Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Driving without due care and failure to stop at red light?
FightBack Forums > Queries > Speeding and other Criminal Offences
worried123
I have been charged with faillure to stop for a red light and careless driving.

It is in relation to an accident where I am accused of driving through a red light and hitting a driver who had priority. I maintain the light was amber and so was hers. (I am aware an amber is classed as a reason to stop).

There was no photo evidence of the red light claim, the police are basing their evidence on a pedestrian at the crossing and a driver behind the victim. Both witnesses may know the victim.

I do not agree with the circumstances behind the investigation. 2 witnesses and the driver are being used against me in this case.

Witness 1
may work with victim. Claims she was actually crossing and jumped back from my car, which due to the fact I was in the left lane of a dual carriage way and she was opposite, is false. Claims she saw a green Man but unlikely as light was amber close to red when I went through it.
This witness claims I spoke to her immediately after the incident and admitted driving through a red light- but I never spoke to her.

Witness 2
May work with victim. Was behind victim in traffic queue when collusion occurred. Stayed with victim all aftermath and conferred with witness 1 for two hours or so.

All 3 witnesses are claiming I drove in excess of 45 mph. Which due to the accident photo evidence, the fact there is a gatso just before the scene and the stopping distance is unlikely. The police have taken this as statement although two witnesses were on the opposite side of the road driving.

Both witnesses are claiming I hit her vehicle side on, which photo evidence disputes as she hit me on to my side, caving in her front. I am not meaning to be pedantic - I admit liability, but my problem is that the police and the witnesses are painting me as reckless criminal, claiming all things the magistrate will judge me on:
-Claims of speeding,
-Injury to others,
-Rude behavior to witnesses,

I am suspiscious to believe this is because I did not accept the FPN that the police initially offered me - now they are going in for all they can get.

Also, the court papers state the victim is claiming injury despite walking around at the scene for over an hour and her parents speaking to me at the scene, claiming she was fine.

After the incident... the Police showed up and were uncooperative with me. They repeatedly asked me if I had been drinking but never breathalyzed me. The police forbade me talking to my family without their presence but let the victim do as they pleased. My licence for some reason stated I was male and not female, and the police said it made them unable to do something?

I have reason to believe the police did not follow the correct procedure as well:
At the scene I was repetitively asked if I had gone through a red light to which I denied. At this point they offered an on the spot fixed penalty just for this ... I stupidly declined.

Then I was informed I would receive a nip/summons within 14 days, I never recieved a NIP?! I only received a letter within 14 days informing me of an investigation.

5 months later I received a summons to appear in court charged with both counts: 'failure to stop for a red light'
and 'driving without due care and attention'

I was never made aware at the scene that I was being prosecuted on the latter. The court date also falls short 9 days of 6 months, despite they collected evidence in September.

Please can you help? Have I got any chance of rejecting the charges or fighting some of it?

I am only 18 months into driving, would it fare me better to get 6 points and sit a re-test?? Does that wipe points clean? Or have I got a chance of getting less than 6 pts? What is realistic?

I have heard I could plead exceptional hardship, as I would lose my job without a car... only thing is that, I can't afford a solicitor.

Do you think I should just plead guilty and mitigation instead of non guilty? I have 8 days till court.

I have all court and witness papers, I will PM them to anyone that may be able to help me.

Thank you so much in advance.
fedup2
For any hope of getting a not guilty to the DWdC you would need a solicitor.

Your guilty of the red light offence so theres little point in going not guilty to that.

The only real hope is trying to do a deal with them dropping the DWDC if you admit the light offence.

You cant plead hardship as its not the court that takes you licence as a new driver its DVLA when you get to 6 points.
worried123
QUOTE (fedup2 @ Tue, 21 Jan 2014 - 19:46) *
For any hope of getting a not guilty to the DWdC you would need a solicitor.

Your guilty of the red light offence so theres little point in going not guilty to that.

The only real hope is trying to do a deal with them dropping the DWDC if you admit the light offence.

You cant plead hardship as its not the court that takes you licence as a new driver its DVLA when you get to 6 points.


Thank you for your swift response, I am so appreciative.

How could I go about getting them to drop the DWDC charge if I admit the red light offence? Would I have to get a solicitor to have a chance of this.

