Got final reminder for unpaid fine from court after 5 years plz help!!

[Old-CodJA]

You'll receive a court date through the post. You can offer a settlement to the company right up until the court date, but whether they accept is entirely up to them. You need to act sooner rather than later if you want to offer a settlement, as it's gone about as far as it's likely to now!

 

If you ignore the summons and don't say anything HMCS will assume you're ignoring it unless they get stuff returned to them presumably, such as 'not known at this address'. Of course that's all well and good, but if a Bailiff attends to recover the debt and you happen to be there, you'll find it's a helluva lot worse for you than simply holding your hands up in the first place. If you genuinely moved house or something, you have the right to have the case re-scheduled and the case re-heard, this is what's known as a Statutory Declaration, and you must do this to the court.

 

Perhaps you missed it Stigy, but this OPs case already stems from a Statutory Declaration. It is a re-issued Summons

 

In my experience the prosecution are less likely to accept an administrative settlement offer in such cases because there is always the chance that the alleged offender had ignored the original prosecution.

 

This does not prevent the OP from writing and offering to pay the fare and all the admin costs in an effort to avoid Court of course.

 

The one thing that is certain is that if the defendant ignores a re-issued Summons and either fails to turn up, or enter a plea after having already made a Statutory Declaration, the prosecutor will remind the Magistrates of this once a conviction in absence has been announced and they will normally take a very dim view in passing sentence.

[Stigy]

Perhaps you missed it Stigy, but this OPs case already stems from a Statutory Declaration. It is a re-issued Summons

 

In my experience the prosecution are less likely to accept an administrative settlement offer in such cases because there is always the chance that the alleged offender had ignored the original prosecution.

 

This does not prevent the OP from writing and offering to pay the fare and all the admin costs in an effort to avoid Court of course.

 

The one thing that is certain is that if the defendant ignores a re-issued Summons and either fails to turn up, or enter a plea after having already made a Statutory Declaration, the prosecutor will remind the Magistrates of this once a conviction in absence has been announced and they will normally take a very dim view in passing sentence.

Indeed I did miss it, although now clearly in the title...whoops, it was late, lol!

[shamsa01]

The summons i have received are dated 5 and a half year back . They did not send me the new summons .What is meant by that.Ii am confused. Please advice .

[Grotesque]

Happy New Year

[Old-CodJA]

The summons i have received are dated 5 and a half year back . They did not send me the new summons .What is meant by that.Ii am confused. Please advice .

 

If you told the Court you did not know about the original hearing, the rail company are permitted to re-issue the Summons alleging the offence without time limitation.

 

You are Summonsed to answer the charge that you committed an offence 5 and a half years ago.

 

It's now up to you to answer to the Court regarding that charge.

[shamsa01]

I am going to attend the the court on 12th jan. I have got a solicitor now he is going to convince them for out of court settlement if not we are going to attend the court . lets see what happens now I have paid 600 pounds to the solicitor.

[honeybee13]

Hello again.

 

Thank you for letting us know how you're getting on. I hope it goes well for you on the 12th, please let us know the outcome.

 

My best, HB

[shamsa01]

I will definitely let you guys know . I am really thankful for all the support I have received from this forum. Thanks

[samsmoot]

I just want to mention that summonses, fixed penalty tickets etc are often cocked up by the issuing party.

 

A similar case was won by a friend after it was spotted that the offence alleged on the summons was travelling without a ticket from station A to station B, whereas he actually got on at station B and off at station A - he simply did not commit the offence alleged on the summons.

 

And another friend got a fixed penalty notice for littering which failed to identify the offence - the actions of the person accused were described but the warden failed to identify the actual offence it constituted - he simply forgot to tick the box. Consequently the fixed penalty could not be paid, as no offence had been alleged, and that was the end of the matter because you have to be given the chance to pay the fixed penalty before it can be taken any further.

 

You lot on here are all very clever and know plenty but it's amazing what can sometimes be achieved by a little studying of the paperwork - standards have dropped a lot over the last few decades and you don't always get the professionalism you might expect. I would suggest that the OP looks (or I can do it if asked) at the paperwork to see if there are any discrepancies - you never know. I woudn't expect the solicitor to bother doing it.

[Old-CodJA]

IYou lot on here are all very clever and know plenty but it's amazing what can sometimes be achieved by a little studying of the paperwork - standards have dropped a lot over the last few decades and you don't always get the professionalism you might expect. I would suggest that the OP looks (or I can do it if asked) at the paperwork to see if there are any discrepancies - you never know. I woudn't expect the solicitor to bother doing it.

