Fixed Penalty Issue, FPN letter received |
Fixed Penalty Issue, FPN letter received |
Thu, 6 Jun 2019 - 19:10
Post
#1
|
|
New Member Group: Members Posts: 5 Joined: 6 Jun 2019 Member No.: 104,180 |
I received a fixed penalty number letter today (06/06/19) letter was dated 04/06/19
The above named person was seen driving a motor vehicle registration ..... at 21:30 hours on 22/05/19 at ...... you were reported for an offence of:- Speeding - motor vehicle exceed 70 mph on a dual carriageway - manned equipment. Due to the nature of the offence the matter will now have to be referred to the magistrates court. You can expect to receive notification of this in due course. Just wondering the way forward now. I was pulled by an unmarked car which was hidden on side of the road (did not see him, no high vis etc and sat in car with the laser gun) Apparently officers that are performing speed checks must be clearly visible to the public and the target vehicle throughout the check. He indicated I was doing 96 no pics taken of the car though and told me he was going to report me for the speeding offence, also stated that it would be the usual 3 points and fine. There is no indication of what speed I was doing on the letter, Should I reply noting the 14day time rule, ask for evidence etc or just wait it out for the court summons? Currently clean licence so wondering what I might end up with, I'm thinking 6 points and a fine of 125% of my weekly wage not sure about disqualification |
|
|
Advertisement |
Thu, 6 Jun 2019 - 19:10
Post
#
|
Advertise here! |
|
|
|
Thu, 6 Jun 2019 - 19:32
Post
#2
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 33,610 Joined: 2 Apr 2008 From: Not in the UK Member No.: 18,483 |
Apparently officers that are performing speed checks must be clearly visible to the public and the target vehicle throughout the check. That’s not correct and never has been. QUOTE Should I reply noting the 14day time rule When you were stopped did they tell you that you might be prosecuted? If so, the 14 day rule is irrelevant. -------------------- 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. |
|
|
Thu, 6 Jun 2019 - 20:31
Post
#3
|
|
New Member Group: Members Posts: 5 Joined: 6 Jun 2019 Member No.: 104,180 |
The operator must be clearly visible to the public and the target vehicle throughout the check.
This is a quote from ACPO Traffic Enforcement Guidelines |
|
|
Thu, 6 Jun 2019 - 20:38
Post
#4
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 33,610 Joined: 2 Apr 2008 From: Not in the UK Member No.: 18,483 |
The operator must be clearly visible to the public and the target vehicle throughout the check. This is a quote from ACPO Traffic Enforcement Guidelines Whatever dude, you clearly know better Take it to court and use that defence, I’m sure you’ll be fine. -------------------- 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. |
|
|
Thu, 6 Jun 2019 - 20:47
Post
#5
|
|
New Member Group: Members Posts: 5 Joined: 6 Jun 2019 Member No.: 104,180 |
The officer ate the time also did not state that I might be prosecuted he stated it would be 3 points and a fine so why the letter stating court proceedings?
But in court this statement might not stand.. |
|
|
Thu, 6 Jun 2019 - 20:50
Post
#6
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 33,610 Joined: 2 Apr 2008 From: Not in the UK Member No.: 18,483 |
The officer ate the time also did not state that I might be prosecuted he stated it would be 3 points and a fine so why the letter stating court proceedings? But in court this statement might not stand.. So long as it was clear that you might be prosecuted then the requirement under s 1 Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988 has been complied with. It’s not possible to give you a definitive answer without knowing exactly what was said or, more pertinently, what evidence he would give in court. Presumably the court proceedings are because you were too fast for an FPN. -------------------- 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. |
|
|
Thu, 6 Jun 2019 - 21:00
Post
#7
|
|
New Member Group: Members Posts: 5 Joined: 6 Jun 2019 Member No.: 104,180 |
apparently the cut off for fpn is 96 so if I was doing 95 I would have got the fpn
Will see what happens over the next couple of weeks |
|
|
Thu, 6 Jun 2019 - 21:32
Post
#8
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 4,746 Joined: 29 Oct 2008 Member No.: 23,623 |
apparently the cut off for fpn is 96 so if I was doing 95 I would have got the fpn And, of course, if my uncle had boobs he'd be my aunt! Will see what happens over the next couple of weeks If this is true: Due to the nature of the offence the matter will now have to be referred to the magistrates court. You can expect to receive notification of this in due course. You can expect very little to happen in the next couple of weeks. They have six months from the date of the alleged offence to begin court action and very often take all of that. The next you will probably hear will be a "Single Justice Procedure Notice" and it may be late November before you get that. BTW the ACPO no longer exists. It was replaced by the National Police Chiefs' Council on 1st April 2015. |
|
|
Thu, 6 Jun 2019 - 23:13
Post
#9
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 13,572 Joined: 28 Mar 2010 Member No.: 36,528 |
