Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Northmonk forget what I said about your Notice to Hirer being the best I have seen . Though it  still may be  it is not good enough to comply with PoFA. Before looking at the NTH, we can look at the original Notice to Keeper. That is not compliant. First the period of parking as sated on their PCN is not actually the period of parking but a misstatement  since it is only the arrival and departure times of your vehicle. The parking period  is exactly that -ie the time youwere actually parked in a parking spot.  If you have to drive around to find a place to park the act of driving means that you couldn't have been parked at the same time. Likewise when you left the parking place and drove to the exit that could not be describes as parking either. So the first fail is  failing to specify the parking period. Section9 [2][a] In S9[2][f] the Act states  (ii)the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver, the creditor will (if all the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met) have the right to recover from the keeper so much of that amount as remains unpaid; Your PCN fails to mention the words in parentheses despite Section 9 [2]starting by saying "The notice must—..." As the Notice to Keeper fails to comply with the Act,  it follows that the Notice to Hirer cannot be pursued as they couldn't get the NTH compliant. Even if the the NTH was adjudged  as not  being affected by the non compliance of the NTK, the Notice to Hirer is itself not compliant with the Act. Once again the PCN fails to get the parking period correct. That alone is enough to have the claim dismissed as the PCN fails to comply with PoFA. Second S14 [5] states " (5)The notice to Hirer must— (a)inform the hirer that by virtue of this paragraph any unpaid parking charges (being parking charges specified in the notice to keeper) may be recovered from the hirer; ON their NTH , NPE claim "The driver of the above vehicle is liable ........" when the driver is not liable at all, only the hirer is liable. The driver and the hirer may be different people, but with a NTH, only the hirer is liable so to demand the driver pay the charge  fails to comply with PoFA and so the NPE claim must fail. I seem to remember that you have confirmed you received a copy of the original PCN sent to  the Hire company plus copies of the contract you have with the Hire company and the agreement that you are responsible for breaches of the Law etc. If not then you can add those fails too.
    • Weaknesses in some banks' security measures for online and mobile banking could leave customers more exposed to scammers, new data from Which? reveals.View the full article
    • I understand what you mean. But consider that part of the problem, and the frustration of those trying to help, is the way that questions are asked without context and without straight facts. A lot of effort was wasted discussing as a consumer issue before it was mentioned that the property was BTL. I don't think we have your history with this property. Were you the freehold owner prior to this split? Did you buy the leasehold of one half? From a family member? How was that funded (earlier loan?). How long ago was it split? Have either of the leasehold halves changed hands since? I'm wondering if the split and the leashold/freehold arrangements were set up in a way that was OK when everyone was everyone was connected. But a way that makes the leasehold virtually unsaleable to an unrelated party.
  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like

Failed to name driver prosecution


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2074 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Firstly, go to your local Magistrates' Court and make a "Statutory Declaration". In this you will declare that you knew nothing of the proceedings against you which resulted in your fine and ban. When it is sent to the court that convicted you it will quash the conviction and the CPS will have to bring fresh proceedings against you.

 

Secondly, there is no reason why you should have been banned for the single offence of failing to name the driver. Whilst any offence that carries points can result in a ban, for that offence the usual penalty is six points. Have you checked your driving record with the DVLA to see if you have, perhaps, another conviction for a similar matter (thus making you liable to a "totting up" ban)?

 

When the CPS restart their proceedings it would be useful if you come back and let us know whether you have been "dual charged" (with both speeding and failing to provide driver's details). If you have there is an avenue to use where you can be convicted simply of the speeding. If not, you are largely stuffed because you have no realistic defence against the failing to furnish charge. But, unless you have other convictions, you should not be banned.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You are a bit off the mark, DF.

 

If the OP is a "New Driver" the court does not ban him. His licence is revoked by the DVLA and there is no specific period mentioned. He can drive as soon as he has a new licence. He cannot be convicted of Speeding and FtF as there is no evidence that he was driving. More info is required from the OP.

Link to post
Share on other sites

“Nothing in the last 5 years until this.”

 

 

Yes, you need to get your Statutory Declaration (SD) done asap and have the case started again.

Do not drive until you are sure that your disqualification has been lifted.

 

 

You need to ensure you attend any new hearing so that you can ensure your correct record is considered.

Beware that if you do your SD at a Magistrates’ Court you may be asked to enter a plea to the charge(s) there and then.

 

 

You should avold doing this until you have the details of the charges explained to you (which they will almost certainly be unable to provide).

You can do your SD at a solicitors for a nominal fee (about £10) which will avoid this entirely.

 

Now you know about you must as others have said apply to make a Stat Dec but and note this well you only have 21 days toe becoming aware - the clock is now ticking.

 

 

A court may not be able to give you an appointment within three weeks.

This is not an issue.

So long as you have applied to make your SD in time it will be accepted.

 

There is some other misleading information on here that must be corrected:

 

Ahh, had no idea how these newer licenses work. I had just assumed that it was the same as the old system, where it'd be a standard ban from a court rather than a revocation. Every day's a school day

 

 

There has never been a provision under the “New Drivers’ Legislation” for a court to impose a ban when a new driver reached 6 points.

The process has always been that the DVLA revoke the licence.

 

 

This is an administrative process against which there is no appeal.

It is not a judicial process imposed by the court and the court has no discretion in the matter.

 

As for not being convicted of both... I've seen it happen. The court 'decides' that the keeper was also the driver and infers that that is why they've not told the court any different, and if they're not in court to contest the point, well, you know the rest. The Magistrates may have been procedurally incorrect and it may have been overturned at a later date (I don't know that bit) but it has/does/can happen
.

 

It has never been acceptable for a court to “decide” that the RK was the driver or to make any inferences from their failure to admit to being so. This is true whether the defendant is present in court or not.

 

 

To prove an offence of speeding the prosecution must show

(a) that the prevailing limit was exceeded and

(b) that the defendant was the driver.

 

 

The usual way to obtain evidence for the latter is by an admission under Section 172 of the Road Traffic Act (the duty to name the driver).

This obligation was challenged as being contrary to te European Convention on Human Rights by Gerard O’Halloran and Idris Francis in 2005 but the challenge was rejected by the ECHR.

 

 

Any Bench making such an assumption should

(a) be prevented from doing so by their legal advisor and

(b) in the very unlikely event of that not happening, would be admonished if the matter was appealed in the crown Court. The only way he can be convicted of both offences is to provide a S172 admission beyond the 28 days allowed (and thus be guilty of an offence) and that admission then being used to convict him of speeding.

This is extremely unusual.

 

Important.

What were your conviction codes from 2004 and 2013?

 

 

It makes no difference.

Even if the offences were those which remain “active” for ten years they only remain so for the purposes of determining whether an enhanced sentence is applicable for a second or subsequent similar offence committed in that time.

Any points imposed do not remain active for totting up purposes beyond three years.

 

If you fail to appear when summonsed - regardless of whether you know about it or not - then the Magistrates are allowed to assume they can inflict the maximum sentence available to them which is how it is such a heavy fine
.

 

Not correct.

Fines are calculated on the basis of net weekly income.

 

 

When the court has no details of a defendant’s income (whether because he is absent or for any other reason) they base their fines on an assumed default income of £440pw.

Edited by dx100uk
spacing
  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I have admitted that I didn't respond, can I still sign a statutory declaration?

 

Yes. You have been convicted of that very offence during a hearing of which you were not aware. You are entitled to a court hearing and if you were not aware of it for any reason you are entitled to make an SD.

 

Another point is that I am a HGV Driver. I haven't been doing this job since January (my last week was actually the time of this offence) but I am being laid off in early September in my current role and so I may need to go back to HGV. I have a girlfriend and a 13 year old in the house who rely on my wage to pay the rent too.

 

Before you worry about avoiding disqualification (because of exceptional hardship) you need to find out why you were disqualified and what the likelihood of you being disqualified again is. From what you have said I can see no reason why you were disqualified. The offence of failing to provide driver's details carries only six points. and you had no other active points on your licence. But you have received a "Totting Up" ban and you need to find out why that is.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...