Summons received this morning
Discussion
OK OK, I know that this one’s been done to death, but I would appreciate a bit of focused advice here:-
Summons came this morning. Allegedly caught doing 83 in a 70 back in April. Appropriate form sent back (can’t remember if I signed the thing …..), NIP received in May. Ignored.
End of July - letter received basically saying: "Pay the fixed penalty or else." Ignored.
Now I have been "requested" to appear in court in November. Two charges - the original 83 in a 70 plus failing to disclose details of the driver. I shall plead not guilty and the case will probably be adjourned - however:-
As far as I am aware, all they have against me is an unsigned declaration (if I did indeed forget to sign it …..) If they are going to go for the speeding charge, presumably they don’t have any evidence that will stand up in court, unless they provide me with a copy of the evidence that they propose to submit (and all they’ve sent me so far is the statement of the grandson of Herr Himmler s who was operating the scamera, and that certainly doesn’t identify me as the driver). I think it probably therefore safe to say that they have no evidence to actually support the speeding charge against me, personally., other than an unsigned (perhaps …) form
Alternatively, if they charge me with failure to provide details of the driver (because I might not have signed the form - as I said, can’t remember …..) then this shows that they have no evidence to support the speeding charge against me because, presumably, they wish to pretend that they haven’t got the form.
The same form, perchance, that they are relying on to support their speeding charge …..??
The two charges seem to me to be mutually exclusive - ie. if they’ve got enough evidence to do me for speeding, then it is clear that they have accepted a possibly unsigned NIP as sufficient evidence to support their case. Alternatively, if they say they I haven’t discharged my obligations under section 172(3) to identify the driver, then they can’t have any evidence to prove that I was the driver at the time??
How should I respond? (All this assumes, correctly, that I am not going to meekly back down and plead guilty) Help and advice would be appreciated.
Summons came this morning. Allegedly caught doing 83 in a 70 back in April. Appropriate form sent back (can’t remember if I signed the thing …..), NIP received in May. Ignored.
End of July - letter received basically saying: "Pay the fixed penalty or else." Ignored.
Now I have been "requested" to appear in court in November. Two charges - the original 83 in a 70 plus failing to disclose details of the driver. I shall plead not guilty and the case will probably be adjourned - however:-
As far as I am aware, all they have against me is an unsigned declaration (if I did indeed forget to sign it …..) If they are going to go for the speeding charge, presumably they don’t have any evidence that will stand up in court, unless they provide me with a copy of the evidence that they propose to submit (and all they’ve sent me so far is the statement of the grandson of Herr Himmler s who was operating the scamera, and that certainly doesn’t identify me as the driver). I think it probably therefore safe to say that they have no evidence to actually support the speeding charge against me, personally., other than an unsigned (perhaps …) form
Alternatively, if they charge me with failure to provide details of the driver (because I might not have signed the form - as I said, can’t remember …..) then this shows that they have no evidence to support the speeding charge against me because, presumably, they wish to pretend that they haven’t got the form.
The same form, perchance, that they are relying on to support their speeding charge …..??
The two charges seem to me to be mutually exclusive - ie. if they’ve got enough evidence to do me for speeding, then it is clear that they have accepted a possibly unsigned NIP as sufficient evidence to support their case. Alternatively, if they say they I haven’t discharged my obligations under section 172(3) to identify the driver, then they can’t have any evidence to prove that I was the driver at the time??
How should I respond? (All this assumes, correctly, that I am not going to meekly back down and plead guilty) Help and advice would be appreciated.
first thing get it ajouned/put off as as long as posible
the first time you go ask for a delay so you can get a solisitor, even if your not going to get one
first request evidence from the cps that will give you some time. they dont like handing it over
the reson you need to play for time, is they have just found adris guity for not signing at a nip at magistrats court.
it has noit set a president but most make the same desition to the idris appeal settels the case law.
he going to appeal it. and it would be best to try and get your case up after he appeals.
then ask for the case to be split so the speeding and s172 are not herd at the same time.
ie with the seeding charge first
you should get off the speeding charge.
the failer to suppy depends on the the idris case.
but IV got a feeling he going to win the appeal.
I can see how the there going to getaway with you to sign it.
and if he dont win the appeal I see another european court of human rights case on the way
>> Edited by outlaw on Wednesday 22 October 01:24
the first time you go ask for a delay so you can get a solisitor, even if your not going to get one
first request evidence from the cps that will give you some time. they dont like handing it over
the reson you need to play for time, is they have just found adris guity for not signing at a nip at magistrats court.
it has noit set a president but most make the same desition to the idris appeal settels the case law.
he going to appeal it. and it would be best to try and get your case up after he appeals.
then ask for the case to be split so the speeding and s172 are not herd at the same time.
ie with the seeding charge first
you should get off the speeding charge.
the failer to suppy depends on the the idris case.
but IV got a feeling he going to win the appeal.
I can see how the there going to getaway with you to sign it.
and if he dont win the appeal I see another european court of human rights case on the way
>> Edited by outlaw on Wednesday 22 October 01:24
If you sent back the original NIP with the driver details they cannot charge you with failing to provide the driver information, even if you did not sign it. It is best if you send it recorded delivery then you have proof of them receiving it.
Also the two charges should be mutually exclusive on the simple logic that if you failed to identify the driver they have no evidence to prodecute you for speeding, after all, it may not have been you. If you are identified as the driver for them to proceed then you must have provided the driver details, ergo, they cannot prosecute you for both offfences, at least one must fail from lack of evidence, provided the scamera picture does not identify you clearly.
If the picture is clear you MAY be able to appoint a solicitor to attend court on your behalf, thus denying them the opportunity to identify you in court. I am not sure about this legally, although I am sure somebody else will be able to confirm or deny the point.
Also the two charges should be mutually exclusive on the simple logic that if you failed to identify the driver they have no evidence to prodecute you for speeding, after all, it may not have been you. If you are identified as the driver for them to proceed then you must have provided the driver details, ergo, they cannot prosecute you for both offfences, at least one must fail from lack of evidence, provided the scamera picture does not identify you clearly.
If the picture is clear you MAY be able to appoint a solicitor to attend court on your behalf, thus denying them the opportunity to identify you in court. I am not sure about this legally, although I am sure somebody else will be able to confirm or deny the point.
Thanks for the info, gentlemen !!
Another point sprang to mind - the summons is the first that I'd heard of the "failure to provide" allegation.
Aren't you supposed to be forewarned that you are to be reported for such a matter, or be interviewed by a police constable, or be cautioned or something?
The point I'm getting at, is there a procedural cock-up here that I can exploit?
Another point sprang to mind - the summons is the first that I'd heard of the "failure to provide" allegation.
Aren't you supposed to be forewarned that you are to be reported for such a matter, or be interviewed by a police constable, or be cautioned or something?
The point I'm getting at, is there a procedural cock-up here that I can exploit?
I've just had a summons for failing to provide driver details satisfactorily (unsigned NIP). I'm waiting until 2 days before the hearing date (november) before I post it back as a Not Guilty plea. The prosecution witnesses are the camera inspector and some woman at sherwood lodge who submits the file for prosecution. I can't see them going to court when they can't prove I was the driver. I reckon it's a bluff and I will win.
d off the road for a day !!!Well I don't think it was a mobile camera. Even now I haven't found it but I think it was concealed so the human factor is just a formality. Some bod looking at digital images and a civilian at the police HQ processing prosecution files. As far as I'm concerned, make them attend at court and work for nothing. I don't see how they can get a fair conviction and maybe at the end of the day I will save myself 3 points.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff