Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Marston Warrant of Control received 29.10.2018
FightBack Forums > Queries > Speeding and other Criminal Offences
Pages: 1, 2
Mysilvercar
I received the attached letter on Monday of this week.

At first i thought it was a bogus letter but after contacting HMCTS i received the following (redacted) response:

Good morning,
Thank you for your email, the contents of which have been noted.
Your account xxxxxxxxxx is to pay a fine for an offence that was heard at Warrington Magistrates Court on xx/03/2018. The offence details are as follows:

You failed to give information about the driver of a vehicle that was allegedly guilty of the following offence:- On xx/11/2017 at WARRINGTON drove a motor vehicle, namely A VOLKSWAGEN xxxxxxx, on a road, namely THE B5210 WOOLSTON GRANGE AVENUE, subject of a local traffic order, namely A LOCAL ORDER, at a speed exceeding 40 miles per hour.

You were fined £826.00 and your licence was endorsed with 6 points.

All original correspondence for this case was sent to FLAT 3, 32 KEPPEL ROAD, MANCHESTER, M21 0BW as this was the address passed to the court by the DVLA at the time of the offence.

As your account is now with Marstons and no longer held by the collections department, you will have to contact Marstons directly to arrange payment of your fine. Please be advise Marstons charge additional fees once an account is passed to them, if you require further information about these fees we advise you to speak to Marstons. Their contact details are as follows:


Is there anything that i can do at this stage to deal with the course or ask for a review in light of the fact that the first knowledge i had of this was on Monday (29th Oct 2018)?
It seems unbelievable that no one attempted to trace me until this was passed over to the debt recovery agency - i am on the electoral and council taxt register at my current and have been since March 2017.

My car is insured for the correct address and the address on my licence (which they have apparently endorsed) is correct so surely they could have contacted me easily?

Obviously i now need to update the registered address of my car however i am also concerned if my credit rating will now be affected.

I am really hoping that someone on here has some insight on how best to deal with this issue.

Many Thanks

Mysilvercar
Jlc
What about your v5?

Anyway, the priority to perform a Statutory Declaration (SD) to have the conviction removed. Upon finding out about the conviction you have a limited time to do this - it's usually best to contact the convicting court. (It can be done at other places if urgency is required - as the bailiff will continue with enforcement until such time it is removed)

This is your priority - if you were driving at the time of the alleged offence it's usually best advised to perform a 'plea bargain' to drop the more serious s172 (failing to furnish) charge in favour of the speeding. If you perform the SD at court then they will ask you to submit a plea there and then - unless they are 'friendly' to the plea bargain then not guilty pleas should be entered (especially as they are unlikely to present any evidence at the time).
peterguk
QUOTE (Mysilvercar @ Wed, 31 Oct 2018 - 08:08) *
My car is insured for the correct address and the address on my licence (which they have apparently endorsed) is correct so surely they could have contacted me easily?



Your DL has nothing to do with your car.

As mentioned above, your V5C, or vehicle registration document is what matters. The address on that is what will have been used by the police and courts.
Bailiff Advice
QUOTE (Mysilvercar @ Wed, 31 Oct 2018 - 08:08) *
I received the attached letter on Monday of this week.

At first i thought it was a bogus letter but after contacting HMCTS i received the following (redacted) response:

Is there anything that i can do at this stage to deal with the course or ask for a review in light of the fact that the first knowledge i had of this was on Monday (29th Oct 2018)?
It seems unbelievable that no one attempted to trace me until this was passed over to the debt recovery agency - i am on the electoral and council taxt register at my current and have been since March 2017.

My car is insured for the correct address and the address on my licence (which they have apparently endorsed) is correct so surely they could have contacted me easily?

Obviously i now need to update the registered address of my car however i am also concerned if my credit rating will now be affected.


All that is needed is for you to approach your local Magistrates Court for an appointment for a Statutory Declaration. You should find the following page useful.

http://bailiffadviceonline.co.uk/index-pag...ry-declarations

The way in which the appointment is approached varies from court to court but more usually than not, the operator will take your details over the phone and either provide an appointment date over the phone or alternatively, will email an appointment date.

You would need to make sure when calling the court to tell the operator that the case is already with an enforcement company and that a visit has been made. Most courts will notify the enforcement company that an appointment is pending.

Any problems, please post back.

PS: I should also mention that you really must return your V5C (Log Book) to DVLA for amendment as soon as possible. It is important that you take a copy of the V5C as well.
Mysilvercar
QUOTE (Jlc @ Wed, 31 Oct 2018 - 09:00) *
What about your v5?

Anyway, the priority to perform a Statutory Declaration (SD) to have the conviction removed. Upon finding out about the conviction you have a limited time to do this - it's usually best to contact the convicting court. (It can be done at other places if urgency is required - as the bailiff will continue with enforcement until such time it is removed)

This is your priority - if you were driving at the time of the alleged offence it's usually best advised to perform a 'plea bargain' to drop the more serious s172 (failing to furnish) charge in favour of the speeding. If you perform the SD at court then they will ask you to submit a plea there and then - unless they are 'friendly' to the plea bargain then not guilty pleas should be entered (especially as they are unlikely to present any evidence at the time).


Thank you very much for this information Jlc - i will contact the court immediately.
Is the Statutory Declaration done via a form or attendance at court?

How do i find out whether they are 'friendly' to a plea bargain' prior to submitting a plea?

In short do i need a solicitor?

Thanks,

Mysilvercar
The Rookie
You ask them, most (pretty much all) are very amenable , no you don’t need a solicitor.
Mysilvercar
QUOTE (The Rookie @ Wed, 31 Oct 2018 - 10:36) *
You ask them, most (pretty much all) are very amenable , no you don’t need a solicitor.


Thanks for this The Rookie
Bailiff Advice
QUOTE (Mysilvercar @ Wed, 31 Oct 2018 - 08:08) *
I am also concerned if my credit rating will now be affected.


Although there exists a provision for Magistrate Court fines to be registered with Registry Trust, it is extremely rare for HMCTS to take such a step. The usual method of enforcment, is to issue a warrant of control and pass the debt to a private sector enforcement company (which is what has happened in your case).
Mysilvercar
QUOTE (Bailiff Advice @ Wed, 31 Oct 2018 - 10:56) *
QUOTE (Mysilvercar @ Wed, 31 Oct 2018 - 08:08) *
I am also concerned if my credit rating will now be affected.


Although there exists a provision for Magistrate Court fines to be registered with Registry Trust, it is extremely rare for HMCTS to take such a step. The usual method of enforcment, is to issue a warrant of control and pass the debt to a private sector enforcement company (which is what has happened in your case).


Thank you - this puts my mind at rest at least in terms of mortgages
Mysilvercar
QUOTE (Jlc @ Wed, 31 Oct 2018 - 09:00) *
What about your v5?

Anyway, the priority to perform a Statutory Declaration (SD) to have the conviction removed. Upon finding out about the conviction you have a limited time to do this - it's usually best to contact the convicting court. (It can be done at other places if urgency is required - as the bailiff will continue with enforcement until such time it is removed)

This is your priority - if you were driving at the time of the alleged offence it's usually best advised to perform a 'plea bargain' to drop the more serious s172 (failing to furnish) charge in favour of the speeding. If you perform the SD at court then they will ask you to submit a plea there and then - unless they are 'friendly' to the plea bargain then not guilty pleas should be entered (especially as they are unlikely to present any evidence at the time).


My V5C has the incorrect (old) address - i am going to send it off tonight to update the address, i though i already had to be honest.
NewJudge
QUOTE (Mysilvercar @ Wed, 31 Oct 2018 - 10:15) *
Is the Statutory Declaration done via a form or attendance at court?

You have to attend - either a Magistrates' Court or a solicitor (a solicitor may charge a small fee of about £5). All you are doing is to declare that you knew nothing of the proceedings against you until you received the bailiff's letter. It should be undertaken within 21 days of you becoming aware of your conviction but often the court may not be able to accommodate you in that time. This does not prevent you making the declaration in court later - all they will do is ask you why you are late and you simply tell them that it was the first appointment the court could make for you. However, in your circumstances you may want to get matters moving quickly and if the court does suggest there will be a delay it may be better to go to a solicitor.
Mysilvercar
QUOTE (NewJudge @ Wed, 31 Oct 2018 - 12:38) *
QUOTE (Mysilvercar @ Wed, 31 Oct 2018 - 10:15) *
Is the Statutory Declaration done via a form or attendance at court?

You have to attend - either a Magistrates' Court or a solicitor (a solicitor may charge a small fee of about £5). All you are doing is to declare that you knew nothing of the proceedings against you until you received the bailiff's letter. It should be undertaken within 21 days of you becoming aware of your conviction but often the court may not be able to accommodate you in that time. This does not prevent you making the declaration in court later - all they will do is ask you why you are late and you simply tell them that it was the first appointment the court could make for you. However, in your circumstances you may want to get matters moving quickly and if the court does suggest there will be a delay it may be better to go to a solicitor.


Thanks so much for all the assistance on here.
I spent quite some time ringing Warrington courts today to no avail - i eventually checked on their website and rang the 'fines' number - this put me through to Marstons (the bayliffs) who weren't particularly helpful! Eventually i went down to the court itself to declare that i wanted to make a statutory declaration.

I have completed the paperwork for the statutory declaration - unfortunately the first date the court can accommodate me is the 5th December.
The lady in the court informed me that she would contact the bayliffs (Marstons) and that given a date has been set they usually put any enforcement action on hold pending the outcome. The lady informed me that if the Statutory Declaration was accepted the bayliffs would have to reimburse me for any action that had been taken.
Jlc
Personally, I wouldn't wait that long. See a local Solicitor and get the SD done. (It will be a nominal charge, if any)

The bailiff's are not your friends... Enforcement action can continue.
Mysilvercar
QUOTE (Jlc @ Wed, 31 Oct 2018 - 14:11) *
Personally, I wouldn't wait that long. See a local Solicitor and get the SD done. (It will be a nominal charge, if any)

The bailiff's are not your friends... Enforcement action can continue.


Thanks Jlc - I will find a solicitor and do just that. Does it matter if I do this even though a court date is set?
Jlc
Nope - you can always deliver the SD to the court and let them know the appointment is no longer required.
Bailiff Advice
QUOTE (Mysilvercar @ Wed, 31 Oct 2018 - 14:07) *
Thanks so much for all the assistance on here.
I spent quite some time ringing Warrington courts today to no avail - i eventually checked on their website and rang the 'fines' number - this put me through to Marstons (the bayliffs) who weren't particularly helpful! Eventually i went down to the court itself to declare that i wanted to make a statutory declaration.

I have completed the paperwork for the statutory declaration - unfortunately the first date the court can accommodate me is the 5th December.
The lady in the court informed me that she would contact the bayliffs (Marstons) and that given a date has been set they usually put any enforcement action on hold pending the outcome. The lady informed me that if the Statutory Declaration was accepted the bayliffs would have to reimburse me for any action that had been taken.


It is always the case that if the Magistrate Court advise the enforcement company of a pending Statutory Declaration that enforcement is placed 'on hold'. I would be very surprised to hear otherwise.

It is usually always the case that Magistrates Courts require Section 14 Statutory Declaration to be made by way of personal attendance. By way of evidence, the following is a copy of a letter that I had posted on the Consumer Action Group forum a few months ago. In this particular case, the OP had made a forum post on the basis that he had visited a solicitor to have a Statutory Declaration sworn and had submitted his sworn Stat Dec to the court. the court retuned his forms to him. This is the letter that he was sent:

The following was taken from an internet site where a debtor had sought advice after being encouraged to send a Section 14 Statutory Declaration to the court by Recorded Delivery. His sworn forms were returned to him and he received the following letter. From enquiries that I receive, these letters are now becoming very common indeed.

QUOTE
Dear Mr X

If you were unaware of the court proceedings and did not receive the court summons/ single justice procedure, you may be entitled to make a Statutory Declaration. However, please note that you only have 21 days from the date you first became aware of the proceedings to make a Statutory Declaration. If the court decides that it was not reasonable to expect you to make the declaration within this period, it may accept a late declaration made ‘Out of time’.

You can make a declaration at your local Magistrates’ Court and must attend in person to make the declaration. It cannot be done in your absence. Please contact your local Magistrates’ Court to make a prior appointment.

If you make a declaration which you know or believe to be untrue, you could be convicted of perjury, a criminal offence punished with imprisonment of up to two years.

Any financial impositions and penalty points remain valid and enforcement of financial impositions will continue until a declaration has been made.

Kind regards

xxxxxx xxxx
adminicon Officer
South East London Justice Area | HMCTS | Bromley & Bexley Magistrates Court | 1 London Road | Kent | BR1 1RA

PS: When completing the forms at the court today, were you asked whether you would be entering a guilty or not guilty plea?
southpaw82
In my opinion, HMCTS are acting unlawfully in not accepting a statutory declaration made not made at court. The requirements of s 14 are simply that a statutory declaration is made. That simply means it has to be sworn (or affirmed) before a person entitled to take oaths, which includes a commissioner for oaths. Rejecting lawfully sworn declarations is unlawful.

It is true that it has to be done in person but in person includes in front of a commissioner for oaths.

If the declaration is being made out of time then it ought to be made in court, as the court has to exercise a discretion to accept it.
Bailiff Advice
QUOTE (NewJudge @ Wed, 31 Oct 2018 - 12:38) *
QUOTE (Mysilvercar @ Wed, 31 Oct 2018 - 10:15) *
Is the Statutory Declaration done via a form or attendance at court?

You have to attend - either a Magistrates' Court or a solicitor (a solicitor may charge a small fee of about £5). All you are doing is to declare that you knew nothing of the proceedings against you until you received the bailiff's letter. It should be undertaken within 21 days of you becoming aware of your conviction but often the court may not be able to accommodate you in that time.


A Section 14 Statutory Declaration may be made outside of the 21 day period (i.e. Out of Time). A reason for the lateness must be provided and the Magistrate is required to consider the 'reason' for lateness.

Changes that were imposed by the courts for dealing with Section 14 Statutory Declarations approx 2 years ago. The changes were imposed in response to Sir Brian Levenson's 'Review of Efficiency in Criminal Proceedings'.

Wherever possible, courts require a defendant to attend court IN PERSON to hear their Section 14 Statutory Declaration.

Section 14 Statutory Declaration MUST be supported by a notice indicating whether they will be wishing to plead guilty or not guilty to the charge.

The defendant must also provide with his Section 14 application a statement of his assets and liabilities (MC100)

If the defendant indicates that he wishes to plead guilty to the charge, his statutory declaration will be dealt with first, and straight afterwards, the Magistrate will then hear the case against him and when setting the level of fine, he will rely upon the information provided by the defendant on his statement of assets and liabilities. It is that simple...and in all the many cases that I have provided assistance, it works well.

In relation to HMCTS, with the Magistrate dealing with both the Section 14 Statutory Declaration AND the charge against the defendant at the same time is in keeping with the 'Better Case Management' initiative which is designed to elicit an early guilty please and reduce the number of hearings per case.

southpaw82
QUOTE (Bailiff Advice @ Wed, 31 Oct 2018 - 16:11) *
Wherever possible, courts require a defendant to attend court IN PERSON to hear their Section 14 Statutory Declaration.


Courts have no power to compel a person to attend to make a statutory declaration, so far as I am aware.

QUOTE
Section 14 Statutory Declaration MUST be supported by a notice indicating whether they will be wishing to plead guilty or not guilty to the charge.


Where does this come from? It is not in s 14 of the Act.

QUOTE
The defendant must also provide with his Section 14 application a statement of his assets and liabilities (MC100)


Again, where is this from?

HMCTS may like the above to happen, and may even have implemented rules in one form or another to put their wishes into effect but I don’t see how either could override the clear words of the statute:

QUOTE
(1)Where a summons has been issued under section 1 above and a magistrates’ court has begun to try the information to which the summons relates, then, if—
(a) the accused, at any time during or after the trial, makes a statutory declaration that he did not know of the summons or the proceedings until a date specified in the declaration, being a date after the court has begun to try the information; and
(b) within 21 days of that date the declaration is served on the designated officer for the court, without prejudice to the validity of the information, the summons and all subsequent proceedings shall be void.


If the declaration was made before a proper person, such as a commissioner for oaths, in time then the court appears to have no power to reject it and the summons and all subsequent proceedings are void from delivery of the declaration upon the designated officer.

Logician
The latest version of the stat. dec. form actually explains that it may be made before a solicitor LINK
Mysilvercar
QUOTE (Bailiff Advice @ Wed, 31 Oct 2018 - 14:28) *
QUOTE (Mysilvercar @ Wed, 31 Oct 2018 - 14:07) *
Thanks so much for all the assistance on here.
I spent quite some time ringing Warrington courts today to no avail - i eventually checked on their website and rang the 'fines' number - this put me through to Marstons (the bayliffs) who weren't particularly helpful! Eventually i went down to the court itself to declare that i wanted to make a statutory declaration.

I have completed the paperwork for the statutory declaration - unfortunately the first date the court can accommodate me is the 5th December.
The lady in the court informed me that she would contact the bayliffs (Marstons) and that given a date has been set they usually put any enforcement action on hold pending the outcome. The lady informed me that if the Statutory Declaration was accepted the bayliffs would have to reimburse me for any action that had been taken.


It is always the case that if the Magistrate Court advise the enforcement company of a pending Statutory Declaration that enforcement is placed 'on hold'. I would be very surprised to hear otherwise.

It is usually always the case that Magistrates Courts require Section 14 Statutory Declaration to be made by way of personal attendance. By way of evidence, the following is a copy of a letter that I had posted on the Consumer Action Group forum a few months ago. In this particular case, the OP had made a forum post on the basis that he had visited a solicitor to have a Statutory Declaration sworn and had submitted his sworn Stat Dec to the court. the court retuned his forms to him. This is the letter that he was sent:

The following was taken from an internet site where a debtor had sought advice after being encouraged to send a Section 14 Statutory Declaration to the court by Recorded Delivery. His sworn forms were returned to him and he received the following letter. From enquiries that I receive, these letters are now becoming very common indeed.

QUOTE
Dear Mr X

If you were unaware of the court proceedings and did not receive the court summons/ single justice procedure, you may be entitled to make a Statutory Declaration. However, please note that you only have 21 days from the date you first became aware of the proceedings to make a Statutory Declaration. If the court decides that it was not reasonable to expect you to make the declaration within this period, it may accept a late declaration made ‘Out of time’.

You can make a declaration at your local Magistrates’ Court and must attend in person to make the declaration. It cannot be done in your absence. Please contact your local Magistrates’ Court to make a prior appointment.

If you make a declaration which you know or believe to be untrue, you could be convicted of perjury, a criminal offence punished with imprisonment of up to two years.

Any financial impositions and penalty points remain valid and enforcement of financial impositions will continue until a declaration has been made.

Kind regards

xxxxxx xxxx
adminicon Officer
South East London Justice Area | HMCTS | Bromley & Bexley Magistrates Court | 1 London Road | Kent | BR1 1RA

PS: When completing the forms at the court today, were you asked whether you would be entering a guilty or not guilty plea?


I think she ticked a box stating that i was not aware of the proceedings at the time- this infers not guilty?
Bailiff Advice
QUOTE (Mysilvercar @ Wed, 31 Oct 2018 - 16:53) *
I think she ticked a box stating that i was not aware of the proceedings at the time- this infers not guilty?


It doesn't infer guilty at all. All that is stated is that you had not been AWARE of the proceedings.
You will need to decide before attending the hearing whether you wish to plead guilty or not guilty to the charge. That must be your choice.
NewJudge
QUOTE (Bailiff Advice @ Wed, 31 Oct 2018 - 16:11) *
If the defendant indicates that he wishes to plead guilty to the charge, his statutory declaration will be dealt with first, and straight afterwards, the Magistrate will then hear the case against him and when setting the level of fine, he will rely upon the information provided by the defendant on his statement of assets and liabilities. It is that simple...and in all the many cases that I have provided assistance, it works well.

It isn't quite that simple in this case. The offence of which he has been convicted is Failing to Provide Driver's Details. Ideally (provided he was the driver) he would like to see that charge dropped in favour of resurrecting a charge for the speeding offence to which he will (presumably) plead guilty.

He has two problems with this. Firstly, it is unlikely that the court that hears his SD will have details of that original allegation to enable it to be dealt with. Secondly (and perhaps more problematic), that allegation stems from almost a year ago and since proceedings for it would not have been started (because they did not know who to proceed against) it is now "out of time".
Bailiff Advice
QUOTE (NewJudge @ Wed, 31 Oct 2018 - 17:49) *
QUOTE (Bailiff Advice @ Wed, 31 Oct 2018 - 16:11) *
If the defendant indicates that he wishes to plead guilty to the charge, his statutory declaration will be dealt with first, and straight afterwards, the Magistrate will then hear the case against him and when setting the level of fine, he will rely upon the information provided by the defendant on his statement of assets and liabilities. It is that simple...and in all the many cases that I have provided assistance, it works well.


It isn't quite that simple in this case. The offence of which he has been convicted is Failing to Provide Driver's Details. Ideally (provided he was the driver) he would like to see that charge dropped in favour of resurrecting a charge for the speeding offence to which he will (presumably) plead guilty.

He has two problems with this. Firstly, it is unlikely that the court that hears his SD will have details of that original allegation to enable it to be dealt with. Secondly (and perhaps more problematic), that allegation stems from almost a year ago and since proceedings for it would not have been started (because they did not know who to proceed against) it is now "out of time".


I was assuming that there are in fact two charges. One for Faiulure to provide driver ID and the other for speeding. (I may be wrong). From the many cases that I see on the same charges, where a stat dec is made, the courts cancel the 1st charge and if the defendant pleads guilty to the charge of speeding, then depending on the actual speed and location, the number of points will usually revert to 3 point (as opposed to 6) and a new fine will be issued. If a guilty plea is entered, the new fine will always be at a lower rate (as a guilty plea attracts a one third discount).

You have made an interesting point when you mention that the court that will hear the SD will be unlikely to have details of the original allegation. In fact, where an SD appointment is made by telephone, sufficient details are usually requested by the court clerk during the call enabling the court the opportunity to approach the issuing court for a copy of the file to be transferred. I have yet to come across a case whee this doesn't happen.

In cases where a Stat Dec is sent by post after being witnesses by a solicitor, then clearly, the court will not have been able to request a copy of the court file and this would mean that although the stat dec may well be accepted, the court would not be able to hear the case against the debtor at the same time and would be required to adjourn for a fresh trial and this is precisely what the court were seeking to avoid when they introduced the amendment to Part 37 (Trial and Sentence in the Magistrates Court).
Neil B
I haven't read the thread but got the gist.
QUOTE (NewJudge @ Wed, 31 Oct 2018 - 18:49) *
It isn't quite that simple in this case. The offence of which he has been convicted is Failing to Provide Driver's Details. Ideally (provided he was the driver) he would like to see that charge dropped in favour of resurrecting a charge for the speeding offence to which he will (presumably) plead guilty.

Understood but have we ascertained if he is technically guilty, i.e. legally liable?

Sorry if that's a daft question but I don't know how legislation covers liability in the original matter, where notices were not received?

Could he end up facing two charges?
southpaw82
QUOTE (Bailiff Advice @ Wed, 31 Oct 2018 - 18:25) *
In cases where a Stat Dec is sent by post after being witnesses by a solicitor, then clearly, the court will not have been able to request a copy of the court file and this would mean that although the stat dec may well be accepted, the court would not be able to hear the case against the debtor at the same time and would be required to adjourn for a fresh trial and this is precisely what the court were seeking to avoid when they introduced the amendment to Part 37 (Trial and Sentence in the Magistrates Court).

In the case of a stat dec performed in time the court has no discretion to accept or reject it. There is no hearing to adjourn.
Bailiff Advice
QUOTE (southpaw82 @ Wed, 31 Oct 2018 - 16:28) *
QUOTE (Bailiff Advice @ Wed, 31 Oct 2018 - 16:11) *
Wherever possible, courts require a defendant to attend court IN PERSON to hear their Section 14 Statutory Declaration.


Courts have no power to compel a person to attend to make a statutory declaration, so far as I am aware.

QUOTE
Section 14 Statutory Declaration MUST be supported by a notice indicating whether they will be wishing to plead guilty or not guilty to the charge.


Where does this come from? It is not in s 14 of the Act.

QUOTE
The defendant must also provide with his Section 14 application a statement of his assets and liabilities (MC100)


Again, where is this from?


Criminal Procedure Rule 37 was amended a couple of years ago to introduce a new provisions for voiding proceedings under section 14 of the Magistrates Courts Act 1980 and setting aside a conviction under section 142 of the Act. In this respect rule 37.16 was added to provide a procedure for dealing with section 14 statutory declarations.

QUOTE
Rule 37.16

(b) serve with the (section 14) declaration one of the following, as appropriate, if the case began with a written charge and single justice procedure notice—

(i) a notice under rule 37.9(4)(a) (notice of guilty plea), with any representations that the defendant wants the court to consider and a statement of the defendant’s assets and other financial circumstances, as required by that rule,

(ii) a notice under rule 37.9(4)(b) (notice of intention to plead guilty at a hearing before a court comprising more than one justice), or

(iii) a notice under rule 37.9(4)© (notice of intention to plead not guilty).

if the defendant is present when the declaration is served, the rules in this Part apply as if the defendant had been required to attend the court on that occasion
;
Bailiff Advice

Most importance was this last line under Rule 37.16:

QUOTE
If the defendant is present when the declaration is served, the rules in this Part apply as if the defendant had been required to attend the court on that occasion
;
southpaw82
Rule 24.17 in my copy of the CrimPR. Don’t see any power for the court (or Court Service) to reject a proper declaration not made before the court.
Bailiff Advice
QUOTE (southpaw82 @ Wed, 31 Oct 2018 - 19:33) *
Rule 24.17 in my copy of the CrimPR. Don’t see any power for the court (or Court Service) to reject a proper declaration not made before the court.


As I mentioned earlier, you are correct. However, the way in courts are steered towards dealing with Stat Decs was changed with the introduction of Rule 37.16 and 37.17 and in fact, it actually works very well.

Motorists (or other defendants) are naturally worried about attending court and in this way, their stat dec can be dealt with, and straight after, the case against them is considered. If a stat dec is made by prior appointment, there is sufficient time for the defendant to obtain copies of the previous fine etc.

As long as a guilty plea is entered, the defendant leaves court with either the case against him being dismissed (not usual), or a fine of a much lesser amount and if points had been awarded against him, the number of points will usually be reduced.

If a 'not guilty' plea is entered, a new trial date will be set.
southpaw82
Right; I thought we were seeing postal declarations being rejected. Whether it works well for individual people is up to them - though I can see both sides.
Mysilvercar
QUOTE (Jlc @ Wed, 31 Oct 2018 - 14:11) *
Personally, I wouldn't wait that long. See a local Solicitor and get the SD done. (It will be a nominal charge, if any)

The bailiff's are not your friends... Enforcement action can continue.


So it turns out that the camera was a 'manned' camera and my car was doing 54mph in a 40mph zone. The police asked that £100 costs be added if I am found guilty. The paperwork they have given me and asked me to bring to court requires that I make a plea to each of the charges:

1. Exceed 40MPH (MANNED CAMERA)
2. Failed to give information relating to the identification of the driver of a vehicle.

Do I plead not guilty to both charges in the first instance of guilty to the speeding and not guilty to the failure to give information? I am certainly not guilty of failure to give information.

Or will the charge of failure to give information cease to exist if they accept my statutory declaration - ie I would then only be facing the original speeding charge which I could plead guilty to?

