Jump to content

 

BankFodder BankFodder


aaroh

Got SJP after GDPR

Recommended Posts

At the and of July I got clocked for doing 59 in a 50 dual carriage way by a mobile speed camera. 

A week later I sent a GDPR request pursuant to article 15 to release photographas which they did not at the time NIP was sent out. 

 

I signed my name that i was driving and refused to take the 3 point and 100 pounds pending the outcome of gdpr

 

All was forgetten untill today

 

an SJP turns up at doorstep about 5 months later.

 

What are my options.

A. Guilty 

b Not guilty citing non compliance of GDPR as mitigating circumstances? 

 

Being security cleared if i get it on my record I would have to delare if found guilty.

will the clearance be taken away whats the impact on future employment. 

 

Kind of think i messed up big time?

 

getting a solicitor will help ?

 

any advise appreciated 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

no you've not messed up much

just find it strange someone in your trade got the idea to GDPR sar them from?

 

if you read the very next topic below yours

or any speeding fine topic of the last few weeks

the correct way to go is listed there.

 

 


please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

“Mitigating circumstances” are mitigation (‘less punishment once guilty’), not a defence (‘not guilty rather than guilty’)

 

Subsequent GDPR non-compliance isn’t a mitigating circumstance, anyway.

You get to plead guilty or not guilty.

 

They don’t HAVE to provide you with the evidence until after you make your plea (and only then if you plead not guilty): They MIGHT do so, but don’t HAVE to.

 

You can always go down the (civil law) GDPR route if you wish, but I don’t know that it will benefit you. I can’t see it being any benefit for the (criminal law) speeding case.

Edited by BazzaS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Totally agree with your suggestion however it was only fair to ask the inforation as a matter of principle albeit using GDPR to which they never complied.

 

The matter is to assertain if the car was clocked and picture taken.

Innocent untill proven otherwise.

 

Im a grown man hindsight should have taken the point but gotta deal with it i guess more of a principle person

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is still “innocent until proven otherwise”

 

You are entitled to plead “not guilty” and let them prove (to the criminal standard of “beyond reasonable doubt”) that you are guilty.

That happens at the trial stage.

 

They don’t have to prove to you that you are guilty before you make your plea.

 

By “car clocked”, do you mean “car cloned”?

If you believe your car wasn’t on that road at the time the offence is alleged to have taken place, plead ‘not guilty’.

Edited by BazzaS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, dx100uk said:

no you've not messed up much

just find it strange someone in your trade got the idea to GDPR sar them from?

 

if you read the very next topic below yours

or any speeding fine topic of the last few weeks

the correct way to go is listed there.

 

 

 

GDPR seemed the logical option as when i called they wanted me to put it in writing right or wrongly took a decision and it went away for ovet 5 months which i was happy with i guess i peed someone up the chain to enforce my rights. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, BazzaS said:

It is still “innocent until proven otherwise”

 

You are entitled to plead “not guilty” and let them prove (to the criminal standard of “beyond reasonable doubt”) that you are guilty.

That happens at the trial stage.

 

They don’t have to prove to you that you are guilty before you make your plea.

 

what you are saying is im shafted anyway rather have my day at court.

Money isnt a problem

 

in their witness statement Gwent police saying they will produce the evidence at court.

 

My arguement is if they complied with they legal duty to comply with the GDPR request i would make an unformed choice.

Thats for the court to decide

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, BazzaS said:

By “car clocked”, do you mean “car cloned”?

If you believe your car wasn’t on that road at the time the offence is alleged to have taken place, plead ‘not guilty’.


if you do mean “clocked” as in “clocked by a speed camera” - you might be working under an incorrect assumption.

Before speed cameras and radar, you could be convicted of speeding based on the testimony of a police officer : they didn’t need photographic evidence.

 

That is still the case. However, speed camera (‘stills’), video evidence, or a radar reading as evidence just make it more likely they’ll be able to prove their case (if it was your car).

 

If it wasn’t you, but was your car, you should have been given the opportunity to identify the driver.

