headlights, or simply sitting on my rear bumper, i have experienced members of the Middle-Lane Owners Club orders of magnitude more frequently.
  Forum: News / Press Articles · Post Preview: #1811227 · Replies: 5 · Views: 258

andy_foster
Posted on: Mon, 11 Mar 2024 - 12:46


Member
Group Icon

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


QUOTE (parallelmonogamist @ Fri, 8 Mar 2024 - 12:56) *
Gemini sent in the bailiffs, ...as their response to me appealing and not naming the driver
<...>
I waited a while and thought they'd probably be out of time or gave up, but I got a letter from some debt collectors the other day.


When did the bailiffs come round?
  Forum: Private Parking Tickets & Clamping · Post Preview: #1811101 · Replies: 8 · Views: 252

andy_foster
Posted on: Mon, 11 Mar 2024 - 11:19


Member
Group Icon

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


QUOTE (dopeteb @ Mon, 11 Mar 2024 - 10:58) *
Why aren't motorists entitled to Human Rights?


They are. However, the partially dissenting judge said that they weren't. If you want to know why, perhaps you should ask him, although I suspect that his [minority] opinion was that motoring offences aren't proper crimes, so the rights afforded to the suspect of a crime ought not to apply.
  Forum: Speeding and other Criminal Offences · Post Preview: #1811086 · Replies: 44 · Views: 1,795

andy_foster
Posted on: Sun, 10 Mar 2024 - 21:11


Member
Group Icon

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


There is usually a witness statement from a tubby at the CTO setting out the alleged facts. Much of such statements can be variously boring and irrelevant, so some OPs heroically decide to save us from such tedium by declining to bother us which the contents of such statements at all.
  Forum: Speeding and other Criminal Offences · Post Preview: #1811052 · Replies: 11 · Views: 1,181

andy_foster
Posted on: Sun, 10 Mar 2024 - 21:02


Member
Group Icon

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


Currently you have told us nothing about the incident, the alleged contravention, the signs, the notices received from the PPC, or the defence you lodged.
But you have told us that you weren't the driver - which may or may not be relevant depending on what the first notice from the PPC says and when it was sent. And whether this was included in your defence.

Other than that, Mystic Meg and Doris Stokes are both dead.
  Forum: Private Parking Tickets & Clamping · Post Preview: #1811050 · Replies: 20 · Views: 754

773 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, 28th March 2024 - 22:08
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.