Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Strange MS90 case
FightBack Forums > Queries > Speeding and other Criminal Offences
wronged
Hi Guys,
My mother is down as the registered keeper to a car my wife and I now drive. My mother lives in Scotland and we live in England (although spends time in England too).
We moved from address A in England (where car was registered) to address B in England around January 2018 (changed address on V5 a couple months later). Between January and February 2018 my wife and I were flashed a number of times.

Wife: Flashed on 8th & 6th of February 2018. Both NIP's arrived at Address A in my mum's name, wasn't a problem as we were collecting mail. Both NIP's were filled out with my wife's details as she was the driver. She was offered a speed awareness course for the one on 6th February and took 3 points for the second.

Me: Flashed on 1st and 7th January 2018. Both of these NIP's were filled out with my details as I was the driver for these. However I never received anything other than a summons to court for one of them which i attended and end up receiving 5 points and a HUGE fine. The other I never heard anything about.

Mum: Never flashed nor did "she" ever fail to provide details for any of the offences. On 30th July 2018 she received a letter to her address in Scotland from court detailing that they are considering disqualifying her from driving due to the number of offences on her record. These were: 2x failure to give information to the ID of the driver for 8th & 6th Feb 2018 and 2x speeding for 1st & 7th Jan 2018. She e-mailed them on 21st Aug 2018 (they stated reply must be made before 30th Aug so this reply was well in time) detailing that she already provided the details and then provided them again in the e-mail as well as stating clearly to send ALL correspondence to address B in England. A follow up e-mail was sent on 9th Sep 2018 asking for an update....no reply to either e-mail.
Now a letter dated 21st Feb 2019 was sent to my mums address in Scotland saying "on the above date you were convicted of a driving offence and disqualified from driving".
I've attached a snapshot of what is on her licence.

Looking for some help on this as to how to resolve this issue and move forward.

Thanks in advance.
Click to view attachment
The Rookie
It seems likely the two drivers committed further offences during the change of address period and the notices went to address A and were not collected/received although for the offence dates noted the actual driving offence would have occurred 30-44 days before that (in December) as the offence date is for the failing to provide information and is committed 28 days after the Request for details is deemed served.

The fact the dates tally with your wife's speeding events on the 8th and 6th Feb is entirely coincidental, they are NOT the same original alleged offences.

wronged
QUOTE (The Rookie @ Wed, 27 Feb 2019 - 10:51) *
It seems likely the two drivers committed further offences during the change of address period and the notices went to address A and were not collected/received although for the offence dates noted the actual driving offence would have occurred 30-44 days before that (in December) as the offence date is for the failing to provide information and is committed 28 days after the Request for details is deemed served.

The fact the dates tally with your wife's speeding events on the 8th and 6th Feb is entirely coincidental, they are NOT the same original alleged offences.



Thanks for the quick reply.
The dates cannot be coincidental as the car was not driven AT ALL before 1st Jan 2018...
The Rookie
They are coincidental the S172 offence occurs more than 28 days after the original speeding/red light (etc.) offence. Please get that or you'll get nowhere. There would have to be a major louse up for them to get the offence date wrong by such a large amount.

The original speeding (or whatever) offences would have occurred on or before 4th and 6th Jan respectively.

Was the car acquired 1/1/19? Perhaps tell us more of the history leading to that point?

wronged
QUOTE (The Rookie @ Wed, 27 Feb 2019 - 11:29) *
They are coincidental the S172 offence occurs more than 28 days after the original speeding/red light (etc.) offence. Please get that or you'll get nowhere. There would have to be a major louse up for them to get the offence date wrong by such a large amount.

The original speeding (or whatever) offences would have occurred on or before 4th and 6th Jan respectively.

Was the car acquired 1/1/19? Perhaps tell us more of the history leading to that point?


No the car was acquired on Feb 2017 for my mum but not driven much at all as we both had our own cars and she preferred being in Scotland. Then late 2017 we started using that car.

What strikes me is on the snapshot it says 0 points for the offence of 6th feb which coincides with the offence date my wife went to a speed awareness course for (the date she attended was March I think) and the 6 points of 8th feb coincide with the 3 points my wife accepted points for (April was the date she paid the fine and sent her licence away for these 3 points)..

My question is how do I overturn my mums licence being revoked...i'm happy for one of us to deal with the consequences but obviously not fair on my mum.
The Rookie
It says zero AIUI because as she totted and the points wiped clean by the totting ban. The sentencing may not have been in the same order as the offences.

If they went to court with the S172 offence the fact a course was offered to the driver would have no material effect on the sentencing at all anyway.

We need more information to understand what your Mum can do, in the short term she can perform a statutory declaration that she was unaware of the cases and that would reset it to the summons stage but that may be pointless if she doesn't have a defence.
wronged
QUOTE (The Rookie @ Wed, 27 Feb 2019 - 11:46) *
It says zero AIUI because as she totted and the points wiped clean by the totting ban. The sentencing may not have been in the same order as the offences.

If they went to court with the S172 offence the fact a course was offered to the driver would have no material effect on the sentencing at all anyway.

We need more information to understand what your Mum can do, in the short term she can perform a statutory declaration that she was unaware of the cases and that would reset it to the summons stage but that may be pointless if she doesn't have a defence.


AH! I think I understand. You're right it must be a coincidence that the date of my wife's offences coincide with the the two S172 dates of the original speeding offences which were by me.

So in short let's ignore my wife's offences as they have been dealt with (and assume that the court/DVLA have not duplicated my wife's offences onto my mums licence too!).

The two speeding offences on 01/01/18 & 07/01/18 were by me but original NIP came to address A. I filled these out with my details as the driver and with new address too, but have never received anything back for them.
Instead the S172 was issued on 06/02/18 & 08/02/18 for the above with no correspondence to any of the addresses until 30/07/18 - which was a letter to my mum at Scotland address for conviction of 2x original speeding offences and 2x failure to provide ID offences.

She sent an e-mail to the stated address to detail that NIP's were filled with MY details previously, and went on to give them once again. There has never been any reply to this e mail or any reply via post until the letter this week saying "on the above date you were convicted of a driving offence and disqualified from driving".

I hope this is now clear...?
The Rookie
QUOTE (wronged @ Wed, 27 Feb 2019 - 12:45) *
The two speeding offences on 01/01/18 & 07/01/18 were by me but original NIP came to address A. I filled these out with my details as the driver and with new address too, but have never received anything back for them.

The 01 or 07 Jan offence that you heard nothing more from is almost certainly resulting in one of the two MS90, with so many offences occurring together I suspect you were perhaps caught 3 times and maybe have got confused, as for each reply you would then get one addressed to you to also reply to.

NOTE: Your Mother was legally obliged to reply not you, whether that has been enough for them to take it to court I don't know.

QUOTE (wronged @ Wed, 27 Feb 2019 - 12:45) *
Instead the S172 was issued on 06/02/18 & 08/02/18 for the above with no correspondence to any of the addresses until 30/07/18 -

NO, the S172 were issued such that the 28 days to reply expired on the 06 and 08/02, so that means issued about 04 and 06 Jan, which tally with your 01 or 07 rather too well.
wronged
QUOTE (The Rookie @ Wed, 27 Feb 2019 - 13:24) *
QUOTE (wronged @ Wed, 27 Feb 2019 - 12:45) *
The two speeding offences on 01/01/18 & 07/01/18 were by me but original NIP came to address A. I filled these out with my details as the driver and with new address too, but have never received anything back for them.

The 01 or 07 Jan offence that you heard nothing more from is almost certainly resulting in one of the two MS90, with so many offences occurring together I suspect you were perhaps caught 3 times and maybe have got confused, as for each reply you would then get one addressed to you to also reply to.

NOTE: Your Mother was legally obliged to reply not you, whether that has been enough for them to take it to court I don't know.

QUOTE (wronged @ Wed, 27 Feb 2019 - 12:45) *
Instead the S172 was issued on 06/02/18 & 08/02/18 for the above with no correspondence to any of the addresses until 30/07/18 -

NO, the S172 were issued such that the 28 days to reply expired on the 06 and 08/02, so that means issued about 04 and 06 Jan, which tally with your 01 or 07 rather too well.


