Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Starmer cosying up to right wing outliers and Brexitish (who seem to be just pointing the fingers away from themselves for the failures resulting from what they financed and promoted) to the outrage of huge swathes of the party is a real problem IMO - probably the main thing that could generate vast quantities of 'I'm not voting' among regulars   Looks like hes taking the core for granted and embedding himself in the 'they have nowhere else to go fallacy' - well they may decide the else is redundant and they simply have nowhere to go
    • how did Paula Vennells, an ordained priest, fall so far and so fast from grace? - because she was never in grace - and always just another devil in shepherds clothing   Post Office scandal: how did Paula Vennells, an ordained priest, fall so far and so fast from grace? | Post Office Horizon scandal | The Guardian WWW.THEGUARDIAN.COM The former chief executive and archbishop’s confidant appears at the Horizon IT inquiry this week to explain her role in the affair that wrecked the...  
    • I started paying her old council tax as they said they would jail her I managed to get those account details. We then got back together she moved in with me stopped me going to my house. Eventually let me back in I was there 4 days then the police showed up at 1am arrested me for 8 different offences. On the morning I was in custody she rang the letting agent and asked for the house to be changed to her sole name as I was in jail. The house was changed to her name I was made homeless. The bills she did not change to her name left them as occupier the utility companies then said I had to pay as there was lots more usage than an empty property. My solicitor said if I don't pay them I will be reported for it. It has since turned out that in her old property she didn't pay the bills. The electric bill she put in her daughter's name then cancelled the direct debit the council tax she never attempted to pay. Due to one of the accusations I have since been told I need to pay these bills even after getting emails saying I'm not liable for the bills. I have forwarded these on to the police and solicitors and had no reply. Other than you have to pay these bills. I'm also going to end up paying the bills where she lives now as once again they are not being paid. I can't go in to detail about the case as I'm due to be charged next week not sure what with yet but the police have told me I'm going to be charged.  My ex will not tell me nor can tell me about her debts as she doesn't want me to know how much debt she is in or has put her daughter in once she turned 18. I do not want to be paying her debts after what she has done to me.
  • 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

Pulled for driving on M62 using mobile phone?


Recommended Posts

Quote

see if you get a NIP in the post first.

You won't get a NIP for two reasons:

1. A NIP is only required if the driver was not stopped and warned at the time that a prosecution is being considered.

2. Mobile phone offences do not require a NIP in any circumstances.

You may, however, get an offer of a fixed penalty (£300 and six points).

You are on a sticky wicket here. If you look at the legislation (Road Vehicles (Construction and Use) Regulations 1986, Reg. 110) it says this:

For the purposes of this regulation—

(a)a mobile telephone or other device is to be treated as hand-held if it is, or must be, held at some point during the course of making or receiving a call or performing any other interactive communication function; [my emphasis]

You said that your phone was on the passenger seat. It is hard, therefore, to imagine that it need not be "....held at some point during the course of making or receiving a call or performing any other interactive communication function." But I think you have a bigger problem than that. You will face testimony from two police officers who will both say they saw you using the phone. They have nothing to gain by perjuring themselves (and frankly, catching drivers using mobile phones is akin to shooting fish in a barrel). Your task will be to persuade the court they were both mistaken. On your own admission, you were using the phone and, by the definition provided in the legislation, it is not a hands-free phone. 

I would say you face an uphill struggle.

As an aside:

Quote

told then I didn't realise and can do the tax straight away to prevent the car being towed away,

Why would you worry about tax? Your trade plates would have overcome the need for you to tax the car (provided you were using them in accordance with their conditions). They would not, however, have provided you with insurance cover. Nor would they have absolved the Registered Keeper (if any) from ensuring continuous cover was in place as required by s144A of the RTA.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Quote

...and ofcourse the officers will just side with each other no doubt there but is it purely based on my story against theirs or will the judge ask for some kind of prove to show I was guilty?

“Proof” is whatever the court finds as proof. The testimony of the two officers is evidence and if, based on that evidence, the court is sure, beyond reasonable doubt that the offence was committed, you will be convicted. There is a popular misunderstanding that there needs to be photographic evidence to support offences of this kind. There need not. Testimony from eye witnesses is often sufficient. You need to take a step back from the alleged persecution you say you have suffered (a court will not be interested in that) and concentrate solely on the offence with which (I assume) you will face.

Quote

I think it will all come down to phone use however my argument is the text was sent handsfree and if theres any evidence with their camera etc to prove they saw me on the phone then show it.

You need to understand the elements of the offence. If the phone must be held at some point to undertake its functions it is considered to be “hand held” (whether you were holding it or not). There is little doubt that a court will find your phone, as you have described it, to be hand held. There is also little doubt that you were using it. Some of the things you have said here simply compound your problems. For example:

Quote

“I have the satnav up on the phone but the phones on the seat as you can see.”

What I think you are missing here is that you do not have to be holding the phone to be “using” it. It’s the design of the device itself which determines whether it is “hand held” (as I explained in my first post). If it is a hand held device, then using it as a satnav on the passenger seat would see an offence committed. The revised mobile phone legislation (introduced January 2022) makes doing virtually anything with a hand-held device into an offence.

Of course it’s your decision whether to defend this in court. Failure (apart from the points) will be expensive. You will pay a fine of at least half a week’s net income, a “Victim Surcharge” of 40% of that fine and prosecution costs which will be at least £620. No change out of £1k for most people. Your points situation is unfortunate. Firstly it means you cannot accept a fixed penalty even if was offered and you wanted to accept it as the six points will indeed see you liable to a six month “totting up” ban. So your case will be heard in court. If you are convicted you can only avoid disqualification if you can convince the court that “Exceptional Hardship” will be suffered by you or others if you are banned.

Let me know if I can help further.
 

  • I agree 1
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...