PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Mobile phone FCP, Advise please
Jay2626
post Mon, 2 Jul 2018 - 17:58
Post #1


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 6
Joined: 2 Jul 2018
Member No.: 98,710



I have just received an FCP becaus I was caught on a mobile.
Which I admitted at the scene it was 30 seconds to a doctors appointment I was running late for
I have been signed off work for 2 years with Axiety and depression and also medicated for the same time.
It sounds like a convenient excuse but it the truth.

I was hoping to go provide evidence from doctor and therapist etc I also let the policeman screen cap number to show it was doctor and the duration.

My concern is do I face paying costs and a potential bigger fine than the £200 for pleading guilty by post or going to court?

Is it better just to pay it all whist I have chance or are my circumstances mitigating?

I have a clean licence part from that.

Any advice much appreciated

Thanks
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
2 Pages V  < 1 2  
Start new topic
Replies (20 - 31)
Advertisement
post Mon, 2 Jul 2018 - 17:58
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
southpaw82
post Wed, 4 Jul 2018 - 15:25
Post #21


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 28,257
Joined: 2 Apr 2008
From: Not in the UK
Member No.: 18,483



QUOTE (The Rookie @ Wed, 4 Jul 2018 - 15:55) *
QUOTE (southpaw82 @ Wed, 4 Jul 2018 - 15:09) *
QUOTE (The Rookie @ Wed, 4 Jul 2018 - 14:37) *
If it were an FPN and the officer made a mistake by giving you one when he shouldn't, they can't stop you accepting it.

Even if he would become a totter as a result?

My understanding is once issued it can't be withdrawn, so yes even if the driver would become a totter as a result. I can't see any exemption?

Section 61 RTOA 88.


--------------------


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 Wed, 4 Jul 2018 - 16:43
Post #22


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 3,411
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



QUOTE (southpaw82 @ Wed, 4 Jul 2018 - 16:25) *
QUOTE (The Rookie @ Wed, 4 Jul 2018 - 15:55) *
QUOTE (southpaw82 @ Wed, 4 Jul 2018 - 15:09) *
QUOTE (The Rookie @ Wed, 4 Jul 2018 - 14:37) *
If it were an FPN and the officer made a mistake by giving you one when he shouldn't, they can't stop you accepting it.

Even if he would become a totter as a result?

My understanding is once issued it can't be withdrawn, so yes even if the driver would become a totter as a result. I can't see any exemption?

Section 61 RTOA 88.

It looks like that was repealed by Paragraph 48 of schedule 3 to the Road Safety Act 2006, presumably there's a similar provision somewhere else now. Still, it suggests they can only rescind the CoFP if they spot the error before the point are added.


--------------------
I am not on the "motorists's side", nor am I on the "police/CPS/council's" side, I am simply in favour of the rule of law.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
southpaw82
post Wed, 4 Jul 2018 - 17:21
Post #23


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 28,257
Joined: 2 Apr 2008
From: Not in the UK
Member No.: 18,483



QUOTE (cp8759 @ Wed, 4 Jul 2018 - 17:43) *
It looks like that was repealed by Paragraph 48 of schedule 3 to the Road Safety Act 2006, presumably there's a similar provision somewhere else now. Still, it suggests they can only rescind the CoFP if they spot the error before the point are added.

Section 61A now covers both holders and non-holders of a licence. Same RSA 2006.


--------------------


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
The Rookie
post Wed, 4 Jul 2018 - 18:03
Post #24


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 38,890
Joined: 9 Sep 2003
From: Warwickshire
Member No.: 317



Thanks for the clarification.


--------------------
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 8-0 PPC's
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jay2626
post Wed, 4 Jul 2018 - 19:10
Post #25


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 6
Joined: 2 Jul 2018
Member No.: 98,710



QUOTE (peterguk @ Wed, 4 Jul 2018 - 13:06) *
QUOTE (Jay2626 @ Wed, 4 Jul 2018 - 13:03) *
It was a conditional offer of fixed penalty

But in reality what is the conditional bit?


Either you agree to the conditions (send in DL and pay the penalty) or you choose not to. If you do the matter is concluded. If not the matter goes to court where the penalty will be more severe.


I intend on paying it
But out of curiosity people that go to court get more than the 200 fine imposed or 6 points??

Someone else said you faces administrative charge costs
But you’re saying people are getting fined more than the above for being caught on a mobile ?

Car drivers?