Firstly it was my mother who opened and queried the offences. I then asked for my details to be filled and had all 3 sent off. I only ever received one reply to the three offences in the form of a summons, this was due to the fact that I had not sent back the NIP that was apparently sent to me, this is where I attended court and received points and a fine.
But the other two that were filled out with my details and my new address I never received anything, no NIP or summons.

When my mum then received another letter stating she failed to give details she emailed them to say she had and provided them once again, but again no reply.

I have no idea what to do and what to ask my mum to do. I was the driver and as I said, she did what was expected on 2 occasions - give details of the driver, which was me. But for some reason this has either been ignored or not received. I have copies of the email correspondence but not much more. What would you advise we do?

Thanks for all the replies so far Rookie smile.gif
The Rookie
You didn't get 5 points for not replying its 6 minimum, so logically for your excess speed. For that you 'must' have got subsequent paperwork in your name for you to confirm you were driving.

So now you were caught 3 times, and were only punished once, that suggests the other two replies were not received and the resulting S172 prosecutions resulted.

She can perform the stat dec as mentioned above, whether the court will accept that she did send the reply and it wasn't received (as opposed to her not replying) is open to debate.
wronged
QUOTE (The Rookie @ Wed, 27 Feb 2019 - 15:11) *
You didn't get 5 points for not replying its 6 minimum, so logically for your excess speed. For that you 'must' have got subsequent paperwork in your name for you to confirm you were driving.

So now you were caught 3 times, and were only punished once, that suggests the other two replies were not received and the resulting S172 prosecutions resulted.

She can perform the stat dec as mentioned above, whether the court will accept that she did send the reply and it wasn't received (as opposed to her not replying) is open to debate.


When I got the summons I pleaded not guilty and sent a note saying that this is the first i've heard so happy to take original points and fine that wasn't sent out. Got another letter with a court date. I went along and after speaking to the clerk I was convinced that I best plead guilty and take the points and fine. When i was called to the stand i explained my self, the confusion and house move etc etc, they gave me 5 points for essentially "wasting courts time.

Ok so is there a standard stat form available for her to fill out, or can she do this over the phone with the court?
Once this is done I take it she'll be called to court to explain herself? Is there anything else she should do in the meantime, should she forward the e mail on again?

Thanks
The Rookie
OK, reading between the lines they accepted it was an unintentional S172 offence and punished you for the speeding, there are no points for wasting the courts time!

To perform a Statutory declaration there are two routes, one is to phone the court and make an appointment to do it in court (I'm not sure if a Scottish court can accept an SD for an English case, she may need to travel to an English court), the second is via a Commissioner of Oaths (any solicitor for example) which will cost £5 for the oath, but they may charge more to draw up the declaration although there are examples on here. This is then submitted to the convicting court. If the SD is made within 21 days of first finding out about the convictions then the court MUST accept it, if its made later its discretionary.
southpaw82
QUOTE (The Rookie @ Wed, 27 Feb 2019 - 15:42) *
a Commissioner of Oaths (any solicitor for example) which will cost £5 for the oath

Or whoever is authorised under Scottish law to administer oaths. No idea what the charge would be.
wronged
Hi Guys,
I'm struggling to find a SD form, can someone be so kind as to post a link or an example?

Thanks
southpaw82
Link
wronged
QUOTE (southpaw82 @ Thu, 28 Feb 2019 - 13:58) *


Thanks.
My mum did receive correspondence to her Scotland address, upon receipt she replied via e-mail, but then heard nothing.
Should she just word the template to that effect??
I've attached the correspondence and then the follow up email with the original email below it for reference so you understand what I mean.

Sorry to be a pain guys!!
southpaw82
The template will need to be amended to reflect the circumstances. Thinking about it, I’m not sure the template can be used if she’s swearing it in Scotland, as I have no idea if the relevant Act applies in Scotland.
The Rookie
As the case was in England (AIUI) then the SD should be to correspond with English Law I would have thought?

So she did get the notices prior to conviction ....she CANNOT perform an SD where she was aware of the court case and she also appears to be guilty, she may just have to serve out the 6 month ban and await the eye watering insurance quotes.
southpaw82
QUOTE (The Rookie @ Thu, 28 Feb 2019 - 16:22) *
As the case was in England (AIUI) then the SD should be to correspond with English Law I would have thought?

