Received summons for speeding - best approach?
Discussion
I've been summonsed for a speeding offence. I intend to plead guilty. Is there any practical benefit to having legal representation? Sentencing guidelines look like I will get a short ban or 6 points and a fine. In reality, do people get lesser penalties when they are legally represented (vs pleading guilty by post).
Generally decent legal representation will cost you more than you would save. You are more likely to get a reduced penalty if you turn up in person vs guilty by post. If you are facing a ban and plead guilty by post they may adjourn in order to require you to attend - they can't ban you unless you are present (with limited exceptions).
If you want to deal with it expeditiously and with the least stress plead guilty, turn up on the day, act contrite, make any mitigation pleas you may have (not defences, remember) and hope for a lenient bench.
If you want to deal with it expeditiously and with the least stress plead guilty, turn up on the day, act contrite, make any mitigation pleas you may have (not defences, remember) and hope for a lenient bench.
Amateurish said:
Thanks for the help, sounds about right. I don't have any mitigation.
Not sure if I would prefer a short ban, or take the 6 points in addition to my current 3. A couple of weeks without driving would be fine, 6 months less so...
Most people have mitigation. You should sim for the least punishment possible.Not sure if I would prefer a short ban, or take the 6 points in addition to my current 3. A couple of weeks without driving would be fine, 6 months less so...
For example, 20 over the limit on an empty motorway on a dry day is something would underlining, along with some kissassness.
Or, did you really do 40mph over the 20 limit, at 3.30 in the driving rain past a school?
You see my point?
FrankAbagnale said:
Go on then, tell us how fast you were going so everyone can tell you how naughty you are and how you will most likely end up being fingered by the wrong end of the devils trident in your next life.
(I don't know the answer to your Q, sorry)
And everyone else can justify your excessive speed by the fact it was quiet/not raining/late/early/driving god/performance car/no one died......(I don't know the answer to your Q, sorry)
Amateurish said:
I've been summonsed for a speeding offence. I intend to plead guilty. Is there any practical benefit to having legal representation? Sentencing guidelines look like I will get a short ban or 6 points and a fine. In reality, do people get lesser penalties when they are legally represented (vs pleading guilty by post).
In the vast majority of cases, yes - or no penalty if a defence / special reasons is available. It really depends on the circumstances as to whether legal help will actually get you a better outcome.
If it's a clear cut case then I'd personally save the money.
I was caught doing just over double the speed limit on a dual carriageway (40mph limit), I sent the paperwork off with my statement of means etc and ticked the box that said I'd be showing up at court. As opposed to pleading guilty by post and then writing a statement in the box.
I went in a suit, and I was the only one there in a suit (aside from the solicitors), most people at the magistrates court looked like they were regulars, and were dressed in tracksuits, hats, jeans, hoodies etc. Although there were 3 courtrooms on the floor I was on, and the courtroom dealing with driving offences had more "normal" looking people.
My approach was remorse and lots of it, but in my case it was genuine, I held my hands up, apologised, stated it was a severe lack of judgement on my part, I also emphasised the mitigating factors i.e road conditions were good, dry day, lack of traffic etc whilst not using it as justification.
I got 6 points and a fine and was very lucky. A ban would have had severe consequences in my line of work.
If it's a clear cut case then I'd personally save the money.
I was caught doing just over double the speed limit on a dual carriageway (40mph limit), I sent the paperwork off with my statement of means etc and ticked the box that said I'd be showing up at court. As opposed to pleading guilty by post and then writing a statement in the box.
I went in a suit, and I was the only one there in a suit (aside from the solicitors), most people at the magistrates court looked like they were regulars, and were dressed in tracksuits, hats, jeans, hoodies etc. Although there were 3 courtrooms on the floor I was on, and the courtroom dealing with driving offences had more "normal" looking people.
My approach was remorse and lots of it, but in my case it was genuine, I held my hands up, apologised, stated it was a severe lack of judgement on my part, I also emphasised the mitigating factors i.e road conditions were good, dry day, lack of traffic etc whilst not using it as justification.
I got 6 points and a fine and was very lucky. A ban would have had severe consequences in my line of work.
Edited by pops and bangs on Tuesday 20th January 15:47
Amateurish said:
Cheers, any recommendations for barristers in Oxford?
You wouldn't want a barrister. Even if you did, you'd be contacting them through a solicitor.Having been through the mill before, my advice would be that the best course of action would be to appear yourself, and appear contrite.
Second to that would be providing a statement to be read.
All a solicitor would be doing would be reading out a statement on your behalf.
Put yourself in the shoes of a magistrate who is deciding how genuine your mitigation is on how much they punish your for. Out of appearing yourself, not appearing and providing a letter, and getting a solicitor to read something on your behalf, which do you think a magistrate would believe to be the most genuine?
A barrister may or may not be a better bet. As far as I'm aware AGT here is now practising as a barrister.
If the barrister is so qualified you can engage one directly, without need for a solicitor, through direct access.
It is not a foregone conclusion that a barrister will charge more than a solicitor to attend trial.
Without knowing what is at stake for the individual it is impossible to blanket advise that a solicitor or barrister is unnecessary. Lay people will not necessarily spot mistakes in procedure or law that the courts make everyday. They may not understand defences or mitigation available that could reduce their penalty to zero.
If the barrister is so qualified you can engage one directly, without need for a solicitor, through direct access.
It is not a foregone conclusion that a barrister will charge more than a solicitor to attend trial.
Without knowing what is at stake for the individual it is impossible to blanket advise that a solicitor or barrister is unnecessary. Lay people will not necessarily spot mistakes in procedure or law that the courts make everyday. They may not understand defences or mitigation available that could reduce their penalty to zero.
pops and bangs said:
It really depends on the circumstances as to whether legal help will actually get you a better outcome.
If it's a clear cut case then I'd personally save the money.
If you're an amateur then how do know it's clear cut? I take it you obtained the TRO for the road in question, etc, etc, etc.If it's a clear cut case then I'd personally save the money.
Edited by pops and bangs on Tuesday 20th January 15:47
It's quite possible that there was no defence - but my point is that you wouldn't actually save any money pleading guilty to an offence you could have avoided.
OP - the only colleagues I know in Oxford don't do motoring cases.
pops and bangs said:
It really depends on the circumstances as to whether legal help will actually get you a better outcome.
If it's a clear cut case then I'd personally save the money.
I was caught doing just over double the speed limit on a dual carriageway (40mph limit), I sent the paperwork off with my statement of means etc and ticked the box that said I'd be showing up at court. As opposed to pleading guilty by post and then writing a statement in the box.
I went in a suit, and I was the only one there in a suit (aside from the solicitors), most people at the magistrates court looked like they were regulars, and were dressed in tracksuits, hats, jeans, hoodies etc. Although there were 3 courtrooms on the floor I was on, and the courtroom dealing with driving offences had more "normal" looking people.
My approach was remorse and lots of it, but in my case it was genuine, I held my hands up, apologised, stated it was a severe lack of judgement on my part, I also emphasised the mitigating factors i.e road conditions were good, dry day, lack of traffic etc whilst not using it as justification.
I got 6 points and a fine and was very lucky. A ban would have had severe consequences in my line of work.
And to go against that. I was caught doing 89 in a 60 on a country dual carriageway. No traffic, dry clear day. I went with a clean licence etc. If it's a clear cut case then I'd personally save the money.
I was caught doing just over double the speed limit on a dual carriageway (40mph limit), I sent the paperwork off with my statement of means etc and ticked the box that said I'd be showing up at court. As opposed to pleading guilty by post and then writing a statement in the box.
I went in a suit, and I was the only one there in a suit (aside from the solicitors), most people at the magistrates court looked like they were regulars, and were dressed in tracksuits, hats, jeans, hoodies etc. Although there were 3 courtrooms on the floor I was on, and the courtroom dealing with driving offences had more "normal" looking people.
My approach was remorse and lots of it, but in my case it was genuine, I held my hands up, apologised, stated it was a severe lack of judgement on my part, I also emphasised the mitigating factors i.e road conditions were good, dry day, lack of traffic etc whilst not using it as justification.
I got 6 points and a fine and was very lucky. A ban would have had severe consequences in my line of work.
Edited by pops and bangs on Tuesday 20th January 15:47
I turned up at court in a suit. Got there first and was made to wait until last. I was genuinely sorry and apologised for my error. I was very nervous when in the court and I think very genuine in my manner. However the magistrate talked to me like I was scum and took great pleasure in talking over everything I said. He laughed at my Means form, saying you have a good salary (as though it was a bad thing) and your outgoings aren't my concern - I assumed it was means not income, why have the rest if you're going to ignore it?! If you didn't fill it in they had a standard amount they'd work to, I should have gone with this!
He gave me a £480 fine and wouldn't allow me to pay in instalments, despite asking me how I'd like to pay. We argued this for a short while and in the end I just had to pay up the full amount in one go - My wife was on maternity leave and I'd just taken a 10% paycut as part of an attempt to stop the company I worked for closing - it wasn't just me taking a cut it was the whole company, my salary isn't that good lol
After dishing out the fine he then made a massive thing of banning me. Asking me what my employer thinks about the fact I may be banned. I couldn't have done my job but I thought I was well within to not even be considered for a ban. By that point I'd had enough. I said something along the lines of, 'I don't suppose he thinks anything because you can't ban me for that much over' (probably a stupid thing to say). He laughed and said 'I can do what I want'. He gave me six points but after making a big song and dance over banning me.
I personally wouldn't go to court again unless I really had to.
In contrast and along the lines of above poster, my brother was caught six months before on a very similar road. He was doing 110 in a 60 and already had 6 points. He turned up at court, said he was sorry, pleaded hardship and lose of licence would finish him etc. and he got £250 and his points taken to 12 but with a note on his licence saying he could continue to drive but it was his last chance.
allergictocheese said:
A barrister may or may not be a better bet. As far as I'm aware AGT here is now practising as a barrister.
If the barrister is so qualified you can engage one directly, without need for a solicitor, through direct access.
It is not a foregone conclusion that a barrister will charge more than a solicitor to attend trial.
Without knowing what is at stake for the individual it is impossible to blanket advise that a solicitor or barrister is unnecessary. Lay people will not necessarily spot mistakes in procedure or law that the courts make everyday. They may not understand defences or mitigation available that could reduce their penalty to zero.
I agree with all those things.If the barrister is so qualified you can engage one directly, without need for a solicitor, through direct access.
It is not a foregone conclusion that a barrister will charge more than a solicitor to attend trial.
Without knowing what is at stake for the individual it is impossible to blanket advise that a solicitor or barrister is unnecessary. Lay people will not necessarily spot mistakes in procedure or law that the courts make everyday. They may not understand defences or mitigation available that could reduce their penalty to zero.
However, the OP is intending to plead guilty, and is asking whether it's best to employ a barrister/solicitor or not.
It's a good investment to get free advice, and it may be a good investment to employ someone to fight a case. However, if it's simply to appear on behalf of the OP to plead guilty, that's the least good investment of a few hundred quid.
woodyTVR said:
And to go against that. I was caught doing 89 in a 60 on a country dual carriageway. No traffic, dry clear day. I went with a clean licence etc.
I turned up at court in a suit. Got there first and was made to wait until last. I was genuinely sorry and apologised for my error. I was very nervous when in the court and I think very genuine in my manner. However the magistrate talked to me like I was scum and took great pleasure in talking over everything I said. He laughed at my Means form, saying you have a good salary (as though it was a bad thing) and your outgoings aren't my concern - I assumed it was means not income, why have the rest if you're going to ignore it?! If you didn't fill it in they had a standard amount they'd work to, I should have gone with this!
He gave me a £480 fine and wouldn't allow me to pay in instalments, despite asking me how I'd like to pay. We argued this for a short while and in the end I just had to pay up the full amount in one go - My wife was on maternity leave and I'd just taken a 10% paycut as part of an attempt to stop the company I worked for closing - it wasn't just me taking a cut it was the whole company, my salary isn't that good lol
After dishing out the fine he then made a massive thing of banning me. Asking me what my employer thinks about the fact I may be banned. I couldn't have done my job but I thought I was well within to not even be considered for a ban. By that point I'd had enough. I said something along the lines of, 'I don't suppose he thinks anything because you can't ban me for that much over' (probably a stupid thing to say). He laughed and said 'I can do what I want'. He gave me six points but after making a big song and dance over banning me.
I personally wouldn't go to court again unless I really had to.
In contrast and along the lines of above poster, my brother was caught six months before on a very similar road. He was doing 110 in a 60 and already had 6 points. He turned up at court, said he was sorry, pleaded hardship and lose of licence would finish him etc. and he got £250 and his points taken to 12 but with a note on his licence saying he could continue to drive but it was his last chance.
Well ultimately it depends on the magistrates on the day as to what you walk out with.I turned up at court in a suit. Got there first and was made to wait until last. I was genuinely sorry and apologised for my error. I was very nervous when in the court and I think very genuine in my manner. However the magistrate talked to me like I was scum and took great pleasure in talking over everything I said. He laughed at my Means form, saying you have a good salary (as though it was a bad thing) and your outgoings aren't my concern - I assumed it was means not income, why have the rest if you're going to ignore it?! If you didn't fill it in they had a standard amount they'd work to, I should have gone with this!
He gave me a £480 fine and wouldn't allow me to pay in instalments, despite asking me how I'd like to pay. We argued this for a short while and in the end I just had to pay up the full amount in one go - My wife was on maternity leave and I'd just taken a 10% paycut as part of an attempt to stop the company I worked for closing - it wasn't just me taking a cut it was the whole company, my salary isn't that good lol
After dishing out the fine he then made a massive thing of banning me. Asking me what my employer thinks about the fact I may be banned. I couldn't have done my job but I thought I was well within to not even be considered for a ban. By that point I'd had enough. I said something along the lines of, 'I don't suppose he thinks anything because you can't ban me for that much over' (probably a stupid thing to say). He laughed and said 'I can do what I want'. He gave me six points but after making a big song and dance over banning me.
I personally wouldn't go to court again unless I really had to.
In contrast and along the lines of above poster, my brother was caught six months before on a very similar road. He was doing 110 in a 60 and already had 6 points. He turned up at court, said he was sorry, pleaded hardship and lose of licence would finish him etc. and he got £250 and his points taken to 12 but with a note on his licence saying he could continue to drive but it was his last chance.
They obviously have guidelines that they work with but they use their discretion as to what punishment they deem appropriate.
First thing I did when I got to the court was let the usher know I was there, otherwise I'd have been sitting there like a lemon waiting around. I got seen relatively quickly, my concern was that even though I had a morning time slot, that due to cases before me maybe running late that I'd have to wait until the afternoon (they break for lunch).
The magistrates I saw were very reasonable and I feel I might not have gotten the same result had I pleaded guilty by post.
And I certainly don't think any solicitor could have gotten a better result for me either.
Edited by pops and bangs on Tuesday 20th January 17:08
Have to say my experience was more in line with WoodyTVR, turned up in a suit made to wait until well after 4pm though my appearance time was 2.30pm as per the summons paperwork.
Interesting that there was 4 of us caught on the same stretch of road at the same speed, same day / very close times all within 1 hour of each other, same distance recorded by the police laser to the car, all driving German made cars less than a year old and all there at court the same time. Coincidence - I dont believe in them.
