PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice Support health workers

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Incorrect SJP issued, after after posting,phoning and emailing in S172, Incorrect SJP issued, after after posting,phoning and emailing in S172
MessiBarca
post Mon, 7 May 2018 - 20:39
Post #1


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 33
Joined: 7 May 2018
Member No.: 97,853



Hi guys

I really need your help. I've received a SJPN dated 20/04/2018. I need to respond to them by 11/05/2018 which doesn't leave me much time

I was the named driver of a vehicle that was caught speeding by a "home office type approved device" on a dual carriage way in Lancashire on 06/08/2017 travelling at 61 on a 50mph zone.

The alleged speeding offence occurred on 6th August 2017 - over 6 months ago? Is this of any relevance in my case as I have read mixed reviews on this in the last couple of hours?!

Anyway the following took place

• A S172/NIP was sent to the registered keeper of the vehicle (my mother) on 11th August 2017.

• This was followed by a reminder letter to my mother which arrived on 4/09/2017 but the actual latter was dated for the day before 03/09/17, this letter requested details of the driver at the time of the alleged offence.

• On 11/09/ 2017, I the registered keeper’s son, PHONED the Lancashire CPU advising that the original S172 had already been returned by post. They stated they had not been received the original and asked I send in the reminder. I asked whether this reminder S172 reminder could be sent by email as well to avoid any mailing issues; they stated it would need to be a document via post.

This time I took a photo of the 03/09/2017 S172 reminder before posting back (which nominated me, the son as the driver). Don't have a photo of the original s172 sent to my mother

•I PHONED the Lancashire CPU again on 26/09/2017 asking if they had received and explained this nomination had already been posted by my mother to them. They said it hadn't yet been received to so I took the email address of the lady officer I was speaking with and said to email it her and she said she would make a note on the system of this, and would note that I had phoned in to check and also of my admission I was the driver and the reminder S172 has still hasn't been received by them

• On 27/11/ 2017, the day after my phone call, they finally received the completed S172 reminder nominating me (the son) as the driver and on the same date a new S172/NIP was sent to me dated 27/09/17

•This S172/NIP was completed by me and posted on 10/10/17.

• On 19/10/ 2017 I received a reminder letter stating that no reply to the previous S172 and that a response is required within 7 days and to advise the department immediately if you have already responded - however the first S172 in my name had already been posted to them by this date on 10/10/17

•on 30/10/17 I emailed the CPU lady officer a copy of this original s172 for their information and explained I had posted this very same document already on 10/10/17

• the next day 31/10/2017, the CPU lady officer acknowledged (by an email reply) that the copy and my admission of the completed reminder but advised that this could NOT be accepted by email and that I needed to return the reminder S172 now as well

•on 01/11/2017 - reminder s172 completed and posted back.

• Just to be sure they received the s172, I emailed again on 09/11/17 enquiring whether if this had been received but was told it hadn't been received again! They asked when it had been posted and if anything else was inside the envelope.

• I waited a few days and emailed again on 15/11/ 2017 to check asking for an update, explained nothing was in the envelope but did NOT receive any reply of any sorts from the CPU lady officer

*regrettably I didn't send the s172 documents back with special or signed for delivery - from what I can recollect it was a second class stamp and I think I got proof of postage but I can't find them as it's been over 6 months *

• After this I received the SJPN in the post dated 20/04/18 stating ONE CHARGE " 1. Fail to give information relating to the ID of the driver / rider of a vehicle when required" - NO OTHER charges are listed

Please advice on how best to deal with this as the initial charge in my opinion is incorrect? It should be for speeding only.

If it goes to court am I likely to win? What are the additional charges for going to court? And how much more will it be if I lose? I'm not even sure if I'll be able to get the time off to attend a day in court? Is it a full day thing? Do we have any say on the day it occurs?

If I did plead guilty to this failing to provide ID charge on the SJPN, what's the best and worst outcome? How many points and financially how much will I get penalised approximately? As I only work part time.

I was really annoyed at receiving the SJPN especially considering the number of emails I sent so I managed to phone the CPU and get the name of the of the CPU manager. I googled her name and found the email address. I put in a written lengthy complaint explaining the above, that it was a failure on their part in receiving the posted S172s and their failure to acknowledge my S172 emails containing this my admission as an attachment was no fault of my own. I concluded the email with "With the above proofs in mind, can you cancel the incorrect single justice procedure notice with immediate effect? My admissions and emails from September to November 2017 clearly absolve me of the 'failing to provide information of the ID of the driver' charge putforth against me, when it is clearly present as an email attachment. Your failure to acknowledge my S172 admission letter and actually respond to my 15/11/2017 email with no reply of any sort is no fault of my own.

Section 5 of the 'Penalty notices – fixed penalty notices and penalty notices for disorder' from the Magistrates Sentencing Council states "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."

With the above proofs in mind, I would therefore ask you cancel the incorrect single justice procedure notice with immediate effect and given my s172 admission letter and ask the fine be given at the statutory Fixed Penalty Notice level of £100, as should have originally occurred.
I look forward to hearing from you promptly"

The CPU manager replied stating the charge will stand and the CPU are not at fault and it was my fault?! I quote "My conclusion is that it is due to your failure to provide the information in accordance with the reasonable instructions outlined on the S172 request and within the statutory timescales, which has resulted in the case proceeding to the issue of the SJP and as such, putting the Police to cost. For the above reason, the SJP notice will not be cancelled and will proceed to a court hearing. Please clearly respond to the SJP notice indicating your plea to the offence charged.

Alternatively, if you wish to formally admit to the speeding offence; the Magistrates’ can, in certain circumstances, amend the charge to that of speeding, however they will require this request in writing. However, regardless of how this case is dealt with, the Police will be making an application for a costs award at the conclusion of your case as there has been no error on their part."

I've responded asking her to clarify a few points in her email but I do not have the luxury of time to wait for a response as I need to submit the form back to them by 10/05/18 at the VERY LATEST so it reaches there on day 21 on 11/05/18.

Any help or advice would be much appreciated

This post has been edited by MessiBarca: Wed, 9 May 2018 - 09:05
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
5 Pages V   1 2 3 > »   
Start new topic
Replies (1 - 19)
Advertisement
post Mon, 7 May 2018 - 20:39
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
southpaw82
post Mon, 7 May 2018 - 20:57
Post #2


Member


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



That’s pretty confusing but what I get from it is that you knew the posted response hadn’t been received but didn’t send another (albeit it would have to be a letter, since you no longer had their form) but thought an email or verbal response would be sufficient. Is that about right?


--------------------
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
peterguk
post Mon, 7 May 2018 - 21:35
Post #3


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 13,735
Joined: 22 Oct 2007
Member No.: 14,720



Are verbal and emailed responses to a S.172 acceptable in law? I though they had to be written and signed.


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
MessiBarca
post Mon, 7 May 2018 - 21:43
Post #4


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 33
Joined: 7 May 2018
Member No.: 97,853



Hi apologies, I wrote the above in a bit of rush. I've re-written it and I hope it reads better!

This post has been edited by MessiBarca: Mon, 7 May 2018 - 23:19
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
southpaw82
post Mon, 7 May 2018 - 21:56
Post #5


Member


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



How is it their fault for not receiving your s 172 form?

The key question for me is whether an email with a scanned attachment of the signed form (if this is what you sent) constitutes an acceptable response under s 172.


--------------------
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
MessiBarca
post Mon, 7 May 2018 - 22:05
Post #6


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 33
Joined: 7 May 2018
Member No.: 97,853



How is it their fault for not receiving your s 172 form? It isn't there fault but it isn't mine either, after posting I would assume receipt within a couple of days. I emailed them on 15/11/17 asking for an update as well - no reply. Next the SJPN arrived on20/4/18

The key question for me is whether an email with a scanned attachment of the signed form (if this is what you sent) constitutes an acceptable response under s 172
They say it isn't at all, neither is my verbal admission.

If it goes to court and I lose - how much more will it cost financially? Any ideas?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
southpaw82
post Mon, 7 May 2018 - 22:09
Post #7


Member


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



So you sent them the original form in the post and a duplicate form in the post after being told the original hadn’t arrived?


--------------------
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
Jlc
post Mon, 7 May 2018 - 22:13
Post #8


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 41,506
Joined: 25 Aug 2011
From: Planet Earth
Member No.: 49,223



The form was definitely unequivocal and signed?

A contested trial is listed just over £600 costs should you be found guilty.

The offence carries 6 points.


--------------------
RK=Registered Keeper, OP=Original Poster (You!), CoFP=Conditional Offer of Fixed Penalty, NtK=Notice to Keeper, NtD=Notice to Driver
PoFA=Protection of Freedoms Act, SAC=Safety Awareness Course, NIP=Notice of Intended Prosecution, ADR=Alternative Dispute Resolution
PPC=Private Parking Company, LBCCC=Letter Before County Court Claim, PII=Personally Identifiable Information, SAR=Subject Access Request

Private Parking - remember, they just want your money and will say almost anything to get it.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
MessiBarca
post Mon, 7 May 2018 - 22:40
Post #9


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 33
Joined: 7 May 2018
Member No.: 97,853



QUOTE (southpaw82 @ Mon, 7 May 2018 - 23:09) *
So you sent them the original form in the post and a duplicate form in the post after being told the original hadn’t arrived?



Yep yep. I emailed them the original signed and completed s172 and they acknowledged it had been received but said they needed the reminder to be sent in the post as hadn't received the original but they didn't receive it

QUOTE (Jlc @ Mon, 7 May 2018 - 23:13) *
The form was definitely unequivocal and signed?

A contested trial is listed just over £600 costs should you be found guilty.

The offence carries 6 points.


6 points?! So if I plead guilty on this SJPN (even though the fail to give driver ID charge is incorrect) I will likely receive 6 points anyway? and a £2-400 fine to go with it?

QUOTE (Jlc @ Mon, 7 May 2018 - 23:13) *
The form was definitely unequivocal and signed?

A contested trial is listed just over £600 costs should you be found guilty.

The offence carries 6 points.



If I "win" the case and manage to over turn this charge, ie, get them to change the charge from failing to give Driver ID in exchange for a speeding charge guilty plea in court, then what can I expect in terms of points and court fees? Will I have to pay the victim surcharge and £85 prosecution charge regardless?

Can you guys think of any reason why they haven't included the speeding charge as well in this SJPN?? Given they acknowledged hey had received my signed emailed copy in their witness statements and my telephone submission (also the s172 postal letters which they didn't receive apparently)

Their witness statement states "I now confirm that I have checked all the relevant computer systems and although there is an email from X (me) attaching a copy of his retuned admission to the offence there is no record of the original document having been received in the CPU from the defendant and therefore, the defendant has failed to comply with their obligation under s172 of the RTA 1988"

Can I also ask, who decides on the amount of points and the fine itself following the SJPN? Is it purely decided by the courts or do the referring Lancashire constabulary have any say from now on in?

QUOTE (MessiBarca @ Mon, 7 May 2018 - 21:39) *
I was the named driver of a vehicle that was caught speeding by a "home office type approved device" on a dual carriage way in Lancashire on 06/08/2017 travelling at 61 on a 50mph zone.

The alleged speeding offence occurred on 6th August 2017 - [u]over 6 months ago? Is this of any relevance in my case as I have read mixed reviews on this in the last couple of hours?![/u]

I received the SJPN in the post dated 20/04/18 stating ONE CHARGE " 1. Fail to give information relating to the ID of the driver / rider of a vehicle when required" - NO OTHER charges are listed

Any help or advice would be much appreciated


Given the date of the offence over 6 months ago, is this 6 months rule of any concequence in this instance or is this clutching at streams


This post has been edited by MessiBarca: Mon, 7 May 2018 - 22:27
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Dwaynedouglas
post Tue, 8 May 2018 - 06:58
Post #10


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 96
Joined: 9 Nov 2016
Member No.: 88,346



QUOTE (MessiBarca @ Mon, 7 May 2018 - 23:40) *
Can you guys think of any reason why they haven't included the speeding charge as well in this SJPN??


QUOTE (MessiBarca @ Mon, 7 May 2018 - 21:39) *
The alleged speeding offence occurred on 6th August 2017 - over 6 months ago?



QUOTE (MessiBarca @ Mon, 7 May 2018 - 23:40) *
Given the date of the offence over 6 months ago, is this 6 months rule of any concequence in this instance or is this clutching at streams


It's six months since the speeding offence, but the S172 is a separate offence. Ultimately, (and there has been discussion on the exact wording on this on the forum, please correct me if I misquote) charges need to be laid before the court within 6 months, as per Magistrates’ Courts Act 1980, Section 127.

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/43/section/127


--------------------
I'm not a lawyer or legally trained, my opinion is based on my experience - follow at your own risk.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jlc
post Tue, 8 May 2018 - 07:48
Post #11


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 41,506
Joined: 25 Aug 2011
From: Planet Earth
Member No.: 49,223



As noted, any s172 offence occurs after the underlying offence (at least 1 month) as there's a period of 28 days to respond. (The 6 months limit does apply here - even later when there's a chain of replies) Resurrecting the speeding after 6 months is legally dubious too, but not unheard of - this thread may be of interest.

You have two choices, either try and 'plea bargain' the s172 offence for the underlying speeding offence but this is much harder if the offences are not dual listed - but we have seen this done; or defend the s172.

In terms of the SJP, unless you want to plead guilty to the offence (6 points, fine, insurance-bashing MS90 endorsement code, costs and surcharge) then you might be better simply asking for the matter to be dealt with in a normal court hearing. (You don't have to submit a plea for that)

You appear to have the makings of a defence to the charge but a lot will depend on convincing the bench that you did reply twice - that proof of postage would have been rather useful. As I already said, if you go to a contested trial there is the risk of losing and picking up the fine without discount (guideline 150% weekly earnings), 6 points, costs potentially exceeding £600 and a surcharge (10% of the fine, min £30).

It's quite strange why 2 pieces of post to them went missing.

You may wish to consider professional assistance as there's a lot of room to get this wrong.

This post has been edited by Jlc: Tue, 8 May 2018 - 07:50


--------------------
RK=Registered Keeper, OP=Original Poster (You!), CoFP=Conditional Offer of Fixed Penalty, NtK=Notice to Keeper, NtD=Notice to Driver
PoFA=Protection of Freedoms Act, SAC=Safety Awareness Course, NIP=Notice of Intended Prosecution, ADR=Alternative Dispute Resolution
PPC=Private Parking Company, LBCCC=Letter Before County Court Claim, PII=Personally Identifiable Information, SAR=Subject Access Request

Private Parking - remember, they just want your money and will say almost anything to get it.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
typefish
post Tue, 8 May 2018 - 08:21
Post #12


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,333
Joined: 28 Mar 2014
From: Corby
Member No.: 69,758



(removed due to inaccurate information)

This post has been edited by typefish: Tue, 8 May 2018 - 08:27
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Irksome
post Tue, 8 May 2018 - 08:48
Post #13


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 761
Joined: 16 Jun 2010
From: sw11
Member No.: 38,303



Others have raised the point - why is the emailed complete S172 response not a satisfactory response? It appears they acknowledged receipt of it; so I would have thought this could be a cast iron defence to the accusation?

Nothing I can see in S172 of the act that proscribes in what format / delivery method the response is to be made.


--------------------
PePiPoo will likely close in October due to issues beyond the control of any contributor to this forum.

