Hi All,

Advice please. I was stopped back in Feb by an unmarked police car after apparently running a red light (with no camera). The police car was in front of me and went through on amber, I went through as the next car behind, at this point he flashed and pulled me over.

I refused to accept an on the spot fine and requested the matter go to court. Today I received the summons letter finally.

How do I proceed in terms of legal representation as I have been informed it wont be eligible for legal aid. Also how do I if necessary represent myself? Finally, bearing in mind there was no camera, the car was in front of me so cannot prove it was red, what chance of success do I have in being found not guilty.

regards

Paul

It is correct that legal aid is not available for this. You said the police went through on amber & you followed? Is this true? If so, then the offence is complete as to go through either a red or an amber is an offence, except if it would be dangerous to stop (on amber).

You can easily defend yourself in a magistrate court, may be worth going to the court on a day prior to your case to get a feel for the situation.

What your defence will be, I assume, is that the police say you did & you say you didn't, my bets on the bench believing the police unless you have some serious evidence.

How many police officers were in the car & do you know if it was video equipped?

If 2 police officers = even more difficult, if video available it will show that they went on amber, you must have gone through on amber or red = offence.

There was one police officer and there was no camera in the car. I thought if you use the "if it is unsafe to stop" you can go through on amber, so isn't this a much less serious "offence" than going through on a red light as I have been charged with.

The traffic light is less than 100 metres from the previous light, so I was effectively still acceptably (in my opinion) accelerating to get up to road speed.

Thanks for the reply though, I will bear it all in mind. Basically I cannot justify £60 and 3 points when I do not believe I was breaking the law. I actually believe the real reason I was stopped was because after I went through the light and caught the unmarked police car up, the road merges into one lane and I effectively cut him up in an aggressive manner. It was only at that point that I was pulled over sadly.

Additionally the car was my fathers and has since been sold so I am no longer driving, is this of any relevance?

What punishment is likely if found guilty, 3 points and £??? in fines and court costs. Can I avoid payment as I am an undischarged bankrupt?

The offence is failing to comply with the signal, whether it is red or amber, the only thing that the colour changes is the punishment. 3 points and a fine of circa a weeks take home pay, they may reduce it do to your status, but probably not by much if at all.

This is almost certainly why you were pulled over. Normally cops don't get too wound up over amber lights but if the driver then shows that this wasn't an isolated piece of poor driving then don't expect too many favours as by your own admission is the case here. As you have admitted going through the light at amber and it is clear the officer saw this then you are guilty of the offence.

In order to be acquitted you would have to lie in court which no-one on this site will ever encourage or endorse.

As you refused to accept a FPN then the court, if convicted, will give you 3 points and an income related fine well in excess of the £60 the FPN was. An early guilty plea will significantly reduce the fine but not the points.

Thanks all for the advice so far, can somebody confirm the law on amber though before i make enquiries myself. Does the law state it is an offense to go through on amber and then with the caveat "unless it was not safe to stop". Under what conditions does that caveat become valid?

Yes.



When it would be unsafe to stop.

Nowhere have you claimed that you went through the light because it was unsafe to stop. In fact if the cop went through on amber that meant you had even more time to stop as you were behind him. As you were accelerating as well there clearly wasn't anything behind you which could have been compromised by you braking heavily.

I suggest you banish all thoughts of making up a story to try and fit a defence. The cop was clearly looking at you in his mirrors and it is even possible he believes the lights were actually red when you went through.

I think you have to accept that by driving aggressively you have somewhat put yourself on a plate for prosecution.

when he flashed and pulled you over were you in front of him having just 'cut him up'?

AFAIR the actual offence is created if any wheels of the vehcile cross the solid white STOP line when prohibted.
Amber means STOP
The defence of 'unless unsafe to do so' is to allow for prevailing road conditions eg rain, ice, vehicle following too close behind & unable to stop.
If the Police car went through on amber, he set a bad example, but I guess he will claim he saw you accelerate at speed from previous TLs and would have ben unable to prevent a collision if he had stopped, evidenced by your subsequent aggressive overtake.
He will also be aware that changes from amber to red should be set at 3secs I believe. If he did cross the line on amber he will know how long before they changed to amber and be able to estimate your distance behind him.
At 30mph a vehicle will cover 44 feet/sec, in dry conditions the quoted stopping distance for a car by HC is 75fps (3 sec = 132ft)
You should never accelerate towards a green TL, always be prepared to stop if they change to amber.
Rejecting the CoFP will prove more expensive.

You seem to forget that mist people crossing on Amber are simply to close to stop when the lights change, probably what happened to the Police car!

As you are meant to leave a circa 2 second gap and the amber is lit for 3.........

Also how many 'I definately crossed on amber' have been red when people have been able to get photos?

So the consensus is to take the guilty plea and pay whatever they say? Seems very harsh to me but such is the justice system in this country I suppose. It may sound bizarre but any amount of unexpected money I have to find hits my disposable income very hard sadly.

Thanks for all the advice.

I think the consensus would be that you best option would have been to take the fixed penalty, but now you are best to plead guilty as you have almost no hope of success in court and defending it will increase the fine and costs you will have to pay. The fine will be equivalent to your net weekly income, less 33% for a guilty plea. That will be taken as £110 if you are on benefits. You will also have to pay £70/85 in cost plus a victims' surcharge of £15. You still have to pay as an undischarged bankrupt, the only good news is that you can negotiate to pay over a period.

As you appear almost certain to have commited the alleged offence of failing to comply with the traffic signal (be it red or amber) it seems a little disingenuous to call it harsh that you suffer the punishment for doing it, I would suggest it would help you to read the highway code as you seem somewhat unfamiliar with the rules of the road.