2 of the people had solicitors with them, I didnt, I felt that the Magistrates didn't want to listen to any of my reason, didn't really want to read my defense until I pushed them / look at the evidence that supported it or follow any of their own procedures. Really got the feeling they enjoyed playing the big I am etc. Got the same no interest in the means form bit and you get paid a good salary. Only good bit was 6 point and fine and not a ban. And surprisingly they where not very helpful when I asked them to explain the victim surcharge they slapped on top on the fine.
I guess attending court all comes down to luck of the draw on the day and if the magistrates have got out of bed the right way and their feelings on motorists.
Interesting that there was 4 of us caught on the same stretch of road at the same speed, same day / very close times all within 1 hour of each other, same distance recorded by the police laser to the car, all driving German made cars less than a year old and all there at court the same time. Coincidence - I dont believe in them.
2 of the people had solicitors with them, I didnt, I felt that the Magistrates didn't want to listen to any of my reason, didn't really want to read my defense until I pushed them / look at the evidence that supported it or follow any of their own procedures. Really got the feeling they enjoyed playing the big I am etc. Got the same no interest in the means form bit and you get paid a good salary. Only good bit was 6 point and fine and not a ban. And surprisingly they where not very helpful when I asked them to explain the victim surcharge they slapped on top on the fine.
I guess attending court all comes down to luck of the draw on the day and if the magistrates have got out of bed the right way and their feelings on motorists.
Interesting question OP - I'm facing the exact same question myself.
Caught over the limit on the m5 on Christmas Day. I have no defence so intend to attend court , plead guilty provide simple mitigation about traffic levels, road conditions, state of mind etc and and take what I'm handed.
Can't see the point in spending extra money on top a fine when I have no defence in law.
Caught over the limit on the m5 on Christmas Day. I have no defence so intend to attend court , plead guilty provide simple mitigation about traffic levels, road conditions, state of mind etc and and take what I'm handed.
Can't see the point in spending extra money on top a fine when I have no defence in law.
richs2891 said:
Have to say my experience was more in line with WoodyTVR, turned up in a suit made to wait until well after 4pm though my appearance time was 2.30pm as per the summons paperwork.
Interesting that there was 4 of us caught on the same stretch of road at the same speed, same day / very close times all within 1 hour of each other, same distance recorded by the police laser to the car, all driving German made cars less than a year old and all there at court the same time. Coincidence - I dont believe in them.
2 of the people had solicitors with them, I didnt, I felt that the Magistrates didn't want to listen to any of my reason, didn't really want to read my defense until I pushed them / look at the evidence that supported it or follow any of their own procedures. Really got the feeling they enjoyed playing the big I am etc. Got the same no interest in the means form bit and you get paid a good salary. Only good bit was 6 point and fine and not a ban. And surprisingly they where not very helpful when I asked them to explain the victim surcharge they slapped on top on the fine.
I guess attending court all comes down to luck of the draw on the day and if the magistrates have got out of bed the right way and their feelings on motorists.
Perhaps we were there on the same day lol. I was in my BMW when caught and too much of a point was made about that. "Charged with driving his BMW at 89mph in a 60 mph limit" or similar was read out - would they have said in his for had I been driving a ford? Interesting that there was 4 of us caught on the same stretch of road at the same speed, same day / very close times all within 1 hour of each other, same distance recorded by the police laser to the car, all driving German made cars less than a year old and all there at court the same time. Coincidence - I dont believe in them.
2 of the people had solicitors with them, I didnt, I felt that the Magistrates didn't want to listen to any of my reason, didn't really want to read my defense until I pushed them / look at the evidence that supported it or follow any of their own procedures. Really got the feeling they enjoyed playing the big I am etc. Got the same no interest in the means form bit and you get paid a good salary. Only good bit was 6 point and fine and not a ban. And surprisingly they where not very helpful when I asked them to explain the victim surcharge they slapped on top on the fine.
I guess attending court all comes down to luck of the draw on the day and if the magistrates have got out of bed the right way and their feelings on motorists.
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff