PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice Support health workers

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

71MPH in 40MPH Zone
MasonV
post Tue, 29 Nov 2022 - 11:36
Post #1


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 14
Joined: 29 Nov 2022
Member No.: 118,447



Hi,

In August 2022, I was caught doing 71 in a 40 (variable speed limit).

I have received a NIP with the alleged offence: Exceed a variable speed limit - automatic camera device.

It was not my finest moment, and I make NO excuses. I am yet to receive an SJPN.

I just had a few questions.

Does this mean I will be charged for speeding, and not something like dangerous driving? Or could this charge change?

What is the likely outcome, as I do not plan on challenging the allegation/sentence?


Initially, I did think about getting representation to help with the letter, but the price is so high £1,000+ it would be better to use it to pay the fine etc.



Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
2 Pages V  < 1 2  
Start new topic
Replies (20 - 37)
Advertisement
post Tue, 29 Nov 2022 - 11:36
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
jfollows
post Thu, 9 Feb 2023 - 10:46
Post #21


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 234
Joined: 18 Jun 2014
From: Cheshire
Member No.: 71,339



QUOTE (MasonV @ Thu, 9 Feb 2023 - 02:41) *
QUOTE (roythebus @ Wed, 8 Feb 2023 - 23:52) *
surely if the SJPN people are considering a ban that will have to go to magistrates. See other similar threads for details.


From what I understand, it starts at magistrates anyway, and I can either go to court to defend/lessen a ban or just accept the length of any ban they impose?

You can choose to defend this in court, but it's likely that it'll be sent to court anyway even if you don't.
Although your mitigation statement will probably make little difference, if I were writing it I'd also put something about changing my approach to driving since receiving the prosecution so that you won't be doing the same again in future. In better words than this!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
The Rookie
post Thu, 9 Feb 2023 - 11:03
Post #22


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 56,198
Joined: 9 Sep 2003
From: Warwickshire
Member No.: 317



QUOTE (jfollows @ Thu, 9 Feb 2023 - 10:46) *
since receiving the prosecution

In better words than this!

Indeed....

This post has been edited by The Rookie: Thu, 9 Feb 2023 - 11:12


--------------------
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
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
MasonV
post Thu, 9 Feb 2023 - 13:23
Post #23


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 14
Joined: 29 Nov 2022
Member No.: 118,447



QUOTE (The Rookie @ Thu, 9 Feb 2023 - 08:10) *
QUOTE (MasonV @ Thu, 9 Feb 2023 - 02:41) *
From what I understand, it starts at magistrates anyway, and I can either go to court to defend/lessen a ban or just accept the length of any ban they impose?

Understanding all wrong.

The Single Justice is part of the magistrates court, but it's singular and he sits in a room all day and goes through the cases sentencing, while he can, in theory, disqualify someone this never happens (not least as the defendant would have no idea they had been banned and commit offences while waiting to be notified), so if they Single Justice considers a ban appropriate he will send the case to the full court and the defendant be invited to attend and the case 'heard' afresh (with no preconception based on the SJ sending it to them) to consider the appropriate sentence. Their is no 'acceptance' in this.



When I say acceptance, I mean, I would get a 'Notice of Disqualification'. You can accept the full disqualification and not drive from that moment or go to go court.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
The Rookie
post Thu, 9 Feb 2023 - 13:28
Post #24


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 56,198
Joined: 9 Sep 2003
From: Warwickshire
Member No.: 317



QUOTE (MasonV @ Thu, 9 Feb 2023 - 13:23) *
When I say acceptance, I mean, I would get a 'Notice of Disqualification'. You can accept the full disqualification and not drive from that moment or go to go court.

Still wrong, the notice would arrive some time after you were disqualified and had been driving illegally, the disqualification is instant and there isn't a delay until you get any letter, hence why the case will be adjourned to a court hearing on a specific date when
1/ You're encouraged to attend OR
2/ Send legal representation and not drive that day until your representative tells you the result OR
3/ Commit to not drive on that day until you know the result. With an SJPN you can't do that as you have no idea when your case will be addressed, you could be not driving for 4 weeks before there is even a hearing.