I fear they are pressing DWDC because the witnesses are now saying I was speeding (which could be shown as false with evidence)

Is this still possible, even though I seemingly did cause a collision.
peterguk
QUOTE (worried123 @ Tue, 21 Jan 2014 - 19:29) *
I admit liability


Ding!


No NIP necessary as there was an accident.

Injuries can often take 24 hours or more to become apparent.

QUOTE (worried123 @ Tue, 21 Jan 2014 - 19:55) *
witnesses are now saying I was speeding (which could be shown as false with evidence)


What evidence?
fedup2
I would think that in 90% of accidents nowadays theres always one witness going to use the Speed word.

Others will properly advise but unless you have access to funds to fight it,i wouldnt worry about witness statements as i doubt you will have the capability of properly defending this on your own and winning.

I dont even know if you could do a deal but if it was me id be hoping to.Wether thats likley in this case to be accepted im not sure but as there was no mention of it at the scene you never know.

Oh and next time they offer you a get out of jail free card after causing an accident,snap it up!



southpaw82
If I was prosecuting, I wouldn't drop the careless for the red light offence. The sentencing range for careless is more appropriate where injury has been caused by a collision and the red light offence is merely the basis for the careless offence.
worried123
QUOTE
QUOTE (worried123 @ Tue, 21 Jan 2014 - 19:55) *
witnesses are now saying I was speeding (which could be shown as false with evidence)


What evidence?



I thought that I could use the stopping distance theory to prove that I was not speeding? As 45mph > 150 ft which did not occur.

How can the witnesses be allowed to say in their statements that I was speeding at 45mph? They had no speed-guns, two of them were on the opposite side of the road to me too. Confused!

^^ I don't know the ins and out of everything - I was just unsure.


I am only 24 and I need my car for work and looking after relatives. I have never ever had any brush ins with the law before.

The thing that shocked me though was that the police treated me on the scene like a criminal, making me stay in their patrol car with no communication with my relatives - yet they let the witnesses confer for HOURS with the victim. Then they try to force me into a corner with something whilst I am in shock, and now I am paying the consequences.

-- Without a lawyer, Can I plea bargain to the red light and drop the DWDC?
peterguk
QUOTE (worried123 @ Tue, 21 Jan 2014 - 20:12) *
[How can the witnesses be allowed to say in their statements that I was speeding at 45mph? They had no speed-guns, two of them were on the opposite side of the road to me too. Confused!


Witnesses can say what they believe to be true. What weight the court put on what they say is a different matter.
uk_mike
QUOTE (worried123 @ Tue, 21 Jan 2014 - 20:12) *
-- Without a lawyer, Can I plea bargain to the red light and drop the DWDC?


There are no plea bargains in english law. Having said that prosecutors will sometimes drop charges where a defendant offers to plead guilty to a lesser charge.

You would need to attend the court on the day, seek out the prosecutor before the trial starts and make the offer. As others have said it is unlikely that they would accept wuch an offer where someone has been injured. Bear in mind that theyncould report your offer to the court who may choose infer that it is an admission for the red light offence.

It is sometimes the case that prosecutors are more likely to accept a plea offer from a solicitor as some will percieve that it is easier to win against someone defending themselves that someone represented.

To be honest given the circumstances if you wish to go not guilty I would advice seeking the assistance of a solicitor. Defending a case where there are injuries is always harder due to the emotive of some of the prosecution evidence.

If you want to rebut the witnesses estimates of speed based on stopping distances, bear in mind that modern cars can stop in far shorter distances than the highway code figures, and if you were already braking the distance can be even shorter than real world figures would suggest. You would also likely face suggestions from the prosecution that you had underestimated the stopping distance (unless you were able to use figures from the police accident report). To do a proper job you would really need to field an expert witness who had carried out tests on your vehicle, something that would cost you a small fortune, and the prosecution may field their own expert to rebut, the bill for which you would be left having to pay of you lost.
worried123
QUOTE (uk_mike @ Tue, 21 Jan 2014 - 20:30) *
QUOTE (worried123 @ Tue, 21 Jan 2014 - 20:12) *
-- Without a lawyer, Can I plea bargain to the red light and drop the DWDC?


There are no plea bargains in english law. Having said that prosecutors will sometimes drop charges where a defendant offers to plead guilty to a lesser charge.

You would need to attend the court on the day, seek out the prosecutor before the trial starts and make the offer. As others have said it is unlikely that they would accept wuch an offer where someone has been injured. Bear in mind that theyncould report your offer to the court who may choose infer that it is an admission for the red light offence.

It is sometimes the case that prosecutors are more likely to accept a plea offer from a solicitor as some will percieve that it is easier to win against someone defending themselves that someone represented.

To be honest given the circumstances if you wish to go not guilty I would advice seeking the assistance of a solicitor. Defending a case where there are injuries is always harder due to the emotive of some of the prosecution evidence.


Attend court on the original summons day? Do I send any guilty/mitigation before the court date?
How do I seek out the prosecutor before the trial starts?

Do you think I could get a legal advice (free council solicitor) to do this for me with 6 days notice?

I don't think I could afford a solicitor, only maybe if it was below <£300.
captain swoop
WHy has this thread come up as new today?

Is it a duplicate or am I hallucinating?
uk_mike
QUOTE (worried123 @ Tue, 21 Jan 2014 - 20:37) *
Attend court on the original summons day? Do I send any guilty/mitigation before the court date?


Yes you need to attend to answer the summons if you want to "plea bargain". You do not send in a guilty plea if you wish to bargain. Once you submit a guilty plea there is really nothing to bargain with.

QUOTE
How do I seek out the prosecutor before the trial starts?


You ask the clerk to point them out to you.
QUOTE
Do you think I could get a legal advice (free council solicitor) to do this for me with 6 days notice?


Most solicitors will give a free consultation and provide general advice but you will struggle to find anyone willing to represent you for free unless you pass a means test for legal aid.

Councils do not provide legal assistance.

Criminal solicitors do sometimes have to represent clients at very short notice so you probably will be able to find someone who could fit you in, if you do not delay any further.

QUOTE
I don't think I could afford a solicitor, only maybe if it was below <£300.


I have heard of folks getting very basic assistance for a guilty plea for a few hundred, but for a full trial no chance.
Jlc
QUOTE (worried123 @ Tue, 21 Jan 2014 - 19:29) *
I maintain the light was amber and so was hers.
This is unlikely unless there's a fault with the lights. If you 'jumped' the amber then her side will have been on red, about to illuminate amber and would have still be stationary. Have you checked the timing of the lights?

As already noted, with an accident involved it is highly unlikely they would drop the CD. Look at page 117 here. It's going to be at least 5 points and aggravating factors are involved. The red light offence is 3 points but as it was committed at the same time as the CD only a fine will apply.

QUOTE (captain swoop @ Tue, 21 Jan 2014 - 20:39) *
Is it a duplicate or am I hallucinating?

The former. icon_pidu.gif
spida
i think this is the same thread, sorry if it aint http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=86585
Jlc
QUOTE (spida @ Tue, 21 Jan 2014 - 21:01) *
i think this is the same thread, sorry if it aint http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=86585

Now I recognise it... I had quite a bit to say on that one............
worried123
Sorry... I couldn't remember if my partner had posted on my behalf before or not.

My question really is whether it is worth getting representation and fighting the dwdc charge?

Jlc
QUOTE (worried123 @ Tue, 21 Jan 2014 - 21:39) *
My question really is whether it is worth getting representation and fighting the dwdc charge?

Put simply that charge is when the driving falls below the standard expected of a reasonable, prudent and competent driver.

If you think your actions didn't fall below that, then you should consider 'fighting it' but you should take professional advice as a not guilty plea could be costly. Costs alone for a trial could be £600+ should you be found guilty.
sgtdixie
As you have been told the due care is nailed on and there is no reason why a prosecutor would drop it for a 3 point offence just to benefit you.

You continue to make allegations that witnesses and the Police have somehow fitted you up. Either the witnesses are known to the other driver or they are not. Insinuating they are is a waste of time.

I suggest you ask a mod to merge the topics so we get the full picture. Based on what you have said I would suggest turning up suited and booted and getting a local solicitor to argue for 5 points is the best you can do. Making wild accusations won't help.
QUOTE
The police forbade me talking to my family without their presence but let the victim do as they pleased
You keep banging on about this. It is to be expected you would be treated differently. You were the suspect, they were witnesses.
worried123
QUOTE (sgtdixie @ Tue, 21 Jan 2014 - 22:13) *
As you have been told the due care is nailed on and there is no reason why a prosecutor would drop it for a 3 point offence just to benefit you.

