High Court Quashed conviction for FTF |
High Court Quashed conviction for FTF |
Thu, 30 Nov 2017 - 21:35
Post
#1
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 294 Joined: 8 Oct 2007 Member No.: 14,341 |
High Court quashes conviction for FTF
Sorry for another Daily Mail article; Quote from the article; "Lord Howard's solicitor-advocate, David Sonn, said that 'crucially' there were no instructions on the form as to how it was to be completed if the recipient did not know who was the driver at the relevant time." I wonder if they've re-designed the form yet. |
|
|
Advertisement |
Thu, 30 Nov 2017 - 21:35
Post
#
|
Advertise here! |
|
|
|
Thu, 30 Nov 2017 - 22:29
Post
#2
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 41,506 Joined: 25 Aug 2011 From: Planet Earth Member No.: 49,223 |
Hmmm, but the requirement is to name the driver...
Of course, there's a statutory defence so should it have an option to tick the box 'I did not know who was driving and after reasonable diligence I could not identify them so please send me a court summons to see if the court believes me'? -------------------- 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. |
|
|
Fri, 1 Dec 2017 - 06:40
Post
#3
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 56,198 Joined: 9 Sep 2003 From: Warwickshire Member No.: 317 |
It seems a very narrow technicality.
I'm enjoying the obvious contradiction of someone claiming not knowing how to complete a form and then hiring what was almost certainly very expensive legal representation for the appeal. -------------------- 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, 1 Dec 2017 - 08:21
Post
#4
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 109 Joined: 18 Sep 2017 Member No.: 94,099 |
I’m somewhat surprised that the headlines are not something like:
“Former Home Secretary shows he is a complete imbecile; he can’t even fill in a simple form.” Micheal Howard, former minister responsible for police and the security of the United Kingdom and it’s citizens has such a poor grasp of logic and comprehension, he can’t even answer the questions on a form that millions of other motorists before him managed with no issue whatsoever. “Thank fu’k ISIS wasn’t around on his watch.” A concerned sap commented. Well done to his barrister who could come up with that for several £thousands. This post has been edited by superSmiffy: Fri, 1 Dec 2017 - 08:24 |
|
|
Fri, 1 Dec 2017 - 08:49
Post
#5
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 41,506 Joined: 25 Aug 2011 From: Planet Earth Member No.: 49,223 |
...and he has a law degree and was a QC.
-------------------- 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. |
|
|
Fri, 1 Dec 2017 - 09:50
Post
#6
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 56,198 Joined: 9 Sep 2003 From: Warwickshire Member No.: 317 |
I’m somewhat surprised that the headlines are not something like: “Former Home Secretary shows he is a complete imbecile; he can’t even fill in a simple form.” Micheal Howard, former minister responsible for police and the security of the United Kingdom and it’s citizens has such a poor grasp of logic and comprehension, he can’t even answer the questions on a form that millions of other motorists before him managed with no issue whatsoever. “Thank fu’k ISIS wasn’t around on his watch.” A concerned sap commented. All ignoring that for most people they are naming the one driver and there was no indication MH couldn't do that. On the other hand we get dozens of cases a year of people making a hash of replying when they aren't sure who was driving and are confused by the form and/or what their obligations are. -------------------- 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, 1 Dec 2017 - 16:14
Post
#7
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 28,931 Joined: 29 Nov 2005 Member No.: 4,323 |
I think David Sonn had a good point.
It is about time that 'trapdoor drafting' of NIP forms was put under the spotlight. IMO the legal capabilities, or lack of them, of the recipient is irrelevant to the matter of the form being defective. be interesting to see the Judgment once it gets lobbed onto t'internet -------------------- Which facts in any situation or problem are “essential” and what makes them “essential”? If the “essential” facts are said to depend on the principles involved, then the whole business, all too obviously, goes right around in a circle. In the light of one principle or set of principles, one bunch of facts will be the “essential” ones; in the light of another principle or set of principles, a different bunch of facts will be “essential.” In order to settle on the right facts you first have to pick your principles, although the whole point of finding the facts was to indicate which principles apply.
Note that I am not legally qualified and any and all statements made are "Reserved". Liability for application lies with the reader. |
|
|
Fri, 1 Dec 2017 - 21:55
Post
#8
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 6,963 Joined: 19 Dec 2006 From: Near Calais Member No.: 9,683 |
It is a question that has been asked on here many times, and a point made many times, I don't know who the driver was and there's nowhere on the form for me to say that. Where do I put that on the form?
Most government forms are badly drafted as re a lot of laws and it often takes someone with a lot of money to play the daft laddie to make the point in the High Court. |
|
|
Fri, 1 Dec 2017 - 23:00
Post
#9
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 2,356 Joined: 30 Jun 2008 From: Landan Member No.: 20,731 |
Howard wasn't Home Secretary when the current s.172 was implemented, but he was in Cabinet. No excuse, really.
--Chuchmouse |
|
|
Sat, 2 Dec 2017 - 02:30
Post
#10
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 701 Joined: 11 Oct 2006 From: stapleford,nottingham Member No.: 8,176 |
Bet he remembers what he had for tea yesterday......Bet he remembers where he parked his car.......Bet he remembers to collect his £300 House of Lords spending money......Bet he remembers his wifes name
|
|
|
Mon, 4 Dec 2017 - 16:05
Post
#11
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 9,985 Joined: 20 Aug 2008 Member No.: 21,992 |
Bet he remembers what he had for tea yesterday......Bet he remembers where he parked his car.......Bet he remembers to collect his £300 House of Lords spending money......Bet he remembers his wifes name But not whether he THREATENED to overrule the prisons chief. -------------------- Sometimes I use big words I don't understand in an effort to make myself sound more photosynthesis.
|
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: Thursday, 28th March 2024 - 18:17 |