Jump to content

Hair Bear

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Posts

    177
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation

4 Neutral

2 Followers

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I actually wrote asking what evidence they had. I knew they couldn't send me any, just wanted to buy time. I got a letter back after three or so weeks saying they don't give evidence at this point, and again offered me a course or the points - with a fresh start date 'from the [new] date of this letter', it should be noted. Note also that the person responding began their letter by saying I was spoken to by the police officer who saw me with a phone, which of course was not the case. I doubt I can use that in my defence, but I also believe that if i had written back pointing out the error, they would have sent yet another fresh date from which I had the required weeks to respond. I have a habit of kicking the can down the road, occasionally this tactic works for me. To that end, no I did not tell them I am going to contest. Will just let them send me whatever it is they will send in their next step.
  2. No, I didn't opt for the course, going to stand my ground instead. Can't recall the length of time that it took for them to send me anything but it was within a month.
  3. No, I've never been done for phone use - I don't really use it away from the car let alone in it! I've had three points a few times, but never more than three at any one time. These have all been for doing 38 in a 30 zone. What's the order of events, btw? If I write to them in order to say i will contest, do they then send me what evidence they have? If so, can I then pick that apart before going to trial, or do I just have to do that in a court room?
  4. "You do not know which offence they may charge you with. It may be "using a mobile phone" [...] But they may charge you with "Failing to be in proper control" Is this not clear on the notification they sent me? It reads: "You have admitted to being the driver of the vehicle...at the time of the alleged offence - Use a handheld mobile phone/device while driving a motor vehicle on a road"
  5. "Could it be that while you were sat bored in traffic in your car, that you were supporting the side of your head with your hand ?" "Would you be prepared to say to the court that you did from time to time reach down to reassure or to check on your baby" The only legit thing I can recall is checking to see if the note in my pocket was a fiver or tenner, but I didn't lift it to my head - I just looked at it next to my pocket for a split second and then re-zipped my pocket. It is possible that a copper (bent on pulling over as many people as possible) might have thought that I was looking down at a phone, but surely this this would sound pretty lame in court, as though I'm desperately trying to think up a story to support my case. Head: I'm fairly sure I didn't support my head, although anything like that is possible. Again, though, that sounds too much like I've gone away and thought up something. The daughter angle seems more reasonable a defence (as you are admitting guilt to reckless driving, but as pointed out, this is not what I am charged with), not least because the questioning copper did not make any reference to her, or even look at her. I actually came away wondering if he knew she was there at all. Certainly the cop who falsely claims to have seen me on my phone did not know she was there. That said, is it not better to simply say I wasn't on the phone and to produce phone records and battery usage, rather than come up with something the police may or may not have seen? Am I allowed to ask them now for their proof? It would be interesting to hear what they have to say.
  6. Apologies if I have not made myself clear or have misunderstood advice. The choice I am personally deciding between is either (a) going on the course - I get no points but am admitting guilt to something I didn't do. I will also lose £90 and indeed the chance to go on another course for three years if ever I actually do infringe the law, meaning drive at, say, 38 in a 30 zone. (b) going to court in an attempt to win my case - if I win great, but if I lose it means 6 points and lots more money than £90. I am leaning towards B, but if people think I can't win, I will reconsider. I certainly have no intension of going to court to plead guilty, or to take the six points now.
  7. I have already been offered to accept the allegation (I wrote this in my opening post: "[the copper] said I would be sent notification of prosecution, which has just come through - six points and £200 fine or else a £90 3-hour driving course. The latter is tempting because I'm told there is no way anyone wins in court, but then I would be lying and saying I was using my phone when I absolutely wasn't") "I don't really know what you intend to do with your statement" - I was following BankFodder's advice, who said: "you should put together a detailed statement immediately describing exactly what happened and who said want to who [...] post it up here so that we can have a look and help you adjust the format"
  8. "same random check" Yes, but extra input is always good "Do you have a phone log showing it was switched off for a relevant period before the stop?" I'm unsure how to check for that. "Were you fiddling with any other objects or devices other than a phone that could have been mistaken as a phone?" Only thing I can think of is a minute or two before being pulled over I checked whether the note in my pocket was a fiver or a tenner. But like I say, this was some time before.
  9. I was travelling in extremely slow stop-start traffic and noticed the police directing the occasional vehicle to an avenue on the left which was teeming with cops. I surmised they were doing some sort of random check as only the odd vehicle was directed that way, and I was unlucky enough to be one of them. Once down the street I was directed by a different officer to pull over, wind down my window and turn off my engine. I was then flabbergasted to hear him say (words to the effect of) "We are doing a mobile phone sting and you've been seen using yours." I told him this just wasn't so and asked him to look at what I assumed would be video footage. "We don't have footage." I pointed out that my phone wasn't even switched on, but this didn't deter him from taking my details, and a photograph, and said I would be sent notification of prosecution, which has just come through - six points and £200 fine or else a £90 3-hour driving course. The latter is tempting because I'm told there is no way anyone wins in court, but then I would be lying and saying I was using my phone when I absolutely wasn't. All thoughts are welcome.
  10. UPDATE & HAPPY ENDING. The bank (RBS) told me they would do a chargeback if I had proof from Amazon that I'd been frauded. I thus harassed Amazon enough so that their 'specialist team' would get their backsides in gear, eventually I received an email saying I "may" have been Defrauded, and that I needed to contact the bank to tell them of the email - and that the bank would ask me to fill in several forms, which never happened. I just rang RBS again (yesterday) to tell them of the email, and (surprisingly) they accepted over the phone that I had this Amazon email without even checking. They never asked me to fill in any forms either, and said the money would be back in my account today, which it was. So a big thank you everyone for chipping in.
  11. Thanks. Do I go to the bank and ask for this, or is this something I have to apply for outside the bank?
×
×
  • Create New...