Advice on going to court over a fixed penalty.

[Carrera2]

Hi guys

I'm hoping someone here might be able to advise me on this.

I'm not going to be too specific here as the question is more about procedure than actaul facts etc.

I have been issued for a fixed penalty notice (£60 and 3 points) for my bike being in dangerous condition. I have decided to contest this as I fully believe (and more importantly can prove through manufacturers specs) that it was not in dangerous condition.

My question is - should I go to court to produce the evidence (and if need be an independant witness) or should I point the copper in the direction of the facts and let him see that he was wrong?

I've not been in this position before and so am a) unsure of procedure and b) trusting of the police to do the right thing when presented with the evidence.

Any advice would be most welcome.

Thanks.

[randlemarcus]

ooh, this sounds like a better story than the cleaner. Tell all.

This sounds a little more than just a dodgy can on the back, as wouldn't that just be a rectification jobbie?

Spill the beans..

[cooperman]

Some years ago I was stopped for speeding and cautioned at the time. After being cautioned I noticed that my speedo seemed to be reading somewhat erratically. The car was only 10 days old (a BMW) and was fitted with an electronic speedo which was defective. This was tested by BMW and I received letters both from the dealer and BMW UK. When I went to court I pleaded guilty but with mitigation. I was given a small fine but no points.
Afterwards the police officer who turned up to give evidence said that if I had written to them pointing this all out and enclosing copies of the letters it would have been dropped. My view was that I had been cautioned and needed to say nothing.
As you are pleading 'not-guilty' you will be entitled to receive all their evidence at least 7 days before the hearing and you must show them your evidence. Maybe there will be a pre-trial review (you could request one) with the CPS at which time they'll probably go for dropping the whole thing.

[Carrera2]

cooperman said:

Some years ago I was stopped for speeding and cautioned at the time. After being cautioned I noticed that my speedo seemed to be reading somewhat erratically. The car was only 10 days old (a BMW) and was fitted with an electronic speedo which was defective. This was tested by BMW and I received letters both from the dealer and BMW UK. When I went to court I pleaded guilty but with mitigation. I was given a small fine but no points. Afterwards the police officer who turned up to give evidence said that if I had written to them pointing this all out and enclosing copies of the letters it would have been dropped. My view was that I had been cautioned and needed to say nothing. As you are pleading 'not-guilty' you will be entitled to receive all their evidence at least 7 days before the hearing and you must show them your evidence. Maybe there will be a pre-trial review (you could request one) with the CPS at which time they'll probably go for dropping the whole thing.

Thanks cooperman - that's very helpful. So I guess I should wait for the summons and evidence to arrive then before I do anything... I was just wondering if I could stop it getting even that far as the notice was only issued today...

Any BiB around to advise me on this?

>> Edited by Carrera2 on Friday 12th May 10:41

[supermono]

Please tell us what the charge is... I'm intrigued for one.

SM

[Carrera2]

I will, but I'd rather the matter was sorted first....call me paranoid if you like

[Mr E]

cooperman said:

Some years ago I was stopped for speeding and cautioned at the time. After being cautioned I noticed that my speedo seemed to be reading somewhat erratically. The car was only 10 days old (a BMW) and was fitted with an electronic speedo which was defective. This was tested by BMW and I received letters both from the dealer and BMW UK. When I went to court I pleaded guilty but with mitigation. I was given a small fine but no points. Afterwards the police officer who turned up to give evidence said that if I had written to them pointing this all out and enclosing copies of the letters it would have been dropped. My view was that I had been cautioned and needed to say nothing. As you are pleading 'not-guilty' you will be entitled to receive all their evidence at least 7 days before the hearing and you must show them your evidence. Maybe there will be a pre-trial review (you could request one) with the CPS at which time they'll probably go for dropping the whole thing.

Interestingly, a friend purchased a Fiat Coupe Turbo, and drove it home. Got pulled for 3 figures on the Mway.

Went to court, and admitted guilt but provided Fiat main dealer evidence of a faulty speedo on a car he'd owned for about 45 minutes. Magistrate accepted that it was a new car, with a faulty speedo and there was no reliable way he could of known how fast he was going. Police confirmed that the car was otherwise sound, and driven well. Magistrate then fined him 4 figures and banned him for a month.

[Yugguy]

In that case the mag could argue that whatever car you're in you should be able to tell the difference between 100 and 70.

[victormeldrew]

Yugguy said:

In that case the mag could argue that whatever car you're in you should be able to tell the difference between 100 and 70.

The perception in speed depends on a lot of factors, not least proximity to the road. 70mph in a people carrier is significantly different to 70mph in a Westfield. The mag could argue as you say, but frankly they would be arguing out of their a**e.

[s2rr kitty]

Sounds like you're ed.

I'd think about leaving the country if I were you

[Dwight VanDriver]

Where a FPN has been issued the system then allows for a procedure other than prosecution to be followed during a specified period - at least 21 days or longer if stated on the N.

This allows a person to admit the offence, pay the required penalty etc and the matter is then over.

Or, if that person has grounds for contesting the FPN, then he can write in and say that he is Not Guilty and elect for the matter to be heard at Court. There the CPS will outline their evidence of the offences and it is then the turn of the defendant to disprove what CPS are alleging.

When reported for offences, ignoring the FPN aspect, BIB will give the defendant a chance to put what he wished foreward and record this. This will be included in the paper file of all the evidence submitted to CPS for their decision on whether a prosecution should take place. So not only do they have the ewvidence of the alleged offence but also some indication of a likely defence.

Under rejected FPN then CPS will have no indication of what evidence defendant has to disprove what is alleged so could go blind and authorise prosecution. So it would seem there are two options:

(1) As mentioned elect for Court hearing on a NG plea, or

(2) Whilst writing in advising of a NG plea then should one so desire mention the reason why with the facts against what is alleged. That will go onto the file which may be considered in total by CPS when considering prosecution and if defence strong may make CPS disengage at that stage and take no further action.

Has it been considered running 'the defence' past a Solicitor (free) at CAB.?

dvd

[mojocvh]

Mr E said:

cooperman said: Some years ago I was stopped for speeding and cautioned at the time. After being cautioned I noticed that my speedo seemed to be reading somewhat erratically. The car was only 10 days old (a BMW) and was fitted with an electronic speedo which was defective. This was tested by BMW and I received letters both from the dealer and BMW UK. When I went to court I pleaded guilty but with mitigation. I was given a small fine but no points. Afterwards the police officer who turned up to give evidence said that if I had written to them pointing this all out and enclosing copies of the letters it would have been dropped. My view was that I had been cautioned and needed to say nothing. As you are pleading 'not-guilty' you will be entitled to receive all their evidence at least 7 days before the hearing and you must show them your evidence. Maybe there will be a pre-trial review (you could request one) with the CPS at which time they'll probably go for dropping the whole thing. Interestingly, a friend purchased a Fiat Coupe Turbo, and drove it home. Got pulled for 3 figures on the Mway. Went to court, and admitted guilt but provided Fiat main dealer evidence of a faulty speedo on a car he'd owned for about 45 minutes. Magistrate accepted that it was a new car, with a faulty speedo and there was no reliable way he could of known how fast he was going. Police confirmed that the car was otherwise sound, and driven well. Magistrate then fined him 4 figures and banned him for a month.

No WAY!!

[bluepolarbear]

victormeldrew said:

Yugguy said: In that case the mag could argue that whatever car you're in you should be able to tell the difference between 100 and 70. The perception in speed depends on a lot of factors, not least proximity to the road. 70mph in a people carrier is significantly different to 70mph in a Westfield. The mag could argue as you say, but frankly they would be arguing out of their a**e.