No - the situs of the declaration is the important factor. If I was to take an SD for use anywhere in the world it would be under my local legislation, because that is what is breached if the declaration turns out to be false.
The Rookie
OK, fair enough, assuming an SD is now possible given the extra information now given that contradicts the earlier version of events somewhat (completely).
wronged
I will try my best to draft something up and will post it here before having it filled out and signed.

Thanks
The Rookie
Draft what up?

Your Mum Cannot do a stat dec saying was unaware of a case she appears to have been well aware of (from the information you just shared) without committing a further more serious offence. One that could then involve time at her Majesty's pleasure.

Your scans in post #16 render all comments before that a nullity as the basis we were working under (that your Mum knew nothing about the cases and didn't in fact get the S172 request) has now been rendered a nullity as it was palpably false.

She clearly new about the cases in August last year
http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?act=at...st&id=62113

She chose not to attend and defend them, the email she sent wasn't in any way the right response to a criminal case.
wronged
QUOTE (The Rookie @ Fri, 1 Mar 2019 - 11:12) *
Draft what up?

Your Mum Cannot do a stat dec saying was unaware of a case she appears to have been well aware of (from the information you just shared) without committing a further more serious offence. One that could then involve time at her Majesty's pleasure.

Your scans in post #16 render all comments before that a nullity as the basis we were working under (that your Mum knew nothing about the cases and didn't in fact get the S172 request) has now been rendered a nullity as it was palpably false.

She clearly new about the cases in August last year
http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?act=at...st&id=62113

She chose not to attend and defend them, the email she sent wasn't in any way the right response to a criminal case.


Sorry I'm a little confused...
I was flashed 3 times in total. 2 of them close to one another - she filled both these NIPs together and sent them off together with my details as the driver. However, I never received anything following that. The 3rd one she sent off also with my details, but I do not ever remember getting the NIP, the first this came to my attention was in the form of a summons - which I end up going to court for and took points and a fine for.

She was sent the letter above to her address in Scotland, so she duly replied via e mail as it states on the letter before the 30/08/18, informing court that she had already provided the details originally.

She received no response to that e mail, or the follow up e mail she sent in September.

Now she has received a letter saying she is disqualified. She has not been made aware of anything following her reply to the letter!?
The Rookie
The court letter is telling she has been convicted already, it specifically asks her to present any case why she shouldn’t be banned. First line ‘you have been convicted’, it’s not ambiguous at all. Second paragraph is also very clear. With all due respect it wasn’t read properly or taken seriously enough.

She may not have been aware of the cases leading up to that point but when you got that she was informed she had been convicted. Emailing back what was meaningless waffle about naming drivers was pointless, she needed to present an argument why she shouldn’t be banned OR make a stat dec if that was genuinely the first she had heard of the two cases. Given the fact the letter above wasn’t read properly or reacted to properly we need to be very sure of what else she may or may not have received.

She could still try an out of time deceleration for the cases, but 6 months after she was made aware by that letter i think it’s highly unlikely to be accepted, why did she not do anything for six months?

If she got prior communications she did not read properly or react to properly then making an incorrect stat dec could land her in very serious trouble. If she replied in a similar vein to the above it proves she got it and it wouldn’t have helped her case at all.

In fact the middle letter you’ve posted looks like the original summons as she was dual charged, she was only then convicted of the two failing to furnish offences.
wronged
QUOTE (The Rookie @ Fri, 1 Mar 2019 - 16:39) *
The court letter is telling she has been convicted already, it specifically asks her to present any case why she shouldn’t be banned. First line ‘you have been convicted’, it’s not ambiguous at all. Second paragraph is also very clear. With all due respect it wasn’t read properly or taken seriously enough.

She may not have been aware of the cases leading up to that point but when you got that she was informed she had been convicted. Emailing back what was meaningless waffle about naming drivers was pointless, she needed to present an argument why she shouldn’t be banned OR make a stat dec if that was genuinely the first she had heard of the two cases. Given the fact the letter above wasn’t read properly or reacted to properly we need to be very sure of what else she may or may not have received.

She could still try an out of time deceleration for the cases, but 6 months after she was made aware by that letter i think it’s highly unlikely to be accepted, why did she not do anything for six months?

