Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Alleged Red Light Contravention by Unmarked Police Vehicle
FightBack Forums > Queries > Speeding and other Criminal Offences
MCCRoadster
Hi,

The folowing occured today at 15:00 hrs. I was approaching a traffic light controlled junction where you can either drive straight on or turn left. There are two lanes accordingly. I was following a HGV as I approached the junction to turn left. I believe there are no filter lights to turn left here as both lights directing traffic straight on and left light up simultaneously.

I was doing no more than 30 mph due to speed restrictions and the slow moving HGV in front of me. The lights were clearly on green as the HGV entered the junction and began to turn left. I was at this point directly behind him. The lights changed to amber. I had crossed the white line entering the junction and began to turn left. The HGV in front of me had slowed at this point to an incredible slow crawl as he navigated the corner. I was at this point committed into the jucntion, and followed him through. However, I maintain that the lights were light as amber when I had crossed the line into the junction. By the time I had left the junction, the lights would have most certainly had turned red.

The next thing there were blue lights behind me from an unmarked white BMW patrol car.

The lone officer says that I have been stopped because he witnessed me drive through a red light. I politely insisted that the light was infact on amber when I crossed the junction but he believes otherwise and proceeds to write me a ticket (fixed penalty notice). He says that I have 28 days to visit a police station of my choice with my driving licence and subsequently pay the £60.00 fine, or write to the address opposite contesting the offence, by which the matter will be dealt with by a court. I again plead my innocence that the light was on amber. He says that he definately saw me go through while the light was on red. I explained that I had enetered the junction on amber but the HGV in front of me had then slowed right down to about 4-5 mph. He then said that he would review the video footage from the inboard camera to double check at a later point. Curiously, he went on to say that the camera inside the car worked in a special way which he could not divulge into further (his words).

I asked if I could see the footage, which he replied, no. I asked if I could request a copy of the footage before deciding what course of action to take, he replied, no.

He went through the proceedure again on the form and asked if i would sign in a box, marked motorist signature (request only). He explained that I did not have to sign if I did not want to but a signature did not admit guilt to the offence. I politely declined to sign pending further advice. He entered 'unhappy to sign' and initialled in the box instead.

He asked if I was a police officer, which I replied no (maybe perhaps due to some of the questions I was asking him etc??) He again asked if I was 100% sure and understood what I had been issued with and what I needed to do regarding the proceedure etc.

I had asked if he had been following my vehicle for sometime and he replied no, just happened to be passing in the right hand lane to proceed straight on. He had then decided at the last moment to change direction and pull me over for the alleged offence.

Upon inspection of the fixed penalty notice, in the offence code he appears to have written H107 and then Contravene Red Signal (spelt Contraven). However, should this be code TS10?? Never heard of H107 and can not find code on the internet. With the spelling error, is this officer new to such codes and offences? Any play here?

Any advice, help and assistance would be greatly appreciated. I have tried to be as thorough as possible but any further information please ask.

Thank you.
Logician
The code will be the constabulary's own code for the offence, not the DVLA code that goes on licences. An obvious spelling mistake will not assist you at all.

You have no right to view any video footage unless you refuse the fixed penalty and plead not guilty when you get the summons, so you have the choice of accepting the fixed penalty notice, or going to court. Basically it comes down to how confident you feel that your version of events is correct. You have the advantage that the officer has admitted that a video exists, so the prosecution can be made to produce it, or suffer the consequences if it is not available. If you are found guilty in court, the fine and costs will be higher than the fixed penalty, points the same.

I presume an MCC roadster is red and yellow?
MCCRoadster
Ok, thanks for your reply. So if I decide to contest this, is the best course of action to wait the 28 days and then write to the central ticket office asking that I be dealt with by a court? Take photos of the scene and check any light sequences?

Will I defineately receive a summons or will they decide first if they have a strong case to prove (ie good video evidence) ?

I dont own or drive a roadster...

Thanks
The Rookie
You are very likley to get a summons, an officer claiming to have watched you jump a red light is all the evidence they need, they don't need a video!

Simon
CuriousOrange
If you didn't give him your driving licence, then the procedure is that you visit a police station with seven days and surrender your licence (i.e. leave it with them) to get an 'authentic' FPN. If you then pay the £60 within 28 days from the offence you get your licence back with 3 points and that's the end of it. If you don't pay the £60 or you don't surrender your licence in the first place then you may or may not get a summons any time within the next six to eight months. It's pretty unusual for it to get forgotten about or otherwise taken no further but not unheard of.  

Are you sure you weren't asked to produce insurance documents etc at a police station?

I don't see that photos would be any of any use? Nor the light sequences, since from your description he was in the lane alongside you and so had a direct view of the lights.

They don't need video evidence. I think (but am not sure) a single officer's opinion can be enough in red light cases, though that's not to say it can't be challenged and reasonable doubt introduced. As said above you should be able to push for video evidence.

Bear in mind that if any part of your car, not just the front, crossed the line on red then you would have committed an offence. Are you sure your car was entirely clear of the line on red?

If it goes to court you don't risk any more points, only a larger fine.

biker337
I always thought going through an amber was an offence too? I might be wrong here but if you 'admitted' even that at the scene it could be case closed. Others might correct me, but either claim it was green or don't say anything.
CuriousOrange
It's basically an offence to cross on amber unless your vehicle is "so close to the stop line that it cannot safely be stopped without proceeding beyond the stop line".

Usually this is in relation to whether you can stop in time, but I suppose it could also be argued to cover a situation where a slow moving car, already mostly over the line when the light turns amber, carries on because stopping dead where they were in the junction would be unsafe?

Thing is the officer told the OP he crossed on red so the assumption has to be that's what'll be in his statement.

The OP's not entirely clear whether they initially crossed the line on green or amber: "...lights changed to amber. I had crossed the white line entering the junction and began to turn left." yet "I maintain that the lights were light as amber when I had crossed the line into the junction."

To be honest, I suspect the OP thought once the front of the car passes the line that's it, not realising they had to be completely clear of the line by red, but until they confirm who knows?
MCCRoadster
Thank you for your recent replies.

I have some more information. I went back to the scene so as to check anything obvious and discovered that there is boxed cycle lane directly in front of the stop line very similar to the image below:



This ties into something the officer said to me on the day of the alleged offence, "...by the time the light was on red you had already passed the first white line and had just gone past the second white line next to the lights. This is why I decided to pursue you for this offence".

At the time I didnt really understand what the officer was referring to regarding two white lines? Looking at the scene it is obvious with the bike lane. However, which line is the legal one which you need to cross in a situation like this to have committed an offence?

I would assume the first major line as that is where you are expected to stop when instructed to do so by the lights when driving a motor vehicle. I called the local police station and asked them just that, and they confirmed that it was the first line. I didnt give details of my name or the date of any offence or the officer issuing the ticket - but they did say that if the officer felt it was justified to give you a ticket then there must have been a clear good reason for him doing so.

They said that I could write in and ask for further clarification (although they seemed reluctant to allow me to view any possible video as policy, should it even exist). I was even invited to email direct to the officer involved for further clarification. Dont know if should do that?

Definately not asked to produce driving documents at a police station. ONLY the licence if I wished to except the FPN. I did NOT sign the paperwork if this helps at all? Maybe not.

Questions:

Should the next course of action be write to the local constabulary for further clarification? Say the reasons why I feel that this offence maybe unjustified and see if they back it up with evidence?? Did this once in the past and they happily sent me photos.

AND/OR: I feel at this moment in time that I wish to contest this offence. Is it simply best to do nothing and wait for any possible summons OR write to the ticket office requesting that this is what I wish to do?

What is the view of others regarding the white line you need to cross to be prosecuted in regards to a bicycle lane box?

I definately believe that I was well clear of the first white line before the lights turned to red. Any help and advice greatly appreciated.

PS First 7 days up next Tuesday.

Thanks

Mayhem007
Well you have the advantage that there is a video of the incident.

If you intend to defend this I would do it sooner rather then later and advice the officer that you will require a copy of the video once you have pleaded not guilty and drafted a defence letter.

Advice him as investigating officer, officer in charge of investigation and disclosure officer he has responsibilities to ensure that the evidence is available to you as the defendant. If they somehow loose this crucial bit of evidence, then this would be abuse of process.
andy_foster
QUOTE (MCCRoadster @ Fri, 9 Jul 2010 - 23:37) *
This ties into something the officer said to me on the day of the alleged offence, "...by the time the light was on red you had already passed the first white line and had just gone past the second white line next to the lights. This is why I decided to pursue you for this offence".


Taken literally, that would mean that you had passed both lines by the time the lights turned red.
MCCRoadster
Do I have to plead not guilty to be able to view the video and therefore eliminating the opportunity to pay the fixed penalty if the video demonstrates in anyway that I may have committed an offence?

Should I write now before the expired 28 days to gain any further clarification / information or is this a waste of time?

What is your opinion on the two white lines in this case?

At present I wish to contest as I feel that I was wrongly accused of going through a red light.

Help appreciated, thank you.
CuriousOrange
Basically yes, you'd have to wait for the FPN to expire and for them to issue a summons. If they do (and normally they will) then you'd have to plead not guilty to obtain the video.

Getting to view it before the FPN expires would rely on them feeling most accomodating.

As far as the issue of the two stop lines goes, they have equal status. If you can safely stop at the first line on amber then you must do so; if you can't stop safely on amber at the first line but you can stop safely on amber at the second (advanced) line then you must do so; if any part of your vehicle crosses either line on red then you have committed the offence.

How sure are you that your car was clear of both stop lines when the line turned red?
MCCRoadster
I am 100% certain that my car had passed the first stop line (the one you must wait behind on red) but about 90% sure that I fully passed the second line before the light turned completely to red.

I know that I was on-top of the junction when the lights turned to amber, and so continued on past the stop line. There is a 3 second delay to red. I was immediately up behind a HGV which turned the corner extremely slowly. I could not see the lights by this point as they were behind me, so not sure if I actually made it completely clear of the second line.

Never come across this situation before regarding double stop lines around cycle box at traffic lights. Assumed first line would be the one you must adhere to (police operator seemed to think so too)?? Anyway of looking this bit of highway law up anywhere? Couldn't find it before?

So either sit it out and cross fingers that they may not issue summons (although likelyhood is that they will) or drop them a line at a shot at uncovering any further info before pleading not guilty? Hmmm.
jobo
QUOTE (CuriousOrange @ Mon, 12 Jul 2010 - 16:33) *
Basically yes, you'd have to wait for the FPN to expire and for them to issue a summons. If they do (and normally they will) then you'd have to plead not guilty to obtain the video.

Getting to view it before the FPN expires would rely on them feeling most accomodating.

As far as the issue of the two stop lines goes, they have equal status. If you can safely stop at the first line on amber then you must do so; if you can't stop safely on amber at the first line but you can stop safely on amber at the second (advanced) line then you must do so; if any part of your vehicle crosses either line on red then you have committed the offence.

How sure are you that your car was clear of both stop lines when the line turned red?


imk not sure that true ?

there is ONLY one stop line and this is the one directly between the trafic signals, as the offence is passing a signal, not crossing the line
southpaw82
QUOTE (jobo @ Tue, 13 Jul 2010 - 00:37) *
there is ONLY one stop line and this is the one directly between the trafic signals, as the offence is passing a signal, not crossing the line


TSRGD 2002, Reg. 36(1)(a)

QUOTE
subject to sub-paragraph (b) and, where the red signal is shown at the same time as the green arrow signal, to sub-paragraphs (f) and (g), the red signal shall convey the prohibition that vehicular traffic shall not proceed beyond the stop line


Reg 4

QUOTE
“stop line” in relation to light signals for the control of vehicular traffic has the meaning given in regulation 43;


Reg 43

QUOTE
(1) Subject to paragraphs (2) and (3), “stop line” in relation to light signals for the control of vehicular traffic means—

(a) in relation to any vehicle except a tramcar the road marking shown in diagram 1001 placed in conjunction with the light signals;

(2) Where the road marking shown in diagram 1001.2 has been placed in conjunction with light signals, “stop line” in relation to those light signals means—

(a) the first stop line, in the case of a vehicle (other than a pedal cycle proceeding in the cycle lane) which has not proceeded beyond that line; or

(b) the second stop line, in the case of a vehicle which has proceeded beyond the first stop line or of a pedal cycle proceeding in the cycle lane.
jobo
QUOTE (southpaw82 @ Tue, 13 Jul 2010 - 19:01) *
QUOTE (jobo @ Tue, 13 Jul 2010 - 00:37) *
there is ONLY one stop line and this is the one directly between the trafic signals, as the offence is passing a signal, not crossing the line


TSRGD 2002, Reg. 36(1)(a)

QUOTE
subject to sub-paragraph (b) and, where the red signal is shown at the same time as the green arrow signal, to sub-paragraphs (f) and (g), the red signal shall convey the prohibition that vehicular traffic shall not proceed beyond the stop line


Reg 4

QUOTE
“stop line” in relation to light signals for the control of vehicular traffic has the meaning given in regulation 43;


