Jump to content


Birmingham council Blue Badge fraud use - now magistrates date. **RESOLVED**


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 450 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

No, the intention of the court is to ensure that justice is done and the right to legal advice/representation is an important aspect of it.

 

A DS is likely to advise you how to proceed and will err on the side of what is right for you, more so than either the prosecutor or Clerk to the Court.

 

Even if you plead guilty, an advocate can inform the  court of the depth of your remorse far better than you can.

 

I think that the court would adjourn in any case so that they can have the benefit of reports if they are minded to impose Community Service Order or even custody (suspended of not).

 

They would also need details of financial state if considering a fine

  • Like 1

My time as a Police Officer and subsequently time working within the Motor Trade gives me certain insights into the problems that consumers may encounter.

I have no legal qualifications.

If you have found my post helpful, please enhance my reputation by clicking on the Heart. Thank you

Link to post
Share on other sites

:whoo:

Well done 

 

 

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

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was told I needed to seek legal advice before the next court date as it would not be adjourned again. The legal advisor also mentioned putting me on bail as fraud is a serious offence and the judges said that wouldn’t be needed as I had turned up this time.   

Link to post
Share on other sites

I can only tell you what your position is. It wasn't your fault it was adjourned this time. Had a DS been available the case would have been done and dusted. Magistrates should understand this when you appear next time. 

 

If you think about this, if they are telling you that you need to engage your own lawyer, the court need never provide any duty solicitors. All they need do is make sure none is available, all the cases needing them get adjourned (like yours) and the next time defendants appear it is their "second" appearance (when they would not be entitled to see a DS). 

 

It should be noted on the court's file that the reason for the adjournment was the lack of a DS and your next appearance should be treated as your first.

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

I don't think so.

 

But the court has an obligation to provide a DS. It's a legal entitlement that (some) defendants have. I find it astonishing that the court's Legal Advisor has suggested that because one was not available for the OP today that she must make her own arrangements for her next appearance.

 

This from Gick raises an interesting point:

 

Quote

I think that the court would adjourn in any case so that they can have the benefit of reports if they are minded to impose Community Service Order or even custody (suspended of not).

 

If the court is considering anything other than a discharge or a fine, it would be bound to order a report by the probation service. If a probation officer is in court (as they always used to be, but it is not so common these days) a report could be prepared on the day and the case could simply be put back whilst that was done. If the defendant took advantage of the DS scheme, the DS would represent the defendant for sentencing as well. But if an adjournment is required for sentencing then the DS could not be called upon for that second hearing.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

@Blackcat13 here's where to start your reseach, the government Legal Aid page on gov.uk

 

WWW.GOV.UK

Legal aid helps pay for legal advice, mediation or representation in court - see if you can claim

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just spoke to him and apparently because I didn’t seek legal help in the first instance and I’ve pleaded guilty it’s made my situation worse. Apparently as it’s classed as fraud and dishonesty I will end up with a criminal record and may lose my job as a result

of this. Things like car insurance will double so I won’t be able to afford to drive either! Don’t know what I’m going to do 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The solicitor has confirmed the advice given here earlier re criminal record, job, car insurance and that you have been charged with fraud, so no surprises there. What does the solicitor recommend you do now? 

 

Do you qualify for legal aid? The solicitor should be able to tell you if you do.

 

Will the solicitor represent you and speak for you in court when the hearing is resumed?

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 24/09/2022 at 17:20, honeybee13 said:

I have a question for @Man in the middleif he's around.

 

MitM, do you think it would help blackcat's cause if she could get one or more character references to show the mags?

 

HB

 

 A character reference may help her (it can't do any harm). Whether it will have any significant impact is difficult to tell.

 

If the court is in two minds (say between a fine or a Community Order) it may just swing it towards a fine.

 

However, if they are fairly well decided in what they are going to impose, it will probably not help very much.

 

I don't really understand the solicitor suggesting she has made her situation worse by pleading guilty before seeking legal help.

 

There was never any doubt about her plea. In common terms she was "banged to rights" and a guilty plea was the only realistic option.

 

She didn't need legal advice to decide that.

 

What has happened is that since has realised that the consequences of a conviction for fraud will be quite far reaching (particularly for her) she is seeking help with mitigation to reduce the damage.

 

But escaping a conviction was never a realistic option and if the solicitor is suggesting that it was, I think she is being misled. 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...