This post has been edited by Jay2626: Wed, 4 Jul 2018 - 19:11
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Logician
post Wed, 4 Jul 2018 - 19:16
Post #26


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 11,283
Joined: 28 Mar 2010
Member No.: 36,528



QUOTE (Jay2626 @ Wed, 4 Jul 2018 - 20:10) *
QUOTE (peterguk @ Wed, 4 Jul 2018 - 13:06) *
QUOTE (Jay2626 @ Wed, 4 Jul 2018 - 13:03) *
It was a conditional offer of fixed penalty But in reality what is the conditional bit?
Either you agree to the conditions (send in DL and pay the penalty) or you choose not to. If you do the matter is concluded. If not the matter goes to court where the penalty will be more severe.
I intend on paying it But out of curiosity people that go to court get more than the 200 fine imposed or 6 points?? Someone else said you faces administrative charge costs But you’re saying people are getting fined more than the above for being caught on a mobile ? Car drivers?


Fixed penalties are fixed, fines in court are related to the offender's income, there is a 10% surcharge (minimum £30) on top of that, and prosecution costs of £85 for a guilty plea or a guideline of £620 if found guilty after a plea of not guilty. The 6 points for mobile use would be the same (technically a disqualification would be possible but vanishingly unlikely)



--------------------



Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
notmeatloaf
post Wed, 4 Jul 2018 - 22:43
Post #27


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,165
Joined: 4 Mar 2017
Member No.: 90,659



Just to add mobile phone use (I think) remains as starting point A fine even after the fixed penalty increase. So it would be 50% of your weekly income, plus the £85 costs and £30 (minimum) victims surcharge.

They do have discretion to sentence at fixed penalty rates, but usually they will still add costs and are obligated to add the victim surcharge on top.

I know a couple of magistrates and they are of the opinion that the courts provide a valuable service and valuable services must be paid for - correctly or otherwise.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
The Rookie
post Thu, 5 Jul 2018 - 05:38
Post #28


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 38,890
Joined: 9 Sep 2003
From: Warwickshire
Member No.: 317



QUOTE (notmeatloaf @ Wed, 4 Jul 2018 - 23:43) *
I know a couple of magistrates and they are of the opinion that the courts provide a valuable service and valuable services must be paid for - correctly or otherwise.

So which part of those pays for the courts?


--------------------
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 8-0 PPC's
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Logician
post Fri, 6 Jul 2018 - 09:54
Post #29


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 11,283
Joined: 28 Mar 2010
Member No.: 36,528



There was a Criminal Courts Charge for 9 months in 2015, abolished after great pressure from the Magistrates' Association LINK perhaps there is some confusion with that. Otherwise prosecution costs go to the CPS and fines are paid into the Consolidated Fund.


--------------------



Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Fri, 6 Jul 2018 - 16:34
Post #30


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 3,411
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



QUOTE (Logician @ Fri, 6 Jul 2018 - 10:54) *
There was a Criminal Courts Charge for 9 months in 2015, abolished after great pressure from the Magistrates' Association LINK perhaps there is some confusion with that. Otherwise prosecution costs go to the CPS and fines are paid into the Consolidated Fund.

Fines are paid net of (a huge amount of) costs which likely involved many of the costs of running the court system. Fines total something around the billion pound mark, only £50 million actually makes it into the consolidated fund.


--------------------
I am not on the "motorists's side", nor am I on the "police/CPS/council's" side, I am simply in favour of the rule of law.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Fredd
post Fri, 6 Jul 2018 - 17:57
Post #31


Webmaster
Group Icon

Group: Root Admin
Posts: 7,063
Joined: 30 Mar 2003
From: Wokingham, UK
Member No.: 2



QUOTE (cp8759 @ Fri, 6 Jul 2018 - 17:34) *
Fines are paid net of (a huge amount of) costs which likely involved many of the costs of running the court system. Fines total something around the billion pound mark, only £50 million actually makes it into the consolidated fund.

Wow, that's amazingly well-judged! A cynical person might almost believe that the "costs" attributed were made just a tiny fraction under the amount of the fines by design.


--------------------
Regards,
Fredd

__________________________________________________________________________
Pepipoo relies on you
to keep this site running!
Donate to Pepipoo now using your
Visa, Mastercard, debit card or PayPal account
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Sat, 7 Jul 2018 - 15:37
Post #32


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 3,411
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



QUOTE (Fredd @ Fri, 6 Jul 2018 - 18:57) *
QUOTE (cp8759 @ Fri, 6 Jul 2018 - 17:34) *
Fines are paid net of (a huge amount of) costs which likely involved many of the costs of running the court system. Fines total something around the billion pound mark, only £50 million actually makes it into the consolidated fund.

Wow, that's amazingly well-judged! A cynical person might almost believe that the "costs" attributed were made just a tiny fraction under the amount of the fines by design.

I assume you mean a tiny fraction over, rather than under. Regardless, I'm cynical enough to know that if the MoJ tried something like that, they'd inevitably mess it up. The chances of them setting out to achieve such an outcome, and actually achieving it, are (In my cynical opinion) close to none. The fact that it has happened is almost a guarantee that this is not by design.


--------------------
I am not on the "motorists's side", nor am I on the "police/CPS/council's" side, I am simply in favour of the rule of law.
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, 20th July 2018 - 12:47
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.