To be honest I am not totally sure about checking if the court is 'friendly' to the idea of a plea bargain as the lady at the court told me I would be sitting outside until I was called.
Bailiff Advice
QUOTE (Mysilvercar @ Wed, 31 Oct 2018 - 21:16) *
The paperwork they have given me and asked me to bring to court requires that I make a plea to each of the charges:


What is the 'paperwork' that the court has given you?
NewJudge
QUOTE (Mysilvercar @ Wed, 31 Oct 2018 - 21:16) *
I am certainly not guilty of failure to give information.

Or will the charge of failure to give information cease to exist if they accept my statutory declaration - ie I would then only be facing the original speeding charge which I could plead guilty to?

The conviction will be set aside as if it never happened. However, the charge will remain and you will face it afresh. If you are not guilty of it, go to court, perform your Statutory Declaration and when the matter is put to you again plead Not Guilty. You will then face a trial (at a later date).

Without successfully negotiating the "deal" mentioned earlier you cannot face a speeding charge as they have no evidence that you were driving. There is the additional problem that the speeding matter is now "out of time" (proceedings have to begin within six months). It will need a cooperative prosecutor to overcome this problem.
Bailiff Advice
QUOTE (NewJudge @ Wed, 31 Oct 2018 - 22:13) *
There is the additional problem that the speeding matter is now "out of time" (proceedings have to begin within six months). It will need a cooperative prosecutor to overcome this problem.


Is it surely the 'laying of the Information within 6 months that applies and not proceedings having to begin (within 6 months)?

Under Section 127 of the Magistrates' Courts Act 1980, the information for a summary offence must be laid within six months of the date of the alleged offence

The information remains valid even if the summons is not served. A Defendant may make a Statutory Declaration under Section 14 of the Magistrates' Courts Act 1980 after conviction stating that he was unaware of the contents of the summons or the actual conviction. He has 21 days etc .

The effect of a valid Statutory Declaration is to make all proceedings void..........without prejudice to the validity of the original information. That will not be affected.
NewJudge
QUOTE (Bailiff Advice @ Thu, 1 Nov 2018 - 00:14) *
Is it surely the 'laying of the Information within 6 months that applies and not proceedings having to begin (within 6 months)?

I would suggest that "laying an information" is the starting point for proceedings to begin. But no matter as I was just trying to keep it simple.

In any event I believe that "laying an information" is now largely a thing of the past for matters such as this as cases usually begin with the concurrent issue of a Single Justice Procedure Notice and a "Written Charge".
Bailiff Advice
QUOTE (NewJudge @ Thu, 1 Nov 2018 - 08:57) *
QUOTE (Bailiff Advice @ Thu, 1 Nov 2018 - 00:14) *
Is it surely the 'laying of the Information within 6 months that applies and not proceedings having to begin (within 6 months)?

I would suggest that "laying an information" is the starting point for proceedings to begin. But no matter as I was just trying to keep it simple.

In any event I believe that "laying an information" is now largely a thing of the past for matters such as this as cases usually begin with the concurrent issue of a Single Justice Procedure Notice and a "Written Charge".


You are right of course in that most cases start with a 'Written Charge'. That said, the situation is the same as I had outlined above (that only the summons and conviction are voided when a valid Section 14 Statutory Declaration is made. The relevant legislation is Rule 37.17 (4)

QUOTE
(4) Where the defendant serves such a declaration, in time or with an extension of time in which to do so and the case began with a summons or requisition—

(a) the court must treat the summons or requisition and all subsequent proceedings as void (but not the information or written charge with which the case began);

https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure...014-part-37.pdf

peterguk
QUOTE (Bailiff Advice @ Wed, 31 Oct 2018 - 17:19) *
QUOTE (Mysilvercar @ Wed, 31 Oct 2018 - 16:53) *
I think she ticked a box stating that i was not aware of the proceedings at the time- this infers not guilty?


It doesn't infer guilty at all

OP said NOT guilty.
southpaw82
QUOTE (Bailiff Advice @ Thu, 1 Nov 2018 - 00:14) *
QUOTE (NewJudge @ Wed, 31 Oct 2018 - 22:13) *
There is the additional problem that the speeding matter is now "out of time" (proceedings have to begin within six months). It will need a cooperative prosecutor to overcome this problem.


Is it surely the 'laying of the Information within 6 months that applies and not proceedings having to begin (within 6 months)?

Nevertheless, if speeding was not alleged originally it is now too late to add a speeding charge for the OP to plead to.
Mysilvercar
Time has gone extremely quickly & my statutory declaration is this week. So here is a quick update: i will also post an update here afterwards.

As stated above my paperwork requests pleas to both the speeding charge and the failure to provide information charge.
I intend to plead guilty to the lesser charge.