 

Sending personal and very private documents, such as Court papers via the internet, or to any unknown and possibly unqualified person to read, is a blindingly silly, not to mention possibly dangerous thing to do.

 

Reading the papers accurately is what you are paying a qualified Solicitor £600 to do.

[samsmoot]

Sending personal and very private documents, such as Court papers via the internet, or to any unknown and possibly unqualified person to read, is a blindingly silly, not to mention possibly dangerous thing to do.

 

Reading the papers accurately is what you are paying a qualified Solicitor £600 to do.

Yes, absolutely correct - solicitors care a great deal about people and always do their best to help their fellow man - yes, best stick to those who really care.

[shamsa01]

My solicitor has replied to them in writing and asked them for out of court settlement lets see if they agree or not. I know its going to be expensive but thats the best i can do to obtain legal advise.

[Old-CodJA]

Yes, absolutely correct - solicitors care a great deal about people and always do their best to help their fellow man - yes, best stick to those who really care.

 

Your sarcasm is understood, but is misplaced samsmoot.

 

Working on the opposite side of the Courts from defence solicitors for a very long time leaves me with no illusions, BUT I would never advocate that anyone send any personal information via the internet, or via any other medium to an unknown third party.

 

I don't think CAG should encourage it either

Edited January 4, 2012 by Old-CodJA

[samsmoot]

Sorry for having to answer and now it looks like a thread hijacking, but if personal info is redacted then what's the problem? Sometimes the only way to get to the bottom of things is by closely studying the documents and that's what needs doing IMO. I would not trust a solicitor any more than I would me to do this properly, so the offer still stands - it would not be the first time I have looked at stuff for a cagger. Whether or not I am unknown or unqualified has no bearing on my ability to find discrepancies in the paperwork.

[rebel11]

As you say about solicitors, that might be the case, but solicitors are regulated and the consumer has a certain amount of comeback it they haven't carried out their work in a diligent way.

 

Sorry for having to answer and now it looks like a thread hijacking, but if personal info is redacted then what's the problem? Sometimes the only way to get to the bottom of things is by closely studying the documents and that's what needs doing IMO. I would not trust a solicitor any more than I would me to do this properly, so the offer still stands - it would not be the first time I have looked at stuff for a cagger. Whether or not I am unknown or unqualified has no bearing on my ability to find discrepancies in the paperwork.

[Old-CodJA]

As you say about solicitors, that might be the case, but solicitors are regulated and the consumer has a certain amount of comeback it they haven't carried out their work in a diligent way.

 

Exactly so.

[samsmoot]

solicitors are regulated and the consumer has a certain amount of comeback it they haven't carried out their work in a diligent way.

Yeah, right, of course they do...

[shamsa01]

I have got a very important question .In my case judgment was given in my absence on 25 september 2006 which is more than 5 and a half year ,so that means the criminal offence is already been spent, so is there a possibility if i pay the "court fine" which is 178 pounds before the court hearing date i will be fine. But bear in mind I have already given statutory declaration as well. Please advise.

[Old-CodJA]

Your Solicitor should already have told you that, when you made a statutory declaration to the effect that you 'did not know about the original prosecution' and once that was accepted by the Court, the original conviction was declared 'null & void'.

 

Therefore, you cannot now pay that fine because that conviction does not exist.

 

The rail company would have been advised by the Court that this was the case and they would have been told that the effect of the statutory declaration did not alter the validity of their information, so they could start the prosecution again without being restricted by the six-month rule.

 

This means that your summons date on 12th January is effectively a first hearing of the allegation. The prosecution starts afresh.

[shamsa01]

Is there going to be a trail on 12th or i just have to plead guilty or not plead guilty, and the trail would be on later date. i am asking this because I want to save some money by not taking solicitor on 12th and plead not guilty and take him with me on the later date. Thanks

[honeybee13]

Hello again.

 

I don't know if you've seen OC's stickied thread about going to court, but here's a link in case it helps. There's more than one post about court days.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?313909-What-happens-when-you-get-to-court-by-Old-CodJA

 

Reading that, it looks as though if you plead not guilty, proceedings will be adjourned and there will be a trial another day. Would a quick call to your lawyer resolve that?

 

My best, HB

[shamsa01]

My solicitor has called me today and confirm that TFL has agreed for out of court settlement for 303 pounds. I am very thankful for all the support and advise I have received from this forum. Thanks to all of you. Bye

[honeybee13]

Hello again.

 

That must be a big relief for you, I'm pleased it's been sorted out. Thank you for letting us know.

 

Don't forget where CAG is, we deal with more than just public transport problems .

 

My best, HB

[Grotesque]

How much did the solicitor cost?

[shamsa01]

600 pounds.