You are encouraged to seek advice at https://www.ftla.uk/speeding-and-other-criminal-offences/ where the vast majority of the experts here have moved over to already.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jlc
post Tue, 8 May 2018 - 09:12
Post #14


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 41,506
Joined: 25 Aug 2011
From: Planet Earth
Member No.: 49,223



Did the letters from the Police make any reference to using an e-mail address?

The forms usually state that the form should be 'completed, signed and returned' to the postal address. However, there's no requirement to use the form provided (Jones v DPP). Given the interaction with them I'd find it hard to see why a court would agree the nomination did not meet the substance of the requirements.

A previous thread where the OP simply e-mailed only was dropped by the prosecution. (At court mind)

This post has been edited by Jlc: Tue, 8 May 2018 - 09:12


--------------------
RK=Registered Keeper, OP=Original Poster (You!), CoFP=Conditional Offer of Fixed Penalty, NtK=Notice to Keeper, NtD=Notice to Driver
PoFA=Protection of Freedoms Act, SAC=Safety Awareness Course, NIP=Notice of Intended Prosecution, ADR=Alternative Dispute Resolution
PPC=Private Parking Company, LBCCC=Letter Before County Court Claim, PII=Personally Identifiable Information, SAR=Subject Access Request

Private Parking - remember, they just want your money and will say almost anything to get it.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
MessiBarca
post Tue, 8 May 2018 - 09:54
Post #15


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 33
Joined: 7 May 2018
Member No.: 97,853



QUOTE (Dwaynedouglas @ Tue, 8 May 2018 - 07:58) *
QUOTE (MessiBarca @ Mon, 7 May 2018 - 23:40) *
Can you guys think of any reason why they haven't included the speeding charge as well in this SJPN??


QUOTE (MessiBarca @ Mon, 7 May 2018 - 21:39) *
The alleged speeding offence occurred on 6th August 2017 - over 6 months ago?



QUOTE (MessiBarca @ Mon, 7 May 2018 - 23:40) *
Given the date of the offence over 6 months ago, is this 6 months rule of any concequence in this instance or is this clutching at streams


It's six months since the speeding offence, but the S172 is a separate offence. Ultimately, (and there has been discussion on the exact wording on this on the forum, please correct me if I misquote) charges need to be laid before the court within 6 months, as per Magistrates’ Courts Act 1980, Section 127.

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/43/section/127



With the S172 being a separate offence to the speeding offence, is the S172 not bound by the fact that the offence needs to be laid to the court within 6 months as well? I can't quiet find where on your link provided it says offences needs to be laid to the court within 6 months

QUOTE (Jlc @ Tue, 8 May 2018 - 08:48) *
As noted, any s172 offence occurs after the underlying offence (at least 1 month) as there's a period of 28 days to respond. (The 6 months limit does apply here - even later when there's a chain of replies) Resurrecting the speeding after 6 months is legally dubious too, but not unheard of - this thread may be of interest.

In terms of the SJP, unless you want to plead guilty to the offence (6 points, fine, insurance-bashing MS90 endorsement code, costs and surcharge) then you might be better simply asking for the matter to be dealt with in a normal court hearing. (You don't have to submit a plea for that)


You may wish to consider professional assistance as there's a lot of room to get this wrong.


Thank you for the advice, im a bit new to all this and I'm not sure what you mean by you "might be better simply asking for the matter to be dealt with in a normal court hearing. (You don't have to submit a plea for that)" how would I do this? When you say I don't have to submit a plea for this does that mean I don't fill out the SJP and not post it back to them??

Anyone in particular you can recommend for professional assistance and any ideas on how much this may cost?

QUOTE (Irksome @ Tue, 8 May 2018 - 09:48) *
Others have raised the point - why is the emailed complete S172 response not a satisfactory response? It appears they acknowledged receipt of it; so I would have thought this could be a cast iron defence to the accusation?

Nothing I can see in S172 of the act that proscribes in what format / delivery method the response is to be made.


This was her reply when I submitted the email copy to make sure they had a copy of it at least before the deadline

On 31 Oct 2017, at 08:24, Cooper wrote:

Good Morning ,

Thank you for your email concerning your S172 admission.

I have noted your comments that the document was posted back to Central Processing on 10th October 2017. However, this has not been received. As the section 172 is a legal document we are unable to accept your admission from the photograph. I must therefore ask you to complete the reminder letter you have received.

Regards

Her name
Lancashire Constabulary


This was reiterated by the CPU manager in her email that verbal and email copies are unacceptable to them

QUOTE (Jlc @ Tue, 8 May 2018 - 10:12) *
Did the letters from the Police make any reference to using an e-mail address?

The forms usually state that the form should be 'completed, signed and returned' to the postal address. However, there's no requirement to use the form provided (Jones v DPP). Given the interaction with them I'd find it hard to see why a court would agree the nomination did not meet the substance of the requirements.

A previous thread where the OP simply e-mailed only was dropped by the prosecution. (At court mind)



What does DPP stand for?

Also OP - can you provide a link to the thread for where OP simply e-mailed only was dropped by the prosecution?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Dwaynedouglas
post Tue, 8 May 2018 - 10:00
Post #16


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 96
Joined: 9 Nov 2016
Member No.: 88,346



QUOTE (MessiBarca @ Tue, 8 May 2018 - 10:54) *
QUOTE (Dwaynedouglas @ Tue, 8 May 2018 - 07:58) *
QUOTE (MessiBarca @ Mon, 7 May 2018 - 23:40) *
Can you guys think of any reason why they haven't included the speeding charge as well in this SJPN??


QUOTE (MessiBarca @ Mon, 7 May 2018 - 21:39) *
The alleged speeding offence occurred on 6th August 2017 - over 6 months ago?



QUOTE (MessiBarca @ Mon, 7 May 2018 - 23:40) *
Given the date of the offence over 6 months ago, is this 6 months rule of any concequence in this instance or is this clutching at streams


It's six months since the speeding offence, but the S172 is a separate offence. Ultimately, (and there has been discussion on the exact wording on this on the forum, please correct me if I misquote) charges need to be laid before the court within 6 months, as per Magistrates’ Courts Act 1980, Section 127.

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/43/section/127



With the S172 being a separate offence to the speeding offence, is the S172 not bound by the fact that the offence needs to be laid to the court within 6 months as well? I can't quiet find where on your link provided it says offences needs to be laid to the court within 6 months




"127 Limitation of time.
(1)Except as otherwise expressly provided by any enactment and subject to subsection (2) below, a magistrates’ court shall not try an information or hear a complaint unless the information was laid, or the complaint made, within 6 months from the time when the offence was committed, or the matter of complaint arose."


--------------------
I'm not a lawyer or legally trained, my opinion is based on my experience - follow at your own risk.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
MessiBarca
post Tue, 8 May 2018 - 10:32
Post #17


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 33
Joined: 7 May 2018
Member No.: 97,853



Hi all thanks for the input so far - really appreciate it.

Given my time constraints, I need to get the SJP to then by Friday this week 11/5/18... I am looking to plead not guilty given everything. With this in mind can you provide any advice on the following titles on the forms:

"I am pleading not guilty" on the information for the courts - Its only a small box and I need to make what I write as concise as possible I assume. I feel magistrates will not really take or have the time to look at my whole case as I've written on here or take all of it in to consideration so no point in printing the whole thing out and attaching it

Also what should I put as my "objections" to the "prosecution witness statements" box? Any suggestions on how to word this given the scenario? Again the box isn't the largest to write in

Any help would be greatly appreciated... I'm incredibly stressed about this to be honest sad.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jlc
post Tue, 8 May 2018 - 11:01
Post #18


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 41,506
Joined: 25 Aug 2011
From: Planet Earth
Member No.: 49,223



QUOTE (MessiBarca @ Tue, 8 May 2018 - 10:54) *
What does DPP stand for?