If she got prior communications she did not read properly or react to properly then making an incorrect stat dec could land her in very serious trouble. If she replied in a similar vein to the above it proves she got it and it wouldn’t have helped her case at all.

In fact the middle letter you’ve posted looks like the original summons as she was dual charged, she was only then convicted of the two failing to furnish offences.


I understand what you're saying. This is the first time any of us have ever had to deal with NIP's/court etc in 20+ years of driving. Apologies if it comes across as if any of us haven't taken it seriously we genuinely have and have numerous sleepless nights due to it.

My mum did what she was asked which was provide the driver details, and then replied to the letter. Following that I'd have thought they would have sent her a court summons at which point the case could have been presented.

I'll get in touch with a solicitor to see what our options are.
Thanks
The Rookie
Well the middle scan looks like part of the original ‘summons’ (Single Justice Procedure Notice), can she confirm if it came with the scan telling her she was convicted or before that?

The first scan if you read it is, to be honest, quite clearly not a request for drivers details, it wasn’t read properly and if it was taken seriously the first thing is to read it properly, it’s not asking for drivers details, it’s asking why she shouldn’t be disqualified, there is no legalise involved.

It’s looking to me more like she will have little choice but to serve out her disqualification.
Irksome
You've just been told what your options are?

I don't understand the timeline however ... letter (date unknow) addressed to Mum(?) warning her that she has been convicted (there must have been a SJP Notice before this?) and that a hearing will be held on the 30th August 2018 to consider imposing a driving ban. I thought courts made an effort not to ban people in their absence but this letter doesn't seem to give the recipient the opportunity to be present?

Is the 2nd image uploaded the reverse of this letter, in which case it seems to indicate that Mum(?) was convicted of BOTH sets of charges (indicating a guilty plea to both offences must have been made or else how did they confirm the driver of the vehicle at the time?). We can't see the speeds, but if that's a list of convictions then its got to be 18 points?

But then the 3rd image is a screen shot showing two MS90's and the TT90 sentanced in February 2019 for a conviction date of the 30th July 2018 ... why such a delay between the conviction and the sentancing ... there has to be more than 1 email going on here?

I don't think we're getting the whole story ...

And has Mum(?) paid the fine ... that's going to be a pretty hefty fine I'd imagine?
The Rookie
QUOTE (Irksome @ Fri, 1 Mar 2019 - 17:28) *
. I thought courts made an effort not to ban people in their absence but this letter doesn't seem to give the recipient the opportunity to be present?

There is six months between the notification of conviction and when she was banned, we don’t know what else may have been sent to give her opportunities to attend.

Maybe something was received in the September which prompted the second email sent?
wronged
Hi,
Just an update...I know I've said some conflicting statements - this was just down to being so confused with the whole case and history. I spoke to the court to understand the timeline and who also provided some useful updates.

To clarify:
Flashed on 01/01/2018 & 07/01/2018 in England
NIP received and filled out/posted back together in 1 envelope with driver details (court never received)

Moved address

Single justice procedure sent on 02/07/2018 to old address despite updating V5, with 4 charges, 2x speeding offence + 2x failure to provide ID

Disqualification warning letter sent on 30/07/2018 to reg keepers address in Scotland asking for a response by 30/08/2018

Response made via e-mail on 21/08/2018 also providing address update for any correspondence (court confirmed they received)

Without any warning or notice court proceeded to convict reg keeper in their absence



The court advised that she should submit a SD but didn't help with how this should be done as the reg keeper is in Scotland. I spoke to a Prosecutor Fiscal in Scotland who couldn't offer much advice other than to speak to a Lawyer in England. I thought it best to put it up here before contacting a Lawyer in case someone can help answer?

Who is deemed a commissioner of oath in Scotland, any lawyer or someone specific who observes the reg keeper signing the document?
Would this be accepted as SD?

