Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • 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

Penalty Notice for not wearing a mask


Ftgab19
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1140 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

Before going to court to appeal this I would first put in a formal compalnt tpo the police. This has all the feel of police officers exceeding their powers for the reasons you said - you do not have to have proof of your medical status. I imagine the government decided that for the very practical reason that in the middle of a pandemic they didn't want GPs to be diverted from fighting covid to write millions of exemption letters.

 

There have been a number of well publicised cases in the media of ovezealous police issuing FPNs that shouldn't have been issued (remember the woman given an FPN by police because drinking a takeaway coffee whilst out walking was an illegal picnic?). In many cases the Chief Constable agreed that the officers shouldn't have issued the FPN and cancelled it. So it seems Chief Constables do have a discretionary power to cancel an FPN if they decide it shouldn't have been issued.

Link to post
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, 45002 said:

I would think by the time a formal complaint was dealt with, your penalty notice would have gone up another £100 even more when it gets to court !

 

 

There is no right of appeal in a court against an FPN. All you can do is not pay it  then you will be taken to court and be prosecuted for the original offence. The backlog of magistrates court cases is so long that your complaint to the police would be heard long before then. In reported cases (albeit where media publicity has been involved) It has taken a matter of days for police to respond. 

 

In any case it isn't one or the other, you can do both in parallel.  

Edited by Ethel Street
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not going to comment on whether OP's medical condition justifies an exemption as I know nothing about her or him, but one point I'd use in my defence if I were the OP was that I had previously taken the time to read the government guidance, download the exemption certificate, create a lanyard and was wearing the lanyard when given the FPN. I know the exemption certificate is a 'self certification' and no guarantee of medical need but it should have been evidence to the police, IMO, that the OP was not making up a medical need on the spot when seen without a mask but had previously taken steps to consider whether they had an exemption and acted in good faith and with a genuine belief they were justified in claiming a medical exemption.

Edited by Ethel Street
Link to post
Share on other sites

Also to add that complaining to the police ("making representations" - there's usually instructions on the back of the FPN how to do this) is preferable to not paying and going to magistrates court. An FPN is not a recordable offence so does not appear on the police national computer and so you don't get a 'criminal record'. However if you don't pay and get prosecuted in a magistrates court and are convicted it is a recordable offence and you get a criminal record. Getting the police to withdraw it is the best thing, get some advice from a solicitor of CAB on making the representation. Check time limits for making a representation.

 

This solicitors' article might be of interest

 

https://www.bindmans.com/news/student-coronavirus-fixed-penalty-notices-withdrawn

Link to post
Share on other sites

Having reflected for several more moments I think we will just have to differ in our advice to the OP @Manxman in exile

 

Any prosecutor would, in my opinion, struggle to convince a court that reading govrnment guidance on when a mask was required should be interpreted by the court os evidence of an intention to breach the law by falsely claiming an exemption when the more obvious conclusion would be that it was evidence of intention to comply (in the absence of other evidence to the contray that has not been mentioned by OP).

 

I hope OP returns to give us an update on this.

Edited by Ethel Street
Link to post
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Man in the middle said:

I think we need to be a bit careful here.

 

The OP is not claiming an ”exemption”. He is claiming that he failed to wear a face covering because he had a “reasonable excuse.” Whilst the legislation mentions both, there is a critical difference.  The legislation says this:

 

I agree with your analysis of the language of the regulations but inmformally "exemption" is used to describe "reasonable excuse for medical reasons" even by the government in their guidance

 

Exemption cards

If you have an age, health or disability reason for not wearing a face covering:

  • you do not routinely need to show any written evidence of this
  • you do not need show an exemption card

This means that you do not need to seek advice or request a letter from a medical professional about your reason for not wearing a face covering.

 

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/face-coverings-when-to-wear-one-and-how-to-make-your-own/face-coverings-when-to-wear-one-and-how-to-make-your-own

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, hightail said:

That word 'reasonable' is what makes it all so difficult. A court might find it isn't at all reasonable not to play your part in protecting yourself and others if you could wear a mask even though you have a condition which makes it slightly more difficult than for the person next to you.  It isn't easy or pleasant for anyone, it will all come down to a matter of degree.