--------------------
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
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
MasonV
post Thu, 9 Feb 2023 - 13:33
Post #25


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 14
Joined: 29 Nov 2022
Member No.: 118,447



QUOTE (The Rookie @ Thu, 9 Feb 2023 - 13:28) *
QUOTE (MasonV @ Thu, 9 Feb 2023 - 13:23) *
When I say acceptance, I mean, I would get a 'Notice of Disqualification'. You can accept the full disqualification and not drive from that moment or go to go court.

Still wrong, the notice would arrive some time after you were disqualified and had been driving illegally, the disqualification is instant and there isn't a delay until you get any letter, hence why the case will be adjourned to a court hearing on a specific date when
1/ You're encouraged to attend OR
2/ Send legal representation and not drive that day until your representative tells you the result OR
3/ Commit to not drive on that day until you know the result. With an SJPN you can't do that as you have no idea when your case will be addressed, you could be not driving for 4 weeks before there is even a hearing.



This is the sort of thing I have been told by

What is a Notice of Proposed Driving Disqualification?
A Notice of Proposed Driving Disqualification is formal notification from the Court that you are at risk of a driving ban. It is the next stage following a Single Justice Procedure Notice / Postal Requisition and advises you that the Court is considering disqualification and if you wish to challenge or make representations about that, you must respond within a certain period of time. It is designed to avoid Court attendances for individuals who accept that a ban is inevitable or do not wish to challenge same. A “Notice of Proposed Driving Disqualification” essentially asks you if you object to being disqualified in your absence.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
NewJudge
post Thu, 9 Feb 2023 - 16:21
Post #26


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 4,746
Joined: 29 Oct 2008
Member No.: 23,623



QUOTE (MasonV @ Thu, 9 Feb 2023 - 13:33) *
This is the sort of thing I have been told by

What is a Notice of Proposed Driving Disqualification?
A Notice of Proposed Driving Disqualification is formal notification from the Court that you are at risk of a driving ban. It is the next stage following a Single Justice Procedure Notice / Postal Requisition and advises you that the Court is considering disqualification and if you wish to challenge or make representations about that, you must respond within a certain period of time. It is designed to avoid Court attendances for individuals who accept that a ban is inevitable or do not wish to challenge same. A “Notice of Proposed Driving Disqualification” essentially asks you if you object to being disqualified in your absence.

A Single Justice cannot, by law, disqualify you without giving you an opportunity to attend court and make representations. Section 16C of the Magistrates' Court Act:

16C Cases that cease to be tried in accordance with section 16A [The Single Justice Procedure]

(1)If a magistrates' court decides, after the accused is convicted of the offence, that it is not appropriate to try the written charge in accordance with section 16A, the court may not continue to try the charge in that way.

(2)If a magistrates' court trying a written charge in accordance with section 16A proposes, after the accused is convicted of the offence, to order the accused to be disqualified under section 34 or 35 of the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988—

(a)the court must give the accused the opportunity to make representations or further representations about the proposed disqualification, and
(b)if the accused indicates a wish to make such representations, the court may not continue to try the case in accordance with section 16A.


(3)If a magistrates' court may not continue to try a written charge in accordance with section 16A because of subsection (1) or (2), the magistrates' court must—

(a)adjourn the trial, and
(b)issue a summons directed to the accused requiring the accused to appear before a magistrates' court to be dealt with in respect of the offence.


The above legislation seems to allow the case to remain in the SJ process if the defendant does not wish to make representations (i.e. if he does not indicate such a wish under 2(b)). But quite how the court knows this until he is informed that disqualification is being considered is not clear.

What happens in practice is that if a SJ decides that disqualification should be considered, the matter comes out of the SJ procedure, the defendant is informed that disqualification is being considered and he is given a date to appear in the normal Magistrates' Court to make his representations. The notice informs him that he should not drive on or after that date until he is aware of the court's decision. If he fails to appear at that hearing he can (and usually will be) disqualified in his absence.