You continue to make allegations that witnesses and the Police have somehow fitted you up. Either the witnesses are known to the other driver or they are not. Insinuating they are is a waste of time.

I suggest you ask a mod to merge the topics so we get the full picture. Based on what you have said I would suggest turning up suited and booted and getting a local solicitor to argue for 5 points is the best you can do. Making wild accusations won't help.
QUOTE
The police forbade me talking to my family without their presence but let the victim do as they pleased
You keep banging on about this. It is to be expected you would be treated differently. You were the suspect, they were witnesses.


The police went overboard. I think it shows how corrupt it is not to mention that they offered me a FPN for less before a summon. This behaviour has been seen with friends of mine who have been stopped and given fpn for not wearing their seatbelt when they were in fact speeding. The police pick and choose what punishment they give people and would not listen to me when I told them the truth. I'm assuming you're a bobby yourself?

My main gripe really is seeing careless driving put on people who have run over cyclists and pedestrians - who then get off the charge. I have done nothing that severe... Simply because I didn't play ball at the scene I am now being punished.
sgtdixie
QUOTE (worried123 @ Wed, 22 Jan 2014 - 08:05) *
QUOTE (sgtdixie @ Tue, 21 Jan 2014 - 22:13) *
As you have been told the due care is nailed on and there is no reason why a prosecutor would drop it for a 3 point offence just to benefit you.

You continue to make allegations that witnesses and the Police have somehow fitted you up. Either the witnesses are known to the other driver or they are not. Insinuating they are is a waste of time.

I suggest you ask a mod to merge the topics so we get the full picture. Based on what you have said I would suggest turning up suited and booted and getting a local solicitor to argue for 5 points is the best you can do. Making wild accusations won't help.
QUOTE
The police forbade me talking to my family without their presence but let the victim do as they pleased
You keep banging on about this. It is to be expected you would be treated differently. You were the suspect, they were witnesses.


The police went overboard. I think it shows how corrupt it is not to mention that they offered me a FPN for less before a summon. This behaviour has been seen with friends of mine who have been stopped and given fpn for not wearing their seatbelt when they were in fact speeding. The police pick and choose what punishment they give people and would not listen to me when I told them the truth. I'm assuming you're a bobby yourself?

My main gripe really is seeing careless driving put on people who have run over cyclists and pedestrians - who then get off the charge. I have done nothing that severe... Simply because I didn't play ball at the scene I am now being punished.

So the officers were willing to give you an FPN (which they shouldn't do following an RTC) which would be far less than the punishment for a careless driving conviction. That sounds like trying to help you out rather than corruption to me. They offered you a resolution, you refused leaving them with no option but to prosecute on the facts. You commit 2 offences of failing to conform to a red light and careless driving. I don't see you have much room to complain.

It is time to man up; you had the chance to settle this. YOU committed the offence, YOU refused an FPN. What did you think would happen?
The Rookie
Seems a bit churlish to complain when you were offered a lesser penalty, one expects you'd also have complained if you weren't, some growing up needed I'm afraid.

Your account is somewhat collender like, the witnesses may no each other, unless they have said they don't then no wrong doing so far, it sounds to me from all you tell us that you are bang to rights I'm afraid.
AFCNEAL
24 years old? You were offered a get-out-of-jail-free card at the scene and declined - why? You admit you jumped a light so evidence and witnesses are really a formality?..........

Get a solicitor as advised or prepare for a revocation of your licence.
worried123
QUOTE (AFCNEAL @ Wed, 22 Jan 2014 - 08:32) *
24 years old? You were offered a get-out-of-jail-free card at the scene and declined - why? You admit you jumped a light so evidence and witnesses are really a formality?..........

Get a solicitor as advised or prepare for a revocation of your licence.


Might they not take pity on me because I can't afford a lawyer??!

I never admitted I jumped a light, I maintain to the police and the insurance that it was amber... I just think I have no other option than to admit it was red as it was a lesser charge.

As for people calling me churlish; I really don't know how you would be ok with being detained by police, no contact with spouse or relatives and being cornered into a statement (Which they lost and does not appear in the papers) all WITHOUT being arrested. They treated me like this but asfaik only people under arrest meet this criteria?

All meanwhile you saw the victim and witnesses congregating for over two hours, and you were allowed no contact to them.

I did not accept the FPN because I was in shock of the whole accident! I had no bearing of the extremities of what had happened until later on.

The police were even laughing at the scene saying how the victim was '****** off'.

Honestly, I came here for advice not to be judged. I am trying to do the right thing here, honestly! I just believe it wasn't in the best circumstances.

This was within my first 6 months of driving - and I have driven over 6 months since the incident with no misdemeanors - can I say this?
fedup2
QUOTE (worried123 @ Wed, 22 Jan 2014 - 18:39) *
QUOTE (AFCNEAL @ Wed, 22 Jan 2014 - 08:32) *
24 years old? You were offered a get-out-of-jail-free card at the scene and declined - why? You admit you jumped a light so evidence and witnesses are really a formality?..........

Get a solicitor as advised or prepare for a revocation of your licence.


Might they not take pity on me because I can't afford a lawyer??!

I never admitted I jumped a light, I maintain to the police and the insurance that it was amber... I just think I have no other option than to admit it was red as it was a lesser charge.

As for people calling me churlish; I really don't know how you would be ok with being detained by police, no contact with spouse or relatives and being cornered into a statement (Which they lost and does not appear in the papers) all WITHOUT being arrested. They treated me like this but asfaik only people under arrest meet this criteria?

All meanwhile you saw the victim and witnesses congregating for over two hours, and you were allowed no contact to them.

I did not accept the FPN because I was in shock of the whole accident! I had no bearing of the extremities of what had happened until later on.

The police were even laughing at the scene saying how the victim was '****** off'.

Honestly, I came here for advice not to be judged. I am trying to do the right thing here, honestly! I just believe it wasn't in the best circumstances.

This was within my first 6 months of driving - and I have driven over 6 months since the incident with no misdemeanors - can I say this?


Obviously you didnt read the highway code properly.It is against the law to go through a traffic light on either red or AMBER although you can argue that is wasnt safe to stop (with good reason) to go through showing amber.So you have admitted to that and nothing ive read here will evade that.

Your not being charged with speeding so forget it,your charged with driving without due care.Id say running an amber light then hitting another vehicle certainly qualifies that charge.



so like i said forget the crap,smart up your attitude and look at the likely options which are all laid out here.Take the current attitude and lack of remorse to court and your going to get hit hard.
crashdetective
Perhaps the OP would care to post up photos of his/her car...let's see the damage?

Earl Purple
You have 28 days or so to accept an FPN. You should have discussed it here or sought legal advice before deciding to go fcr a court hearing.



worried123
QUOTE (Earl Purple @ Sun, 26 Jan 2014 - 18:03) *
You have 28 days or so to accept an FPN. You should have discussed it here or sought legal advice before deciding to go fcr a court hearing.


This was never explained to me. All I ever heard was suspicion of a red light charge at the scene and I didn't react to it as I was in shock. The police were pretty much do it now or suffer later. I simply didn't understand and it was all pushed on me very quickly.

There has been some development in this.

I have found evidence online where the witness has taken to social media and called me a 'f****** c***'
The victim has also posted a lot of specific information joking about her personal injury claim for whiplash and saying she is going to go shopping with it.

I also have found one witness does work with the victim.

Surely some of this is contempt of court? Can it be used in court?
sgtdixie
QUOTE (worried123 @ Tue, 28 Jan 2014 - 12:16) *
QUOTE (Earl Purple @ Sun, 26 Jan 2014 - 18:03) *
You have 28 days or so to accept an FPN. You should have discussed it here or sought legal advice before deciding to go fcr a court hearing.


This was never explained to me. All I ever heard was suspicion of a red light charge at the scene and I didn't react to it as I was in shock. The police were pretty much do it now or suffer later. I simply didn't understand and it was all pushed on me very quickly.

There has been some development in this.

I have found evidence online where the witness has taken to social media and called me a 'f****** c***'
The victim has also posted a lot of specific information joking about her personal injury claim for whiplash and saying she is going to go shopping with it.

I also have found one witness does work with the victim.

Surely some of this is contempt of court? Can it be used in court?

No, it isn't contempt of court.
You could seek to introduce it as evidence but that can be costly as you can't just rock up with a printout and the court accept it.

In essence your whole defence will be to try and rubbish the victim and witnesses. Beware of this tactic. Without solid evidence; and what you have posted isn't; all you will do is put the bench's backs up.

Unless the victim has posted that the claim is bogus it doesn't mean anything. I have a close friend who got over £50,000 from a serious RTC. She spent quite a while speculating what she would do with the money.
worried123
Please can you offer me some last min impartial advice?

I was not told at the scene about the 28 day rule for a FPN, I was told if I did not accept the red light there and then - I would instead receive a summons. Is it right of the police to have done this?

Is it right that they then added another charge that wasn't mentioned at the scene?

According to the Road traffic act 1988: (Does this not apply to DWDC?)
Requirement of warning etc. of prosecutions for certain offences.

(1)
Subject to section 2 of this Act, [F1a person shall not be convicted of an offence to which this section applies unless]—

(a)
he was warned at the time the offence was committed that the question of prosecuting him for some one or other of the offences to which this section applies would be taken into consideration, or

(b)
within fourteen days of the commission of the offence a summons (or, in Scotland, a complaint) for the offence was served on him, o

©
within fourteen days of the commission of the offence a notice of the intended prosecution specifying the nature of the alleged offence and the time and place where it is alleged to have been committed, was—

(i)
in the case of an offence under section 28 or 29 of the M1Road Traffic Act 1988 (cycling offences), served on him,

(ii)
in the case of any other offence, served on him or on the person, if any, registered as the keeper of the vehicle at the time of the commission of the offence.


Can I mention in court that the police made no reference to any charge but a red light violation? Then a summons said otherwise?
crashdetective
You should have accepted the FPN at the time. It wouldn't be an admission of guilt. You would still have had the option of court.

As for the charge of without due care - there is no need for a verbal NiP because a collision negates that requirement.

Incidentally, I think I offered to look at the damage profile for you if you wish to forward photos of your car.
worried123
QUOTE (crashdetective @ Tue, 28 Jan 2014 - 22:31) *
You should have accepted the FPN at the time. It wouldn't be an admission of guilt. You would still have had the option of court.

As for the charge of without due care - there is no need for a verbal NiP because a collision negates that requirement.

Incidentally, I think I offered to look at the damage profile for you if you wish to forward photos of your car.


Thanks for your reply.

I didnt accept the FPN because I had just been in an accident, I was quite simply in shock and did not comprehend the gravity of what was happening yet.

The police had just previously asked me three times whether I had been drinking, so I was a little confused/shellshocked and wanted to leave. This is where they informed me I was being questioned under caution for the red light.
I now see this usually happens in a police station sometime after an incident - not immediately after a collision.

I was not told in any shape that there was 28 days to accept the FPN. The police officer said I would either have to accept it there or decline and be summoned.

Surely this is not procedure?
southpaw82
By "surely this isn't procedure" do you mean "I hope this isn't procedure?". You're actually asking the wrong question. The only question that matters is "is this legal?" To which the answer is "yes".
worried123
QUOTE (southpaw82 @ Tue, 28 Jan 2014 - 23:41) *
By "surely this isn't procedure" do you mean "I hope this isn't procedure?". You're actually asking the wrong question. The only question that matters is "is this legal?" To which the answer is "yes".


Why is it legal that the police can offer a fpn for 5 minutes only when the usual mandate is 28 days?

Is it because they aren't obligated to tell you of the time period? Surely that should be a Miranda right type situation where they have to inform you.
sgtdixie
QUOTE (worried123 @ Tue, 28 Jan 2014 - 23:58) *
QUOTE (southpaw82 @ Tue, 28 Jan 2014 - 23:41) *
By "surely this isn't procedure" do you mean "I hope this isn't procedure?". You're actually asking the wrong question. The only question that matters is "is this legal?" To which the answer is "yes".


Why is it legal that the police can offer a fpn for 5 minutes only when the usual mandate is 28 days?

Is it because they aren't obligated to tell you of the time period? Surely that should be a Miranda right type situation where they have to inform you.

They say "I intend dealing with this by way of a fixed penalty".
You say "I didn't go through a red light so I'm not accepting one".

You denied the offence and still do, so why would you now accept a FPN when you still deny you went through a red light?

I'm afraid the cops tried to do you a favour by offering you a FPN when strictly they shouldn't after a collision. It is in fact quite common to interview offending drivers at the scene so I don't know why you thing they shouldn't have done this.

This is quite simple. If you told us you had gone through a red light I could understand you being annoyed at them turning 3 points and £100 into possibly more points and a lot more money. But you are not, you say you are innocent. So you would be fighting this at court in any event.