Do i need to provide evidence that the address the paperwork was originally sent to was my previous address?
I do not intend to call any witnesses as i did not believe this would be required.

With regards to making the stat dec outside court beforehand i have not done this so i will be making the declaration this week.
My car has not been removed by marstons and i do not believe that they have made another visit however my car is of low value so i do not think they would choose to remove it anyway.

southpaw82
QUOTE (Mysilvercar @ Mon, 3 Dec 2018 - 12:03) *
Do i need to provide evidence that the address the paperwork was originally sent to was my previous address?

If you’re making the declaration within 21 days then the court is bound to accept it. If outside 21 days the court has a discretion to accept it. It seems to me that the discretion ought to be concerned with whether to accept it late or not rather than whether they believe you or not. After all, you’re committing perjury if you lie.
Mysilvercar
QUOTE (southpaw82 @ Mon, 3 Dec 2018 - 12:19) *
QUOTE (Mysilvercar @ Mon, 3 Dec 2018 - 12:03) *
Do i need to provide evidence that the address the paperwork was originally sent to was my previous address?

If you’re making the declaration within 21 days then the court is bound to accept it. If outside 21 days the court has a discretion to accept it. It seems to me that the discretion ought to be concerned with whether to accept it late or not rather than whether they believe you or not. After all, you’re committing perjury if you lie.


Thanks for the reply - I will report back on what happens. I am hoping that things work out well. Just one final thing: I did attend a speed awareness course some time ago - will this have any bearing on how many points I am given or how big a fine I am given?

Also is it necessary for me to provide details of my earnings?

Many Thanks,

Mysilvercar
Redivi
My understanding is that you continue to plead Not Guilty to the speeding charge until the prosecution agrees a deal

There's a notorious thread where the OP pleaded Guilty without the discussion

The prosecution thanked him for the plea and asked the court to delay sentencing until the more serious charge had been heard
The Rookie
QUOTE (Mysilvercar @ Mon, 3 Dec 2018 - 16:03) *
I did attend a speed awareness course some time ago - will this have any bearing on how many points I am given or how big a fine I am given?

No, none at all.

QUOTE (Mysilvercar @ Mon, 3 Dec 2018 - 16:03) *
Also is it necessary for me to provide details of my earnings?

If requested, yes, not doing so is a separate offence.
andy_foster
QUOTE (Mysilvercar @ Wed, 31 Oct 2018 - 21:16) *
I am certainly not guilty of failure to give information.


That is far from certain, and possibly even far from likely.

A requirement under s. 172 RTA 1988 to provide information applies from when it is served, which is done when it is delivered to your last known address. At the expiration of the period of 28 days beginning with the date of service, subject to any applicable defences the offence is committed if the required information is not provided.
Previously, it was widely assumed that not being aware of the requirement to provide information under s. 172 RT 1988, regardless of why you were not aware, meant that it was not reasonably practicable to provide the information (which is a statutory defence). However, case law has decided that reasonable practicability can (and pretty much therefore does) include actions you ought to have taken before the notice was even issued - such as updating the V5C when you moved.
Redivi
The belief that updating a driving licence also updates the vehicle address seems to be the most common reason for this situation
Mysilvercar
QUOTE (Redivi @ Mon, 3 Dec 2018 - 16:06) *
My understanding is that you continue to plead Not Guilty to the speeding charge until the prosecution agrees a deal

There's a notorious thread where the OP pleaded Guilty without the discussion

The prosecution thanked him for the plea and asked the court to delay sentencing until the more serious charge had been heard


This is quite alarming - should I appear without the paperwork provided filled in then? This process (appearing in court) is completely new to me so I am absolutely unclear at how I would plead not guilty and then change my plea or where the opportunity to do this would arise.

Thanks,


The Rookie
If you are in court no paperwork is needed at all. leave it blank.

When is your hearing?
Mysilvercar
QUOTE (The Rookie @ Wed, 5 Dec 2018 - 07:59) *
If you are in court no paperwork is needed at all. leave it blank.

When is your hearing?


Hearing is imminent

The paperwork states that I must complete the 'make your plea' form

There are the two charges stated (speeding & failure to give information relating to the identification of a driver) and three options to each:

1. Guilty: I do not want to attend court
2. Guilty: I do want to attend court
3. Not Guilty: Send me the date of my trial

I am tempted to just fill the paperwork in before hand. I will certainly be pleading not guilty to the failure to provide information. The only question is the other offence - in the end I am happy to accept this lesser charge.
The Rookie
That's for a postal plea, as you have a hearing date and are attending its redundant and probably included by mistake, you're better off not filling it in - after all you are clearly attending court!

DO NOT plead guilty to speeding without agreeing the deal, they may well discontinue the S172 but if they don't 9 points beckons as detailed above.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2019 Invision Power Services, Inc.