I XXXXXXXXXXXXX,
of XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
DO SOLEMNLY AND SINCERELY DECLARE THAT:
With reference to the following offences on:
On 08/02/2018 - failed to give information relating to the identification of the driver of a vehicle, namely XXXXXXX,
On 07/01/2018 - speed exceeding 70 miles per hour
On 06/02/2018 - failed to give information relating to the identification of the driver of a vehicle, namely XXXXXXX,
On 01/01/2018 - speed exceeding 70 miles per hour
By XXXXXXX Magistrates Court, I did not know of any hearing for this matter. From information provided to me on 07/03/2019 by the Magistrates Court I am informed that a Single Justice Procedure was sent to an old address and that a hearing was held in my absence where I was convicted resulting in my licence being endorsed with a number of points leading to a disqualification. The reference number for this case is, XXXXXX.
AND THAT:
A letter was sent notifying me that the court was considering disqualifying me from driving, to which I duly replied, however received no reply or correspondence.
Notification of this first came to my attention on 26/02/2019 when a letter from DVLA came to my home address advising me that on the 21/02/2019 I was convicted of an offence and disqualified from driving.
I make this solemn declaration conscientiously believing the same to be true and by virtue of the provisions of the Statutory Declarations Act 1835.

DATE:
SIGNATURE:

DECLARED BEFORE ME:
COMMISSIONER FOR OATHS/NAME OF JUSTICE:
The Rookie
Let’s rewind, was the list of alleged offences received with the notice of convictions or at some other time, as it doesn’t tally with it as the speeding cases had already been dropped. In addition why was that sent to the Scottish address randomly if nothing earlier was (like the single justice procedure notice which the list of offences looks like it’s from).

QUOTE
A letter was sent notifying me that the court was considering disqualifying me from driving, to which I duly replied, however received no reply or correspondence.
Notification of this first came to my attention on 26/02/2019 when a letter from DVLA came to my home address advising me that on the 21/02/2019 I was convicted of an offence and disqualified from driving.

Those two contradict each other. She was notified of the conviction in August, she didn’t reply meaningfully, so while she replied in the strict sense of the word it was a nullity. Making an incorrect statement is a serious offence, let’s not make it worse by admitting guilt in the statement itself!

She wasn’t convicted on 21/02/19, it was back in August as the letter makes clear.
ford poplar
If your mother is a named driver on your Insurance you will have to declare her disqualification, which will increase your Premium or else you commit another offence.
wronged
QUOTE (The Rookie @ Fri, 8 Mar 2019 - 17:30) *
Let’s rewind, was the list of alleged offences received with the notice of convictions or at some other time, as it doesn’t tally with it as the speeding cases had already been dropped. In addition why was that sent to the Scottish address randomly if nothing earlier was (like the single justice procedure notice which the list of offences looks like it’s from).

QUOTE
A letter was sent notifying me that the court was considering disqualifying me from driving, to which I duly replied, however received no reply or correspondence.
Notification of this first came to my attention on 26/02/2019 when a letter from DVLA came to my home address advising me that on the 21/02/2019 I was convicted of an offence and disqualified from driving.

Those two contradict each other. She was notified of the conviction in August, she didn’t reply meaningfully, so while she replied in the strict sense of the word it was a nullity. Making an incorrect statement is a serious offence, let’s not make it worse by admitting guilt in the statement itself!

She wasn’t convicted on 21/02/19, it was back in August as the letter makes clear.


I’m not sure I understand what you’re asking...the reason she received the letter to the Scottish address (the only letter she received after the initial offences where she was asked to provide details of driver), stating the court were considering disqualifying her, was because the court contacted DVLA and found her licence address and sent it there. They put an address label over the wrong address and hand wrote the Scottish address on it.

On the most recent letter from DVLA that says she is now disqualified and needs to send her licence to them, it says “you were convicted on the above date”, the “above date being 21/02/2019.

What should she have said in her reply if it is so wrong? She stated that she has already provided details and that she was not the offender. Following that the court should not have heard her case on her absence and without letting her know what was going on...

QUOTE (ford poplar @ Fri, 8 Mar 2019 - 17:49) *
If your mother is a named driver on your Insurance you will have to declare her disqualification, which will increase your Premium or else you commit another offence.


Thanks, goes without saying.
The Rookie
They may have used the word conviction, probably a template letter, but clearly she was convicted in August AND she can’t say the February letter was the first she was aware clearly, not forgetting that if they care to they have the email as evidence.

It just seemed strange the list of offences were sent in August so trying to be sure.

She’ll have to pray they allow a late Stat dec as it’s well outside the 21 days since she became aware of the conviction.
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.