Jump to content

 

BankFodder BankFodder

Man in the middle

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

    288
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    8

Man in the middle last won the day on November 19 2019

Man in the middle had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

604 Excellent

About Man in the middle

  • Rank
    Basic Account Holder

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. Yes. You should have been sent a form MC100. If the court has no details of your means it will probably impose a fine based on a default figure of £440pw Relevant Weekly Income.
  2. There's very little point to be honest. Sentencing for speeding is quite prescriptive and there's rarely anything to be said that will influence the court.
  3. Indeed not. "Out-of-time" prosecutions are extremely rare. With the introduction of the SJ procedure an automatic system was introduced which, simultaneously, produces a "written charge" (which is the document that effectively begins court proceedings) and the SJPN. The written charge is usually transmitted electronically to the court office and the listing department returns a date for the matter to go before a SJ. The SJPN is then populated with the hearing date and is sent to the defendant (together with an evidence pack).
  4. What was the date of the alleged offence and what was the date on the SJPN? Nothing else matters.
  5. Millions (literally) of people commit speeding offences every year. If every one of them lost their job as a result those millions would be unemployed. I know of few jobs where a single speeding conviction would result in dismissal. Should you be unfortunate enough to be in this position again simply follow the process as laid out in the paperwork. Don't get smart and start prattling on about your (mistaken) rights under GDPR or whatever. As you have seen, by the time you've established your rights correctly you will face a court hearing. You can ask for "photographs to help identify the driver" before you return your driver nomination form (though that does not stop the 28 day clock measuring the period in which you have to respond). Don't ask for "evidence" as it may be taken that you are disputing the matter and out-of-court disposals (far and away the most favourable option) may not be offered. You have no entitlement to evidence unless the matter goes to court. Most forces will provide such photos (though they don't have to) by giving you a link to follow. They rarely help in identifying the driver because their purpose is to identify the vehicle. Identifying the driver is your responsibility and if you fail to do so without a valid defence you commit a more serious offence which carries a hefty fine, six points and an endorsement code that will see your insurance premiums rocket.
  6. Yes you will have a criminal record (which you would not have had if you'd accepted a course or fixed penalty). But it will be a "non-recordable" offence and should not hinder your entry to the USA. What loophole do you have in mind?
  7. I thought you said you admitted being the driver ("I signed my name that i was driving") I'm intrigued. How do you believe the camera calibration would help you identify the driver? Just as an aside, camera calibration is rarely of any assistance defending a speeding charge. It seems to be a popular pub myth that asking for it helps the driver or hinders the police in some way.
  8. You thinks correctly. The police have no obligation to release any photographs they may have in connection with criminal proceedings. Before you are asked to enter a plea you should have been served with the evidence the prosecution intends to rely on to convict you. That will probably include a photograph to identify the vehicle. And that's that. Pursuing what you mistakenly believed were your rights has cost you dearly. You should have been offered a speed awareness course for that speed (provided the offence was not in Scotland and you had not done one in the last three years). Cost about £100, half a day of your time, but no points. The alternative was a fixed penalty of £100 and 3 points. Now, provided you plead guilty, you will pay a fine of a third of a week's net income, a surcharge of 10% of the fine (Min £32) and £85 costs. And three points.
  9. When you have completed your SD you will almost certainly be asked how you plead to the offence(s). Hopefully you have been "dual charged" with both Failing to provide driver's details (FtP) and Speeding. So long as you were driving at the time of the allegation you should offer to plead guilty to speeding providing the FtP charge is dropped. Do not under any circumstances plead guilty to speeding unless and until you have this agreement. You cannot be convicted of speeding unless you plead guilty as they have no evidence that you were driving. The danger in pleading guilty without the deal is that you will be convicted of speeding and they can still continue with the FtP charge. On the basis of what you have said success will not be impossible but will be problematic and the possible outcome is nine points. The "deal" is a well known procedure to prosecutors and Magistrates and is exercised in courts across England & Wales every day and is nearly always accepted. It is nearly always accepted. If you can, arrive at court early and ask to see the prosecutor. You can put your offer then. If not, make the offer when you have completed your SD. I f by any chance it is not accepted, plead Not Guilty to both charges and come back on here (your case will be adjourned to a later date). We can then decide whether you have a reasonable chance of successfully defending the FtP charge. Certainly at this stage you do not need a lawyer. You probably wouldn't need one if you have to defend the FtP charge either but let's wait and see what happens on Friday. Save your money for your fines, etc. You need to make every effort to avoid a FtP conviction. It carries six points but most importantly an endorsement code (MS90) which insurers hate and it will see your premiums increase dramatically.
  10. Be prepared for a long haul (and a hard time in court) if you intend to plead Not Guilty. You may secure a better outcome if you plead guilty but with strong mitigation (for which you will need the supporting medical evidence of your condition that you describe). If you intend to plead Not Guilty, unless you are very confident, you will need the help of a solicitor in court (for which you will not receive Legal Aid). A good starting point may be to get an opinion from a solicitor who gives a free initial consultation. The Citizens Advice Bureau will probably be able to direct you to one.
  11. Personally I would not get too involved with the circumstances of this particular offence. You've pleaded guilty and that's that. The only decision you're really interested in the court making is whether to sentence you in accordance with the guidelines or at the (much lower) fixed penalty rate. The circumstances of the offence will not help them with that decision and if they decide to sentence you in accordance with the guidelines what you have said will not alter that calculation. I particularly would not draw the court's attention to discrepancies in whatever the officer said or didn't say. It won't help and the court may think you are trying to argue the toss. I might go with something along these lines: Since the offence I have turned on the ‘do not disturb while driving’ feature on my iPhone so my I do not receive notifications whilst I am driving. I am determined not to see a recurrence of this offence. Furthermore, I am sorry for wasting the courts time. I originally accepted the Fixed Penalty that was offered and paid the £200 as requested. However, I did not read the fixed penalty notice properly and failed to send my driving license to the conditional offer unit. I accept full responsibility for this. With all this in mind I would be extremely grateful if you could impose a fine equivalent to the original fixed penalty. Of course it's up to you but my recommendation is short and sweet. The Magistrates are more likely to digest it all (they have limited attention span, you know ) and are more likely to concentrate on the main issue you're concerned with.
  12. Yes, that's the "guideline" fine. Have a look towards the bottom of this document: https://www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk/offences/magistrates-court/item/offences-appropriate-for-imposition-of-fine-or-discharge/3-offences-appropriate-for-imposition-of-fine-or-discharge/#Use_of_mobile_telephone You will see the offence listed in the left hand column. You will see the maximum fine as "L3". That's level three and is £1,000. Don't worry about that - it's simply the maximum fine the law allows in any circumstances. In the next column you will see "6". That's the number of points that must be imposed (you will note it went up from 3 to 6 in March 2017). Finally in the Right hand column you will see "A". That is the recommended "starting point" (which is almost always the actual fine in straightforward cases like yours). It means "Band A" which is half a week's net income. (Band B is one week and Band C is 1.5 weeks, there are also higher bands which are used infrequently). You can see these bands explained if you click on the arrow to the right of "Band Ranges" at the bottom of the page. Rather than ask for "leniency" you should explain the circumstances (forgot to send licence in, etc.) and specifically ask if you might be sentenced at the Fixed Penalty level as per the guidance they have. Grovel a bit and explain that you realise you were at fault, the difficulties were of your own making, sorry to waste court time, etc. etc. but you would be grateful if they would overlook your silly error. Best of Luck !!!
  13. You will pay a fine of half a week's net income, reduced by 33% for your guilty plea. You will also pay a surcharge of 10% of the fine (minimum £32) and £85 costs. However, you could try asking the Single Justice (or the Bench if you choose to appear in person before a normal court) whether they could see their way clear to imposing a penalty at the fixed penalty equivalent. They have guidance which says this: "Where a penalty notice could not be offered or taken up for reasons unconnected with the offence itself, such as administrative difficulties outside the control of the offender, the starting point should be a fine equivalent to the amount of the penalty and no order of costs should be imposed. The offender should not be disadvantaged by the unavailability of the penalty notice in these circumstances." Of course the "administrative difficulties" were far from outside your control. In fact you caused them. However, it's worth a shot. They can only refuse or they may "split the difference" by ordering a £200 fine and £85 costs. It's up to them.
  14. I was wondering that very thing yesterday when I read the latest post, especially when the "Stasi State" reared its head! I don't quite understand how the offer of avoiding a prosecution and settling the matter at a considerably reduced cost by accepting the allegation as its stands amounts to oppressive behaviour. After all, the choice to have the matter heard in open court where he can, if he chooses, put the prosecution to proof, always remains.
×
×
  • Create New...