Reg 43

QUOTE
(1) Subject to paragraphs (2) and (3), “stop line” in relation to light signals for the control of vehicular traffic means—

(a) in relation to any vehicle except a tramcar the road marking shown in diagram 1001 placed in conjunction with the light signals;

(2) Where the road marking shown in diagram 1001.2 has been placed in conjunction with light signals, “stop line” in relation to those light signals means—

(a) the first stop line, in the case of a vehicle (other than a pedal cycle proceeding in the cycle lane) which has not proceeded beyond that line; or

(b) the second stop line, in the case of a vehicle which has proceeded beyond the first stop line or of a pedal cycle proceeding in the cycle lane.



ok could have phrased that better, there are two stop lines

but only one gives an endorsable offence of contravining a traffic signal

or am i wrong about that ?
southpaw82
QUOTE (jobo @ Tue, 13 Jul 2010 - 19:22) *
or am i wrong about that ?


I think so. IMO it's the first line, unless you're a cycle or have already passed it, in which case it's the second line.
The Rookie
My understanding is with SP, the 'primary' stop line is the first one, however it is not an offence to pass that on amber if you couldn't stop in the distance available and thus stop in the cycle box without crossing the second line, crossing either on Amber when you could have stopped safely or on red is an offence.

Simon
jobo
QUOTE (The Rookie @ Tue, 13 Jul 2010 - 20:58) *
My understanding is with SP, the 'primary' stop line is the first one, however it is not an offence to pass that on amber if you couldn't stop in the distance available and thus stop in the cycle box without crossing the second line, crossing either on Amber when you could have stopped safely or on red is an offence.

Simon


yes but what offence, it not a red light offence to drive into a cycle box, is it ?
CuriousOrange
The offence is crossing a stop line when the red light is showing (36(1)(a)).

43(2) defines the stop line for the cycle box as:

'The first stop line, in the case of a vehicle which has not proceeded beyond that line, or the second stop line, in the case of a vehicle which has proceeded beyond the first stop line.'

Taken too literally, it could be argued that if you cross the first line on red you commit an offence, and then (since you've proceeded beyond it) the second line is now a stop line for you, so crossing it is a second offence.
southpaw82
QUOTE (jobo @ Wed, 14 Jul 2010 - 15:14) *
yes but what offence, it not a red light offence to drive into a cycle box, is it ?


Yes - the offence is not entering the cycle box per se but rather crossing the stop line; be it the first or second stop line in question.
MCCRoadster
Interesting about the double white stop lines dry.gif

Have decided to write to the corresponding police force and ask them for any further clarification of the actual incident in regards to photos / video etc. Not expecting much, but at least i've asked. Depends if they are feeling accommodating or not? mellow.gif

Have until 03.08.10 for the 28 days to be up. As things stand will contest the offence. All depends if there is a video dipicting my vehicle blantantly crossing 'one' of the white lines on red?!

Will see what they come back with...
MCCRoadster
Please see copy of letter received from the police force dealing with this offence after I wrote to them.

Any further advice moving on from here would be greatly appreciated.

Do I have a chance in contesting this?





Hmm after many attempts, the file will not upload for some reason!! File size is correct, very frustrating. I will have to write as below:

Dear Sir,

Thank you for you letter in relation to the issue of a fixed penalty notice.

I have considered the circumstances outlined in your letter and have made further enquiries with the issuing officer. Regrettably, I have to advise you that the fixed penalty notice was correctly issued.

From enquiries made, the driver / vehicle was seen to be committing an offence as indicated on the notice and on this basis I am not prepared, on this occasion to cancel the ticket.

You should therefore now comply with the instructions as indicated on the ticket i.e. payment or you may request for a court appearance.

Such evidence is produced at court.

Yours faithfully


Interestingly, I did not ask them to cancel the ticket at all, just for further clarification. Any help and suggestions with proceeding with this in the hope of successfully contesting? Thanks.
MCCRoadster
Sorry, but I only have 6 days remaining before the entire 28 days have expired.

I just want to know if I have a chance of defending this at court from what I have posted here or am I best just accepting it and taking the fine along with the 3 points?

As said before, I feel confident that I passed on amber but will my word mean nothing against an officer of the law who says different? There may or may not be a video...

Please help - Thanks!
southpaw82
Passing on amber is still an offence unless you passed because it was not safe to stop.
Pancras
QUOTE (MCCRoadster @ Thu, 29 Jul 2010 - 08:05) *
Sorry, but I only have 6 days remaining before the entire 28 days have expired.

