Discussion
I don' really want to say too much but was advised by police officer that I did not have to produce any docs. At the time I found this strange and double checked it with him ! - now recieved a summons for not having insurance (as well as the one for speeding)
Funny thing is that the station where I was "supposed" to produce documents has been added to the photocopy of the HO/RT1 sent to me (The original does not have this)
I think this is well dodgy i.e namely tampering with a document to reflect that I was aware of where to produce docs when I wasn't!! Goes to heart of speding matter.
Any views.
Funny thing is that the station where I was "supposed" to produce documents has been added to the photocopy of the HO/RT1 sent to me (The original does not have this)
I think this is well dodgy i.e namely tampering with a document to reflect that I was aware of where to produce docs when I wasn't!! Goes to heart of speding matter.
Any views.
If what you say is true, I would take this as a very serious matter.
You certainly have a very good case against the no insurance charge, as long as that is you can show you have valid insurance. A good solicitor will be able to present what has happened in such a way where the case will instantly be dropped. On no account tell the CPS of what has happened though, save that for court. With a bit of luck this will show enough doubt over the evidence gathering (tampering) in the speeding charge.
Is the speeding charge correct though? Were you going that fast? How were you accused of doing 50? Laser or just an opinion of speed?
You certainly have a very good case against the no insurance charge, as long as that is you can show you have valid insurance. A good solicitor will be able to present what has happened in such a way where the case will instantly be dropped. On no account tell the CPS of what has happened though, save that for court. With a bit of luck this will show enough doubt over the evidence gathering (tampering) in the speeding charge.
Is the speeding charge correct though? Were you going that fast? How were you accused of doing 50? Laser or just an opinion of speed?
justinp1 said:
If what you say is true, I would take this as a very serious matter.
You certainly have a very good case against the no insurance charge, as long as that is you can show you have valid insurance. A good solicitor will be able to present what has happened in such a way where the case will instantly be dropped. On no account tell the CPS of what has happened though, save that for court. With a bit of luck this will show enough doubt over the evidence gathering (tampering) in the speeding charge.
Is the speeding charge correct though? Were you going that fast? How were you accused of doing 50? Laser or just an opinion of speed?
I thought they could use an insurance database to check for valid cover?
esselte said:
If what you say is true, I would take this as a very serious matter.
You certainly have a very good case against the no insurance charge, as long as that is you can show you have valid insurance. A good solicitor will be able to present what has happened in such a way where the case will instantly be dropped. On no account tell the CPS of what has happened though, save that for court. With a bit of luck this will show enough doubt over the evidence gathering (tampering) in the speeding charge.
Is the speeding charge correct though? Were you going that fast? How were you accused of doing 50? Laser or just an opinion of speed?
I thought they could use an insurance database to check for valid cover?
They probably can, however I am guessing that the charge is failure to produce the insurance document at the nominated police station. If what the guy is saying is true and the police station was added to the forms counterpart after it was presented to the driver, this is pretty much doctoring evidence as far as I can see...
Car Parking pics? Not Scamera staff, but NCP staff working on Bury MBC's parking.
After an internal audit investigation, one or two lost their jobs, I think, and definitely one was found guilty of something like deception in court if memory serves.
NCP are still getting the usual bad press here (in Bury), mind...
After an internal audit investigation, one or two lost their jobs, I think, and definitely one was found guilty of something like deception in court if memory serves.
NCP are still getting the usual bad press here (in Bury), mind...
justinp1 said:
If what you say is true, I would take this as a very serious matter.
You certainly have a very good case against the no insurance charge, as long as that is you can show you have valid insurance. A good solicitor will be able to present what has happened in such a way where the case will instantly be dropped. On no account tell the CPS of what has happened though, save that for court. With a bit of luck this will show enough doubt over the evidence gathering (tampering) in the speeding charge.
Is the speeding charge correct though? Were you going that fast? How were you accused of doing 50? Laser or just an opinion of speed?
I'm not sure about the speeding - I really don't think I was going that fast but was lasered by a Prolaser III - i
>> Edited by RNP1 on Thursday 9th March 09:52
I'm confused RNP1....(whats new???)... only half a tale to make sense of me thinks.
Police told you not to produce Insurance.
Form RT/1 (Producer) then sent to you - not issued at time - why sent?
Current Insurance in force for day of incident?
If summons for No Insurance was alternative summons also for failing to produce?
Form HO/RT/1 has no standing at law. It is merely an aide memoire to the driver to whom it is given to produce documents at the station HE elects. If this station has been added and the one elected so what? Agree if another station contrary to that elected had been stated and the result person summoned for failing to produce then that IS another matter.
In pure law, if BiB stopped and demanded to see docs and not produced there is no statutory requirement to issue a producer...... go on look at the Act and Section.
dvd
Police told you not to produce Insurance.
Form RT/1 (Producer) then sent to you - not issued at time - why sent?
Current Insurance in force for day of incident?
If summons for No Insurance was alternative summons also for failing to produce?
Form HO/RT/1 has no standing at law. It is merely an aide memoire to the driver to whom it is given to produce documents at the station HE elects. If this station has been added and the one elected so what? Agree if another station contrary to that elected had been stated and the result person summoned for failing to produce then that IS another matter.
In pure law, if BiB stopped and demanded to see docs and not produced there is no statutory requirement to issue a producer...... go on look at the Act and Section.
dvd
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff