Fail to comply with solid white line markings

[Lucky2004]

Hi

I've just been sent a road traffic notice for 'motor vehicle fail to comply with solid white line road markings.

 

I've been given 3 choices

£100 fine + points

£90 course which would mean a day of work (self employed)

Go to court and defend it.

 

Now I'm usually not one for breaking driving laws, I've had a clean license for 30+ years but it could have happened.

 

There was no photographic evidence included in the letter and I'm seriously thinking of going down the court summons route if only to see what evidence they have.

 

My question is, do they have to supply me with the photographic evidence if I request it before deciding which option I will choose?

 

 

 

[BazzaS]

No.

 

You only get to see the evidence if you plead not guilty and go to court.

 

You can ASK if the evidence helps identify the driver if they have sent the keeper a S172 request to ID the driver (but if they have, DON’T miss the deadline to provide your reply!)

Edited August 17, 2019 by BazzaS

[Lucky2004]

I've already admitted I was the driver. 

 

I think I'll go for the court option, if they do have photographic evidence I'll plead guilty.

 

Thanks for your speedy reply.

[BazzaS]

You’ll still get some credit for a guilty plea, but not as much as pleading guilt at the earliest opportunity. There is also the chance your penalty will be more severe by having had the court’s time taken up.

[Lucky2004]

I understand that but I'm an old fashioned person who still believes in ' innocent until proven guilty'

 

[Man in the middle]

Quote

I think I'll go for the court option, if they do have photographic evidence I'll plead guilty.

 

Quote

I understand that but I'm an old fashioned person who still believes in ' innocent until proven guilty'

 

Then be prepared to get your cheque book out.

 

You will be served with the evidence the prosecution intends to rely on to convict you when you receive notification of court action. This will almost certainly be in the form of a "Single Justice Procedure Notice" (SJPN). They have six months to begin court proceedings and in most areas take all of that. You will be given three options:

 

1. Plead guilty and have the matter heard by the Single Justice (a hearing which you cannot attend).

 

2. Plead guilty and opt for a hearing in the normal Magistrates' Court (a hearing which you can attend).

 

3. Plead Not Guilty.

 

If, after viewing the evidence, you decide on (1) or (2) you will be sentenced in accordance with the sentencing guidelines. These suggest a fine of half a week's net income (maximum £1,000, reduced by a third for a guilty plea). You will also pay a surcharge of 10% of the fine (Minimum £30 - or £32 if the offence was committed on or after 28th June 2019) and costs of £85. You will also receive 3 penalty points. So you can see that the costs and surcharge will exceed £100 before you consider the fine.

 

If you choose (3) you will have to rely on either (a) the prosecution being unable to prove its case or (b) successfully rebutting their evidence. The cost of failure here is high. You will obviously lose your one third discount for a guilty plea and the costs will increase to as much as £620.

 

You can see that you "old fashioned" approach could cost you dearly. But you takes your choice and pays your money    (or hopefully not  ).

[Manxman in exile]

On ‎17‎/‎08‎/‎2019 at 15:37, Lucky2004 said:

I understand that but I'm an old fashioned person who still believes in ' innocent until proven guilty'

 

 

Unless you are absolutely certain you did not commit the offence and you want to stick to a "principle", opting for the course is probably a no-brainer.  Going to court will be more expensive whether you win or lose (especially if you are self employed).

 

Opting for the course is not the same as saying "I'm guilty" any more than is returning the s172 (which you've already done).

[aesmith]

On 17/08/2019 at 14:28, Lucky2004 said:

...

There was no photographic evidence included in the letter and I'm seriously thinking of going down the court summons route if only to see what evidence they have.

 

My question is, do they have to supply me with the photographic evidence if I request it before deciding which option I will choose?

...

Are you assuming there is photographic evidence, or has it been mentioned somewhere?  I ask because it would be perfectly possible to be charged and in fact convicted without any sort of photograph or video, for example if the allegation was backed up by witness statements.  

[Man in the middle]

Yes your alleged misdemeanour could have simply been witnessed by a police officer who then reported the matter for action. If that was the case the evidence against you will be his statement. If you want to challenge his recollection of events you will have to ask for him to attend court so that you (or your representative) can cross-examine him.

[ericsbrother]

If it was a traffic officer good luck with challenging his memory or version of events.

If I were you I would do the course, some insurers dont count it as a conviction and as for a day off work- being self employed you have full control over what work you do or dont do so you cnat really be said to be losing money and you may actually find it useful.

I did a speed awareness course soem years ago when I was clocked going through a camera when I was actually at home but rather than challenge their camera's clock and radar calibration ( yes I went through said camera earlier in the day at a different speed to that stated). The course was relaxed and the other people a pleasant group. We were fed and watered and most of it was jsut refreshing people about speed limits for types of vehicles on different types of road and none of it was judgemental. All in all it was like going on a first aid refresher course rather than a punishment