I just want to know if I have a chance of defending this at court from what I have posted here or am I best just accepting it and taking the fine along with the 3 points?

As said before, I feel confident that I passed on amber but will my word mean nothing against an officer of the law who says different? There may or may not be a video...

Please help - Thanks!

To me the choice seems very clear:

If you believe that you did not cross the line on red, then ask for a court hearing and plead not guilty. Then ask for the video of the alleged offence to be disclosed to you.

If you suspect that you may have crossed the line on 'stop' (bear in mind that amber also means stop too, unless it you are travelling at a speed which would mean that you would be endangering yourself to do so) then pay the FPN.

You can't ask to see the video first, because advance disclosure will not be given in fixed penalty matters.

Once you plead not guilty, you see the video, if this shows you going through on red as the officer states, then you can change your plea, but you should be aware that you run the risk of a higher fine, court costs and a victims surgharge Likely to be about £110 in total. You will still get the points if convicted.
MCCRoadster
I have decided to plea not guilty and have sent back the necessary slip to the central ticket office just prior to the 28 days requirement.

Do I wait to hear back before asking for any video evidence or statements from the police?
nemo
QUOTE (MCCRoadster @ Tue, 3 Aug 2010 - 14:27) *
Do I wait to hear back before asking for any video evidence or statements from the police?

You will need to wait until you receive a summons (and a plea of not guilty plea has been entered) before you can expect to receive copies of any evidence upon which the crown proposes to rely.
MCCRoadster
Received a summons through the post today. Date of offence was 06.07.10, date of summons issued 04.01.11 and date of actual summons 09.02.11

Included is the police officers statement. Alongside the red light offence he makes reference to the fact that my vehicle was heavily loaded with boxes (which he mentioned at the scene but decided not to pursue) and paints a picture that I was placing people pedetrians at potential risk - despite there being no-one around at doing less than 5mph. Also mentions that the vehicle was not displaying 'L' plates and the driver was not supervised by a qualified driver. What? I am not a learner driver in any case and have a full licence.

The most significant piece of information is that he specifically refers to a video made of the incident which has been exported from the hard drive and onto a memory stick by another officer and is now labelled as evidence for prosecution and a copy for the defence.

I had asked for the confirmatoin of a video at the time of the offence but the police declined to comment.

What am I best to do now? I guess it doesnt look good if they have a video? Can I see the video before the summons but would I have to plea not guilty to see it?

All comments welcome...
roadrunner 163
that was close, nearly a time out,

the officer is presenting information and evidence of the events, if he did not mention the boxes and then you used the heavy laden weight as a reason for not stopping then he would look a little silly, on the down side for you it also suggests that you should have kept the distance greater to increase the stopping distance and visibility you had. bare bones though it has little to do with the offence reported.

The L plates and supervised driver is a standard insert of a traffic offence statement, it covers a multitude of sins and as it has no consequence of being in. As you have a full substantive driving licence it is irrelevant but is put in as a matter of course for many traffic officers.

There is video evidence being submitted. The officer told you it was equipped with CCTV and he would view it at a later date. Looks like it probably caught something.

You must plead not guilty to view the evidence. if its conclusive of teh offence then its an expensive viewing as you will loose any early plea discount.
Pancras
QUOTE (MCCRoadster @ Sat, 29 Jan 2011 - 10:50) *
The most significant piece of information is that he specifically refers to a video made of the incident which has been exported from the hard drive and onto a memory stick by another officer and is now labelled as evidence for prosecution and a copy for the defence.

I had asked for the confirmatoin of a video at the time of the offence but the police declined to comment.

What am I best to do now? I guess it doesnt look good if they have a video? Can I see the video before the summons but would I have to plea not guilty to see it?

All comments welcome...

Yes, you would have to plead Not Guilty to see the video.

Either asking to see the video at the time of the stop, or now would get you nowhere, because the police are not under any obligation to disclose it.
MCCRoadster
A video which they are prepared to use as evidence in itself says alot without actually having to see it.

Perhaps my best option now is to plea guilty by post and send back the paperwork and complete section mitigating circumstances? I can then put my side of events over including that I was not speeding, entering the junction at approx 30mph down to 5mph, was loaded so took the split second decision to enter the juction on amber opposed to braking heavily which may have been more dangerous? Was left longer in the junction (and emphasised) by the HGV vehicle turning extremely slowly in front (almost came to a stop) unpredictably.

I could also state clean driving licence (no points) and prepared to take driver awareness or advanced / additional training courses? Not sure if the offer of taking a course would make a difference here but would perhaps demonstrate responsible attitude? I doubt they would waiver 3 points in any case in exchange for an awareness course. I also now have a van instead of a car, so that now eliviates future over-loading problems. Dont know if that is worth mentioning as that again demonstrates that I have taken corrective action? (however, offence is for running a red light, not for being overloaded - yet officer mentions it in statement).

Any more thoughts on how I am best to handle this from here would be greatly appreciated. Thank you.
CuriousOrange
The court doesn't have the option of giving you an awareness court. If you're found guilty, it'll be three points, no more, no less. There can be 'special reasons not to endorse' which is guilty with no points, but nothing you've said would be special reasons.

I'd agree that if they're specifically prepared to put the video in as evidence against you, you've little chance of getting not guilty.

Pancras
QUOTE (MCCRoadster @ Mon, 31 Jan 2011 - 10:12) *
A video which they are prepared to use as evidence in itself says alot without actually having to see it.

Yes. It must prove the offence, otherwise it would not be getting exhibited by the bib...
Logician
There are countless ways in which video evidence can be mucked up, from incompatibility problems (very common) to showing the wrong one. I have seen a DVD played which was meant to show a shoplifting case in detail but actually did nothing of the sort and also undermined the only other prosecution evidence.
MCCRoadster
Just one other point that I wanted to check on. The summons has to be issued within 6 months of the offence. According to the paperwork they achieved that within 2 days remaining! This was the 4th January. However, I did not receive the paperwork until the 29th January. Any reason for this? Would they have back-dated the forms to be within the 6 month requirement and would this be near impossible to prove in any event? Logic says that if the paperwork was generated on the 4th I should have received it soon after? Why did I not receive it for over 3 weeks later? Is this normal?
Glacier2
It is very normal for a delay between laying the information (4th January) and receipt (29th January). Depends on how busy the courts are.
The important thing is they got it in with time. No point arguing the toss.
CuriousOrange
QUOTE (Logician @ Tue, 1 Feb 2011 - 01:28) *
There are countless ways in which video evidence can be mucked up...



That goes without saying: The question is what are the odds of it being mucked up in this case, and would it be worth the OP's risk of an increased fine?

MCCRoadster
Ok, so had decided to plea guilty by post due to the fact of a video as evidence and not knowing what that video actually shows. Filled in all the forms and mitigating circumstances stating that I believed it was unsafe to stop so continued on amber. Had an email back from a free solicitor which says:

"Yes you can argue that it was not safe to stop, but the burden will be on you to prove this, rather than on the prosecution to disprove it. If you argue that it was not safe to stop and you only went through on amber ion your mitigation the court will treat it as a not guilty plea and list the matter for a trial. If you plead guilty you have to take full responsibility for the allegation."

Is this true? I dont want this to go to trial but I do want to lessen the seriousness of the offence to the court. I wanted to send this out today but have now placed everything on hold unsure what to do. Help please!
Logician
You are being accused of going through a red light, you cannot plead guilty to that and at the same time say that when you went through the light was amber. You must decide either to plead guilty, which means you accept you went through a red light, and put forward mitigation, or plead not guilty on the basis that the light was amber.
MCCRoadster
I understand what you are saying but if I write in mitigation that I had "believed" I'd entered on amber will they bump it up to trial as a not guilty even when I have ticked the guilty box? Didnt really want to say "yes, I knowingly drove through a solid red light" when I feel this wasnt the case. Dont want to go to trial just to hear the court say thats 3 points and a very big fine thank you very much. No point to that either. Bottom line is, wanting a lesser sentence / fine rather than attempting to defend at court.
Logician
Intention is not an issue, it is fact, did you go through a red light or not? There is no "mens rea" required in legal terms. No harm in saying, you thought the light was amber, you would not have done it intentionally, distracted, could not see the light because of HGV, momentary inattention while concentrating on the HGV, anything like that.
MCCRoadster
Ok decided to go guilty by post, awaiting outcome...

I have researched what the magistrates may decide to do and discovered:

Notice of fine and collection order; and
Notice of endorsement order

I am still finding the proceedure a little unclear. Will they send be both of these orders out at the same time after the hearing? Or just the fine and collection followed by endoresement? Or simply just fine order only?

Dont know what to expect so any advice would be appreciated. Thanks.
Glacier2
Both come at the same time.
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.