Director of Public Prosecutions. Here.

QUOTE (MessiBarca @ Tue, 8 May 2018 - 10:54) *
im a bit new to all this and I'm not sure what you mean by you "might be better simply asking for the matter to be dealt with in a normal court hearing. (You don't have to submit a plea for that)" how would I do this? When you say I don't have to submit a plea for this does that mean I don't fill out the SJP and not post it back to them??

Simply submitting a not guilty plea will refer the matter to a court hearing anyway. Alternatively, you can simply 'reject' the SJPN and explicitly ask for the matter to be heard at court.

QUOTE (MessiBarca @ Tue, 8 May 2018 - 10:54) *
With the S172 being a separate offence to the speeding offence, is the S172 not bound by the fact that the offence needs to be laid to the court within 6 months as well?

Absolutely, same limitation period. The offence is considered as occurring once the 28 days have expired from the date the notice was given. (Although looking at the dates again this would have been 27 October - so any proceedings would need to commence by 27 April which seems to be the case)

QUOTE (MessiBarca @ Tue, 8 May 2018 - 10:54) *
Anyone in particular you can recommend for professional assistance and any ideas on how much this may cost?

See here for an example.

QUOTE (MessiBarca @ Tue, 8 May 2018 - 10:54) *
can you provide a link to the thread for where OP simply e-mailed only was dropped by the prosecution?

Here.


--------------------
RK=Registered Keeper, OP=Original Poster (You!), CoFP=Conditional Offer of Fixed Penalty, NtK=Notice to Keeper, NtD=Notice to Driver
PoFA=Protection of Freedoms Act, SAC=Safety Awareness Course, NIP=Notice of Intended Prosecution, ADR=Alternative Dispute Resolution
PPC=Private Parking Company, LBCCC=Letter Before County Court Claim, PII=Personally Identifiable Information, SAR=Subject Access Request

Private Parking - remember, they just want your money and will say almost anything to get it.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
MessiBarca
post Tue, 8 May 2018 - 15:39
Post #19


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 33
Joined: 7 May 2018
Member No.: 97,853



QUOTE (MessiBarca @ Tue, 8 May 2018 - 11:32) *
Hi all thanks for the input so far - really appreciate it.

Given my time constraints, I need to get the SJP to then by Friday this week 11/5/18... I am looking to plead not guilty given everything. With this in mind can you provide any advice on the following titles on the forms:

"I am pleading not guilty" on the information for the courts - Its only a small box and I need to make what I write as concise as possible I assume. I feel magistrates will not really take or have the time to look at my whole case as I've written on here or take all of it in to consideration so no point in printing the whole thing out and attaching it


This is what I am looking to attach with the SJP

I am pleading ‘not guilty’ because:

The single charge put forth in the single justice procedure notice (SJP) of ‘failing to give information relating to the identification of the driver when required’ is completely incorrect for the reasons highlighted below

I had already submitted my S172 submission to the CPU by Royal mail postal service as explained in my emails and phone calls to the CPU.

Three separate emails were sent to the CPU concerning this S172 admission, namely to a X of the CPU as she explained over our telephone conversation that the CPU had apparently not received my original S172 admission due to the failings of Royal Mail.

Therefore as requested at the time, an email was also sent to the CPU on 30/10/2017 at 22.55 contains 2 attachments showing a completed copy of the 'Notice of Intended prosecution/S172' letter, clearly shows my details and admission. This was unequivocally signed, dated and also posted to the CPU by me earlier that month on 10/10/2017 and is visible on the email attachments sent. I then received a reply to this email from the CPU at 12.38 on 09/11/2017 which shows they had indeed received my S172 email attachments thus proving my S172 admission of being the rider of the vehicle. This alone should absolve me of the charge of failing to give information relating to the rider of the vehicle when required.

To add, another two follow up email were sent by me to the CPU on 9/11/2017 and 15/11/2017 asking if they had yet received the S172 admission document and an update and my email on 15/11/2017 at 15.53 was ignored by the CPU with no response. I would presume the S172 admission already be delivered 2 days after posting as legislation dictates. This alone should clear me of me of this charge, however even then I did not assume receipt and followed this up again with my second email on 15/11/2017. My email on 15/11/2017 at 15.53 was ignored by the CPU with no response. In this email I confirmed the document had already been sent over a fortnight ago and requested an update from the CPU on whether they had received the document and progress. No reply was provided by the CPU to my email and it was ignored.

After this I received the SJP in the post-dated 20/04/18 stating a single charge of "1. Fail to give information relating to the ID of the driver / rider of a vehicle when required"

My admissions and emails from September to November 2017 clearly absolve me of the 'failing to provide information of the ID of the driver' charge put forth against me, when it is clearly present as an email attachment. The CPUs failure to acknowledge my S172 admission letter and actually respond to my 15/11/2017 email with no reply of any sort to my email is no fault of my own.

Section 5 of the 'Penalty notices – fixed penalty notices and penalty notices for disorder' from the Magistrates Sentencing Council states "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."

With the above in mind, I would therefore ask you strike out the incorrect single justice procedure notice with immediate effect and given my s172 admission letter, ask the fine be given at the statutory Fixed Penalty Notice level of £100, as should have originally occurred


QUOTE (MessiBarca @ Tue, 8 May 2018 - 11:32) *
Hi all thanks for the input so far - really appreciate it.

Given my time constraints, I need to get the SJP to then by Friday this week 11/5/18... I am looking to plead not guilty given everything. With this in mind can you provide any advice on the following titles on the forms:

Also what should I put as my "objections" to the "prosecution witness statements" box? Any suggestions on how to word this given the scenario? Again the box isn't the largest to write in



For the Prosecution witness statement part...

My objections are as follows.

There is no mention in the witness statement that I made written admissions to the CPU that I had indeed returned by Royal Mail post my S172 admission and this was explained to during my telephone conversation with X of the CPU on 25/09/2017 in respect of the S172 document. There is no mention of this telephone conversation

The witness statement also fails to mention the fact that there was a clear verbal admission by me on the telephone to the CPU in respect of this charge on the SJP of failing to give information relating to the identification of the driver when required. During this same telephone conversation with X of the CPU on 25/09/2017, I clearly stated over the phone in the telephone conversation that I was the driver of the vehicle and this clear verbal admission can be confirmed by the telephone recordings held by the CPU

The witness statement fails to mention that additional emails were sent to the CPU on two separate occasions in relation to my S172 admission. The two follow up emails were sent by me on 9/11/2017 at 12.38 and 15/11/2017 at 15.53 asking if they had yet received the S172 admission document and for an update. The witness statement also overlooks the fact that the CPU failed to respond and ignored the last of these emails requesting an update.

In this email on 15/11/2017 I confirmed the S172 document had already been posted over a fortnight ago and requested an update from the CPU on whether they had received the document and progress. No reply was provided and my email was ignored by the CPU with no response


How do both of these read? Any feedback on what to add or remove for both?

This post has been edited by MessiBarca: Tue, 8 May 2018 - 15:40
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
AntonyMMM
post Tue, 8 May 2018 - 15:47
Post #20


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,547
Joined: 17 May 2010
Member No.: 37,614



You don't have to put anything, but "the driver was nominated" will be enough if you want to put something.

Nothing will be looked at by the court until the trial date in any case so little point in adding more.

As there is no speeding charge, the stuff about the fixed penalty equivalent is irrelevant.

You have a choice of defending the s172 charge, which you seem to have a potential defence for, in which case the speeding is not an issue at all .... or you can do a deal at court to get speeding added as an alternative charge for you to plead guilty to, and the s172 gets dropped (if the CPS agree). The deal needs to be done on the court day by discussion with the prosecutor, its not going to happen before that.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

5 Pages V   1 2 3 > » 
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: Thursday, 28th March 2024 - 17:13
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.
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