This post has been edited by NewJudge: Thu, 9 Feb 2023 - 16:24
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
MasonV
post Thu, 9 Feb 2023 - 16:58
Post #27


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 14
Joined: 29 Nov 2022
Member No.: 118,447



QUOTE (NewJudge @ Thu, 9 Feb 2023 - 17:21) *
QUOTE (MasonV @ Thu, 9 Feb 2023 - 13:33) *
This is the sort of thing I have been told by

What is a Notice of Proposed Driving Disqualification?
A Notice of Proposed Driving Disqualification is formal notification from the Court that you are at risk of a driving ban. It is the next stage following a Single Justice Procedure Notice / Postal Requisition and advises you that the Court is considering disqualification and if you wish to challenge or make representations about that, you must respond within a certain period of time. It is designed to avoid Court attendances for individuals who accept that a ban is inevitable or do not wish to challenge same. A “Notice of Proposed Driving Disqualification” essentially asks you if you object to being disqualified in your absence.

A Single Justice cannot, by law, disqualify you without giving you an opportunity to attend court and make representations. Section 16C of the Magistrates' Court Act:

16C Cases that cease to be tried in accordance with section 16A [The Single Justice Procedure]

(1)If a magistrates' court decides, after the accused is convicted of the offence, that it is not appropriate to try the written charge in accordance with section 16A, the court may not continue to try the charge in that way.

(2)If a magistrates' court trying a written charge in accordance with section 16A proposes, after the accused is convicted of the offence, to order the accused to be disqualified under section 34 or 35 of the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988—

(a)the court must give the accused the opportunity to make representations or further representations about the proposed disqualification, and
(b)if the accused indicates a wish to make such representations, the court may not continue to try the case in accordance with section 16A.


(3)If a magistrates' court may not continue to try a written charge in accordance with section 16A because of subsection (1) or (2), the magistrates' court must—

(a)adjourn the trial, and
(b)issue a summons directed to the accused requiring the accused to appear before a magistrates' court to be dealt with in respect of the offence.


The above legislation seems to allow the case to remain in the SJ process if the defendant does not wish to make representations (i.e. if he does not indicate such a wish under 2(b)). But quite how the court knows this until he is informed that disqualification is being considered is not clear.

What happens in practice is that if a SJ decides that disqualification should be considered, the matter comes out of the SJ procedure, the defendant is informed that disqualification is being considered and he is given a date to appear in the normal Magistrates' Court to make his representations. The notice informs him that he should not drive on or after that date until he is aware of the court's decision. If he fails to appear at that hearing he can (and usually will be) disqualified in his absence.


Yes, this is what I was getting at. To be honest, the whole thing can be quite confusing, but thanks! I could include it in my mitigation, that I am okay with disqualification?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
NewJudge
post Thu, 9 Feb 2023 - 18:11
Post #28


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 4,746
Joined: 29 Oct 2008
Member No.: 23,623



QUOTE (MasonV @ Thu, 9 Feb 2023 - 16:58) *
Yes, this is what I was getting at. To be honest, the whole thing can be quite confusing, but thanks! I could include it in my mitigation, that I am okay with disqualification?

You could. Whether it would be acted on is unlikely. Apart from the legalities, courts do not like disqualifying a driver in his absence. This is because it is preferable to have him present so that (a) he can be told exactly what it means and (b) to be sure he is aware of it. Of course that cannot be allowed to go on indefinitely and one, or perhaps two at most "invitations" is usually the most he will get before being dealt with in his absence.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
roythebus
post Thu, 9 Feb 2023 - 19:07
Post #29


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 6,963
Joined: 19 Dec 2006
From: Near Calais
Member No.: 9,683



Saying that you are ok with disqualification is meaningless, you don't have any choice in the matter, whether you like it or not. I was close to disqual about 15 years ago under totting up 9 points. I had to drive like a saint for a year or so.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
NewJudge
post Thu, 9 Feb 2023 - 19:20
Post #30


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 4,746
Joined: 29 Oct 2008
Member No.: 23,623



QUOTE (roythebus @ Thu, 9 Feb 2023 - 19:07) *
Saying that you are ok with disqualification is meaningless,...