You also need to be careful what you claim. You say you were in shock so presumably not fully understanding of what was going on. Yet you have given us a detailed description of what the witnesses and Police did throughout the post collision period. From my experience if you had been in shock and confused you wouldn't have had a clue what was going on. Credibility when giving evidence is vital, anomalies such as this won't help you.
The Rookie
QUOTE (worried123 @ Tue, 28 Jan 2014 - 23:58) *
Why is it legal that the police can offer a fpn for 5 minutes only when the usual mandate is 28 days?

Not true at all, they offer one, you receive it, go away and think about it and then have 28 days to comply with the conditions of acceptance (pay fine).....
worried123
Back from court.
For an early plea the prosecution dropped the red light charge.

I got 4 points for DwDc and a £200 fine.

Thanks to the people on here who took the time to PM me and listen to my circumstances without criticising me.

fedup2
QUOTE (worried123 @ Wed, 29 Jan 2014 - 16:01) *
Back from court.
For an early plea the prosecution dropped the red light charge.

I got 4 points for DwDc and a £200 fine.

Thanks to the people on here who took the time to PM me and listen to my circumstances without criticising me.



Good result wink.gif
southpaw82
QUOTE (worried123 @ Tue, 28 Jan 2014 - 23:58) *
QUOTE (southpaw82 @ Tue, 28 Jan 2014 - 23:41) *
By "surely this isn't procedure" do you mean "I hope this isn't procedure?". You're actually asking the wrong question. The only question that matters is "is this legal?" To which the answer is "yes".


Why is it legal that the police can offer a fpn for 5 minutes only when the usual mandate is 28 days?

Is it because they aren't obligated to tell you of the time period? Surely that should be a Miranda right type situation where they have to inform you.


Miranda (properly Miranda v Arizona) is US law so I'm not sure of the relevance. If you mean, it ought to be a legal obligation to explain the FPN to you then perhaps it should but since you weren't issued one it's not relevant. That also answers your question as to why it's legal.
worried123
QUOTE (southpaw82 @ Wed, 29 Jan 2014 - 17:46) *
QUOTE (worried123 @ Tue, 28 Jan 2014 - 23:58) *
QUOTE (southpaw82 @ Tue, 28 Jan 2014 - 23:41) *
By "surely this isn't procedure" do you mean "I hope this isn't procedure?". You're actually asking the wrong question. The only question that matters is "is this legal?" To which the answer is "yes".


Why is it legal that the police can offer a fpn for 5 minutes only when the usual mandate is 28 days?

Is it because they aren't obligated to tell you of the time period? Surely that should be a Miranda right type situation where they have to inform you.


Miranda (properly Miranda v Arizona) is US law so I'm not sure of the relevance. If you mean, it ought to be a legal obligation to explain the FPN to you then perhaps it should but since you weren't issued one it's not relevant. That also answers your question as to why it's legal.



I was making a common colloquial reference to when someone is notified to their rights before they are cautioned/arrested.

To anyone that helped/PM'd me with non critical advice, Thank you!: I went to court today and received 4pts for DwDc and they withdrew my red light charge as there was not enough evidence.

I am considering making a complaint against the officer who offered me a FPN without explaining the 28 day rule, but claiming it had to be accepted on the spot or else.

But thanks to everyone's input, helpful or otherwise. biggrin.gif
fedup2
I wouldnt go complaining,things have a habit of coming back to bite you.

You had a good day,enjoy it.
sgtdixie
QUOTE (worried123 @ Wed, 29 Jan 2014 - 18:42) *
QUOTE (southpaw82 @ Wed, 29 Jan 2014 - 17:46) *
QUOTE (worried123 @ Tue, 28 Jan 2014 - 23:58) *
QUOTE (southpaw82 @ Tue, 28 Jan 2014 - 23:41) *
By "surely this isn't procedure" do you mean "I hope this isn't procedure?". You're actually asking the wrong question. The only question that matters is "is this legal?" To which the answer is "yes".


Why is it legal that the police can offer a fpn for 5 minutes only when the usual mandate is 28 days?

Is it because they aren't obligated to tell you of the time period? Surely that should be a Miranda right type situation where they have to inform you.


Miranda (properly Miranda v Arizona) is US law so I'm not sure of the relevance. If you mean, it ought to be a legal obligation to explain the FPN to you then perhaps it should but since you weren't issued one it's not relevant. That also answers your question as to why it's legal.