The operator must be clearly visible to the public and the target vehicle throughout the check. This is a quote from ACPO Traffic Enforcement Guidelines Guidelines from 1993, issued by an organisation that no longer exists in respect of technology that is no longer used, were only ever guidelines and failure by the police to follow them would never have been an effective defence, so do not get your hopes up that it will be 26 years later. QUOTE The officer at the time also did not state that I might be prosecuted he stated it would be 3 points and a fine so why the letter stating court proceedings? Either the officer did not know the cut-off point for a fixed penalty or more likely he was minimising the likely consequences in the interests of avoiding a roadside confrontation, we have seen this many times. -------------------- |
|
|
Fri, 7 Jun 2019 - 03:06
Post
#10
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 56,198 Joined: 9 Sep 2003 From: Warwickshire Member No.: 317 |
I received a fixed penalty number letter today No you didn't, whatever you got it wasn't that, which perhaps calls into question your ability to recall whatever the officer said at the time. The ACPO guideline related to the safety of the officer performing the checks...... -------------------- 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 |
|
|
Fri, 7 Jun 2019 - 07:44
Post
#11
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 601 Joined: 7 May 2019 Member No.: 103,734 |
The operator must be clearly visible to the public and the target vehicle throughout the check. This is a quote from ACPO Traffic Enforcement Guidelines If you are going to quote the police's own guidance back at them you need to find one that is current. ACPO were dissolved in 2010 as I recall and in 2010 the guidance you mention had already been replaced. It is now 2019 and there is no requirement for a police officer or police staff to pre-warn drivers that their speed will be measured. Well, you shoudl be pre-warned in any case as it is quite plain that the police are allowed to measure your speed whenever they like and do so without being seen. You have and I would say were warned. |
|
|
Fri, 7 Jun 2019 - 08:14
Post
#12
|
|
New Member Group: Members Posts: 5 Joined: 6 Jun 2019 Member No.: 104,180 |
I received a fixed penalty number letter today No you didn't, whatever you got it wasn't that, which perhaps calls into question your ability to recall whatever the officer said at the time. The ACPO guideline related to the safety of the officer performing the checks...... The letter I received quoted a FIXED PENALTY NUMBER and date of OFFENCE I have not received a NIP or anything like that, I have not been issued with a NIP or A FPN. |
|
|
Fri, 7 Jun 2019 - 09:40
Post
#13
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 56,198 Joined: 9 Sep 2003 From: Warwickshire Member No.: 317 |
OK, it says what it says, the fact you didn't get an FPN is still irrelevant. Clearly it's meant as a reference.
-------------------- 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 |
|
|
Fri, 7 Jun 2019 - 10:53
Post
#14
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 13,572 Joined: 28 Mar 2010 Member No.: 36,528 |
I received a fixed penalty number letter today No you didn't, whatever you got it wasn't that, which perhaps calls into question your ability to recall whatever the officer said at the time. The ACPO guideline related to the safety of the officer performing the checks...... You did not need to be issued with a NIP since you were warned by the officer at the time that you would be considered for prosecution. What you received, whatever it called itself, was information that the offence was not appropriate for a fixed penalty, presumably because the speed was above the level at which a fixed penalty is given, so the offence will be dealt with by a court. That does not need you have to attend, proved you plead guilty it can all be done by post. If the speed is indeed 96 in a 70 limit, the guideline suggests 5 points and a fine equivalent to your net weekly income, less 33% discount for a guilty plea, plus 10% surcharge (min. £30), plus £85 costs. Do not kid yourself there is some easy way to make this go away, there isn't. -------------------- |
|
|
Fri, 7 Jun 2019 - 17:48
Post
#15
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 3,140 Joined: 19 Jun 2004 From: Surrey Member No.: 1,326 |
I'm sure someone will mention the hidden camera inside a horse box a few years ago soon, which was legal IIRC.
|
|
|
Fri, 7 Jun 2019 - 20:56
Post
#16
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 1,215 Joined: 1 Jul 2012 From: Roaming the South Member No.: 55,802 |
I'm sure someone will mention the hidden camera inside a horse box a few years ago soon, which was legal IIRC. If you insist........ There was a horse trailer used by North Wales Police to hide a speed camera in, some years ago to catch speeding motorists........ This post has been edited by SatNavSam: Fri, 7 Jun 2019 - 20:56 -------------------- |
|
|
Fri, 7 Jun 2019 - 23:29
Post
#17
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 13,572 Joined: 28 Mar 2010 Member No.: 36,528 |
And HERE it is.
-------------------- |
|
|
Sat, 8 Jun 2019 - 09:01
Post
#18
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 4,126 Joined: 31 Jan 2018 Member No.: 96,238 |
Just asking for somebody to feed them some hay
|
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: Thursday, 28th March 2024 - 19:01 |