 

A magistrates' court could, theoretically, decide that but would be very unlikely to ignore official government guidance on exemptions from wearing a mask

 

OP on here is being subjected to some very unwarranted assumptions in my opinion, unless posters here know more about her/his medical condition than I do. 

 

I'm not surprised posters on here asking for help aren't coming back when they are treated this way.

Edited by Ethel Street
Link to post
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, hightail said:

Most of the conditions which can give rise to a reasonable excuse for not wearing a mask are not digital. 

 

Sorry but that makes no sense at all to me. I have no idea how a medical condition can or canot be "digital" or what "digital "has to do with the regulations.

 

CAG is here to help people, not to tell them  why, on no evidence, they are not meeting their social obligations (as defined by other posters)

Edited by Ethel Street
Link to post
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Manxman in exile said:

All we really know is that the police officers concerned did not think it a reasonable excuse (for what it's worth).

 

I hope OP comes back with more information as one key thing we don't know is what the police said when OP told them he had a medical condition. All that OP posted was "I explained this to the police but they still issued me with the notice...". I'd like to know what the police actually said. What was their response to OP when OP told the police she/he had a medical condition? I assume they didn't carry out a medical assessment in the middle of Asda!

Edited by Ethel Street
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

ACRO have a page of FAQs on Covid Penalty Notices. All of it is relevant to you but particulalry note what they say about if you want to complain. There is no point in sending complaints to ACRO because they cannot cancel an FPN, only the police force which issued it can do that (details of how to do that should be on th back of the FPN).

 

"ACRO does not have the authority to review, investigate or cancel your FPN. 

ACRO is only responsible for administering your FPN on behalf of the relevant police force. As such, we do not have the authority to cancel the fines; this decision must come from the force or a court."

 

https://www.acro.police.uk/FPN-FAQs

 

You need to do something urgently if you want to make a complaint. The point was made at the start of the thread about needing to watch out for the timescales and unfortunately you are now almost out of time to submit a complaint. As ACRO site says (and as is presumably shown on the FPN?) you have 28 days from the date of the ACRO letter to pay, or "contest".  Your ACRO letter is dated 17th February. So the 28 days is up on 17th March - the day after tomorrow. 

 

I assume that any request to "contest" or complain must be received by the police within 28 days (not just sent within 28 days).

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

My comment on when the 28 days starts from is based on what ACRO say on that page: "If you have received an FPN, you have two options: you can either pay the FPN in full within 28 days (unless otherwise stated) from the date of your FPN letter (the date is located above your ACRO reference number) or contest it"

 

And according that ACRO page you can submit a request to "contest" the FPN by email, this is the relevant bit:

 

"Contesting your FPN

If you do not want to pay your FPN, cannot pay your FPN or if you disagree with any of the information within your FPN, you can contest it and request a court hearing.

I want to contest my fixed penalty notice, what should I do? 

Please email [email protected] with your ACRO reference number, clearly stating that you wish to contest and request a court hearing. 

You are welcome to provide an explanation and any supporting information or evidence you wish to be taken into consideration by the force/court."

 

 

 

 

But if you "contest" it this way that means you are asking to go to court and be tried in a Magistrates court. If you want to complain and ask the police that issued it to cancel it without going to court it will depend on that police force's rules whether you can submit it by email.

 

Just to be clear @Ftgab19both this post and my earlier one today are based only on my reading of the ACRO webpage. I have no expert knowledge or personal experience. You may read the ACRO page differently.

Edited by Ethel Street
Link to post
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Manxman in exile said:

  (And I don't know if a conviction for a breach of Covid regs means a criminal record or if it means paying extra too)

 

According to the ACRO website:

 

"Will my fixed penalty notice result in a criminal record? 

Fixed penalty notices issued for offences under coronavirus legislation are non-recordable, so whether an FPN is paid or contested, it will not be recorded on the Police National Computer. Local records may be held by the relevant force."

 

Although bear in mind that it is still a criminal offence and if, for example, a potential employer asks specifically if you have ever been issued with an FPN it must be disclosed.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...