I was making a common colloquial reference to when someone is notified to their rights before they are cautioned/arrested.

To anyone that helped/PM'd me with non critical advice, Thank you!: I went to court today and received 4pts for DwDc and they withdrew my red light charge as there was not enough evidence.

I am considering making a complaint against the officer who offered me a FPN without explaining the 28 day rule, but claiming it had to be accepted on the spot or else.

But thanks to everyone's input, helpful or otherwise. biggrin.gif

So you are saying the basis of the careless was you went through a green light?

I would give up now. You made a mistake, had a crash and let ego or pride overcome judgement by refusing an FPN.

You may be interested to know that you would only have got the same points even with the red light offence included.

By all means make a complaint. It won't go anywhere as all the cop did was try and do you a favour. But by all means waste your time.
baggins1234
+1

It wont get you anywhere. I imagine the PC will recollect that he explained the FPN to you and you declined it.

End of

Move on.
The Rookie
QUOTE (worried123 @ Wed, 29 Jan 2014 - 18:42) *
I am considering making a complaint against the officer who offered me a FPN without explaining the 28 day rule, but claiming it had to be accepted on the spot or else.

Please read my previous reply, I expect he explained it properly and you misunderstood it. This will go nowhere at all, you are just trying to blame everyone else for your mistakes and now continuing with that.

sgtdixie
SO the OP claims there was insufficient evidence to support an offence of contravening the red light. He says he was offered an FPN for this offence which he still denies, but rejected it becuase he beieved he wasn't guilty.
So his complaint will I assume be that he should have been allowed to have the FPN for an offence he didn't commit rather than going to court and being convicted of the offence he does admit.

Can see that one being replayed around the parade room table for months.
worried123
QUOTE (sgtdixie @ Thu, 30 Jan 2014 - 09:51) *
SO the OP claims there was insufficient evidence to support an offence of contravening the red light. He says he was offered an FPN for this offence which he still denies, but rejected it becuase he beieved he wasn't guilty.
So his complaint will I assume be that he should have been allowed to have the FPN for an offence he didn't commit rather than going to court and being convicted of the offence he does admit.

Can see that one being replayed around the parade room table for months.


Have you got a life/job, or do you just get off fearmongering on a forum where 99% of your assumptions are wrong! As proven with my case!!

The PO in question said I had to accept the FPN on the spot, interestingly he did not say this in front of his colleague but in front of my father and my fiancé. Also as pointed out previously in this thread I am not a male either.
He was so sure of himself that day that he wanted to issue a FPN based on statements from what he knew were uncredible sources. Not only that but he said it was only acceptable on the spot.

I admit the light was amber, I have all along! The Highway Code says amber is stop though it is not actually the law and it does specify an amber can be passed in certain circumstances and you do not know what mine were! Until I went to court I was unsure of whether I could use my mitigation as the police at the scene were very harsh.

Also My fiancé had turned up in a high end luxury vehicle (not his but he was insured and legal) and the other po walked around it looking all over at it which was completely irrelevant to my incident, bit of a joke tbh.

In his statement he is quoted as saying he told me that I was under questions of ignoring a traffic sign but he mentioned nothing else.

Maybe now you will see why I have little faith for the police.
sgtdixie
You pleaded guilty to careless. No one is scare mongering. You were told you didn't have a defence but you refused to believe everyone who told you this. But you pleaded guilty. You do understand you were guilty don't you.

As for the fpn, of course you have to accept it there and then. But if you had let the officer fill it out and explain you would have been told all about your options. But as soon as you refused to accept it the officer is not going to waste time explaining it all

You came here for advice, everyone told you the same and you were convicted. Take some responsibility.

I would just say I couldn't care less what your opinion of the police is.
southpaw82
QUOTE (worried123 @ Thu, 30 Jan 2014 - 12:25) *
The Highway Code says amber is stop though it is not actually the law


Yes it is the law. Regulation 36(1)(e) of the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2002.
QUOTE
(e)the amber signal shall, when shown alone, convey the same prohibition as the red signal, except that, as respects any vehicle which is so close to the stop line that it cannot safely be stopped without proceeding beyond the stop line, it shall convey the same indication as the green signal or green arrow signal which was shown immediately before it;

I'm not sure how many times you want to be told the same thing. This thread has run it's course.




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.