 

If it wasn’t your car (“cloned”, as above), plead not guilty - you’ll get the opportunity to show they can’t prove to “beyond all reasonable doubt” that it was your car.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, aaroh said:

So what your saying is im shafted anyway rather have my day at court. Money isnt a problem in their witness statement Gwent police saying they will produce the evidence at court. My arguement is if they complied with they legal duty to comply with the GDPR request i would make an unformed choice. Thats for the court to decide


Nope, you can have your day in court if you chose. You can elect to have your day in court by pleading ‘not guilty’.

You face a more severe penalty if found guilty, but you still have the right to have the matter heard, with a hearing at which you appear. 

 

However, the magistrates will be deciding “has guilt been proved beyond reasonable doubt”, and won’t be influenced by “has GDPR been complied with”. The first is a criminal law matter, the latter a civil law matter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By severe penalty you mean ?

criminal record is criminal record right ?

isnt it still their duty comply with GDPR albeit Civil

 

the duty of the police

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whose duty?

 

you can use civil law to pursue the GDPR issue with the police (though, as I’ve stated: it may not do you any benefit).

 

The court isn’t bound by any duty under GDPR that the police may (or may not) have.

I can only repeat, the duty of the magistrates regarding verdict is “is the offence proven beyond all reasonable doubt?”.

They can’t, and won’t, be influenced by the GDPR issues at that stage, and you are misguided if you continue to believe that it will make a difference to their verdict.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In essence I am trying to win a loosing battle i take up the 33 % discount on offer me thinks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Were you driving on that road at that time?

if not “not guilty”.

If you were driving on that road at that time: Are you sure you weren’t speeding? If so “not guilty”.

 

If you aren’t sure you weren’t speeding..... why do you think they believe you were?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, aaroh said:

In essence I am trying to win a loosing battle i take up the 33 % discount on offer me thinks

 

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.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, BazzaS said:

Were you driving on that road at that time?

if not “not guilty”.

If you were driving on that road at that time: Are you sure you weren’t speeding? If so “not guilty”.

 

If you aren’t sure you weren’t speeding..... why do you think they believe you were?

I honestly dont know if I was so i asked for a camera calibration report also. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Man in the middle said:

 

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.  

 

I was out of luck with speed awarwness done that already.

Will I get a criminal record if pleading guilty paying the fine was not a problem was all about the principle thats it 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Man in the middle said:

 

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.  

 

They never mentioned anything about the evidence they wished to rely on hence i asked for the photos

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, aaroh said:

I honestly dont know if I was so i asked for a camera calibration report also. 

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.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

if thats the case ill sign the plea

take the discount and que up at the american embassy every year declaring the criminal record every year i visit from now on on 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Man in the middle said:

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.


I agree. Might as well try “officer wasn’t wearing a hat with a white cover” or “I’ll just chew on a 2p coin before I’m breathalysed” ....

 

The police will have seen & heard it all before.

 

OP, you MIGHT just find a loophole. It will likely cost you dear to keep trying. You have the absolute right (“innocent until proven guilty”) to try, but together with that right comes the responsibility of the more severe sentence if you don’t succeed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I could just about find a loophole you 28 to reply that NIP 30 for GDPR what can go wrong.

 

Ill get a crimibal record if found guilty and or pleade guilty

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://uk.usembassy.gov/visas/visa-waiver-program/additional-requirements/


“Traffic offenses

If you have a minor traffic offense which did not result in an arrest and/or conviction you may travel visa free under the Visa Waiver Program, provided you are otherwise qualified. If you are not sure whether or not you are eligible to travel visa free, the only way to resolve this question is to apply for a visa.”

 

Safest is to apply for a visa.

If you have regularly / frequently travelled to the USA under the Visa Waiver Program, and are now applying for a B-1 or B-2 visa (the most common categories), a minor speeding conviction shouldn’t pose a problem, and you can ask for a “multiple entry” visa (so that you don’t have to apply each visit / each year)

Edited by BazzaS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is amazing greatly appreciate your help.

 

Now the after I sign my plea ill need to declare it to NSV about the offence hopefully its ok or ill lose my job.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If an Advocate General  (for Scotland) can be appointed having had a speeding conviction, I think you are on fairly safe ground.

 

Declare it (Change of Personal Circumstances form). 

 

Be open and honest and show you aren’t trying to conceal it (& thus it can’t be used as a lever to apply pressure on you to breach security).

 

Other than that side to it, why do you think UKSV will be bothered, even for Enhanced DV?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...