I think what he is trying to say, roy, is that he is OK for the SJ to impose a disqualification in his absence (to save him going to court). As I explained above, he will be disqualified in his absence if he does not attend when invited anyway.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
agtlaw
post Thu, 9 Feb 2023 - 20:46
Post #31


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 47
Joined: 17 Mar 2011
Member No.: 45,185



QUOTE (NewJudge @ Thu, 9 Feb 2023 - 19:20) *
QUOTE (roythebus @ Thu, 9 Feb 2023 - 19:07) *
Saying that you are ok with disqualification is meaningless,...

I think what he is trying to say, roy, is that he is OK for the SJ to impose a disqualification in his absence (to save him going to court). As I explained above, he will be disqualified in his absence if he does not attend when invited anyway.

Your explanation was wrong. If it were legal advice then it would be incompetent advice.

OP has read the guidance notes, he is absolutely correct.

Google notice of proposed driving disqualification.

Google courtroom 77.

OP, get proper legal advice from a qualified professional. Legal walts on a forum won’t help you.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
southpaw82
post Thu, 9 Feb 2023 - 21:25
Post #32


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 33,610
Joined: 2 Apr 2008
From: Not in the UK
Member No.: 18,483



QUOTE (agtlaw @ Thu, 9 Feb 2023 - 20:46) *
OP, get proper legal advice from a qualified professional. Legal walts on a forum won’t help you.

Bit harsh?


--------------------
Moderator

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
cp8759
post Thu, 9 Feb 2023 - 22:34
Post #33


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 38,006
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



QUOTE (agtlaw @ Thu, 9 Feb 2023 - 20:46) *
OP, get proper legal advice from a qualified professional. Legal walts on a forum won’t help you.

What do you think a solicitor could add that would warrant the additional cost? We've heard of people paying almost £2k and it is highly unlikely that a lawyer would save the client that much, even if we take into account the cost of taxis and public transport while a ban is being served.


--------------------
If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
MasonV
post Fri, 10 Feb 2023 - 02:16
Post #34


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 14
Joined: 29 Nov 2022
Member No.: 118,447



QUOTE (NewJudge @ Thu, 9 Feb 2023 - 20:20) *
QUOTE (roythebus @ Thu, 9 Feb 2023 - 19:07) *
Saying that you are ok with disqualification is meaningless,...

I think what he is trying to say, roy, is that he is OK for the SJ to impose a disqualification in his absence (to save him going to court). As I explained above, he will be disqualified in his absence if he does not attend when invited anyway.


Precisely. I read someone else's case on here, and they were sent the notice and chose to fight it because they did not want to be disqualified, otherwise, they would have not been able to drive after a certain date, and that would be that. I do not intend on getting a lawyer, that will only add to the cost of things, the fees were so high.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
MasonV
post Fri, 10 Mar 2023 - 10:18
Post #35


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 14
Joined: 29 Nov 2022
Member No.: 118,447



Just to update everyone, in the end, I pleaded guilty, and got 6 points and a £600 fine.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
jfollows
post Fri, 10 Mar 2023 - 10:30
Post #36


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 234
Joined: 18 Jun 2014
From: Cheshire
Member No.: 71,339



QUOTE (MasonV @ Fri, 10 Mar 2023 - 10:18) *
Just to update everyone, in the end, I pleaded guilty, and got 6 points and a £600 fine.

Thank you for letting us all know the outcome.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
The Rookie
post Fri, 10 Mar 2023 - 11:05
Post #37


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 56,198
Joined: 9 Sep 2003
From: Warwickshire
Member No.: 317



Not too bad a result as a disqualification was a distinct possibility.


--------------------
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
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
MasonV
post Fri, 10 Mar 2023 - 13:57
Post #38


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 14
Joined: 29 Nov 2022
Member No.: 118,447



Yes, I was half-expecting that to be the case, part of me thinks it's because they have many cases or not enough time and just wanted to get it over with.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

2 Pages V  < 1 2
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: Friday, 29th March 2024 - 02:35
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.
IPS Driver Error

IPS Driver Error

There appears to be an error with the database.
You can try to refresh the page by clicking here