If you can't tell the difference between 100mph and 70mph in any car with nothing more than your eyesight you should not be allowed on the road.

[monkeyhanger]

Mr E said:

Interestingly, a friend purchased a Fiat Coupe Turbo, and drove it home. Got pulled for 3 figures on the Mway. Went to court, and admitted guilt but provided Fiat main dealer evidence of a faulty speedo on a car he'd owned for about 45 minutes. Magistrate accepted that it was a new car, with a faulty speedo and there was no reliable way he could of known how fast he was going. Police confirmed that the car was otherwise sound, and driven well. Magistrate then fined him 4 figures and banned him for a month.

Ahh, that'll be our famous "justice system" so prized by certain members on here.

[jith]

Carrera2 said:

Hi guys I'm hoping someone here might be able to advise me on this. I'm not going to be too specific here as the question is more about procedure than actaul facts etc. I have been issued for a fixed penalty notice (£60 and 3 points) for my bike being in dangerous condition. I have decided to contest this as I fully believe (and more importantly can prove through manufacturers specs) that it was not in dangerous condition. My question is - should I go to court to produce the evidence (and if need be an independant witness) or should I point the copper in the direction of the facts and let him see that he was wrong? I've not been in this position before and so am a) unsure of procedure and b) trusting of the police to do the right thing when presented with the evidence. Any advice would be most welcome. Thanks.

It is extremely difficult to advise you without prior knowledge of at least the charge; but DVD has outlined the procedure and I would add that if you are confident that your bike is legal, have either your local dealer or an independent firm of motor engineers write you a report based on the specifics of the alleged fault and send a copy of same to the officer in charge of the station in question.
If he decides to ignore your plea, the case will be handed over to the CPS on non payment of the FP; at this point you can carry out the same procedure with them BEFORE the date of your first calling in court and ask then to drop the charges.
If this fails then you can defend yourself in exactly the same manner at a trial.
Your single largest problem in all of this is the staggering inability inherent in members of the CPS to understand technical submissions and hence their deep suspicion of the same.
I wish you the very best of luck.

[pies]

Dwight VanDriver said:

. Or, if that person has grounds for contesting the FPN, then he can write in and say that he is Not Guilty and elect for the matter to be heard at Court. There the CPS will outline their evidence of the offences and it is then the turn of the[bold] defendant to disprove[/bold] what CPS are alleging. dvd

And theres me thinking it was the obligation of the prosecution to prove guilt

[vonhosen]

pies said:

Dwight VanDriver said: . Or, if that person has grounds for contesting the FPN, then he can write in and say that he is Not Guilty and elect for the matter to be heard at Court. There the CPS will outline their evidence of the offences and it is then the turn of the[bold] defendant to disprove[/bold] what CPS are alleging. dvd And theres me thinking it was the obligation of the prosecution to prove guilt

Well it's wrong that's why. It is the burden of the prosecution to prove the offence.

[Pedestrian]

Carrera2 said:

Hi guys, I have been issued for a fixed penalty notice for being in dangerous condition. Thanks.

Have these guys got nothing better to do?

Rapists get away with less.

Dangerous condition, my arse - was it missing two wheels and a roof per chance??

[pies]

vonhosen said:

pies said: Dwight VanDriver said: . Or, if that person has grounds for contesting the FPN, then he can write in and say that he is Not Guilty and elect for the matter to be heard at Court. There the CPS will outline their evidence of the offences and it is then the turn of the[bold] defendant to disprove[/bold] what CPS are alleging. dvd And theres me thinking it was the obligation of the prosecution to prove guilt Well it's wrong that's why. It is the burden of the prosecution to prove the offence.

you dont have to disprove anything,the right to silence remains.Prosecution have to prove your guilt beyond reasonable doubt

[vonhosen]

pies said:

vonhosen said: pies said: Dwight VanDriver said: . Or, if that person has grounds for contesting the FPN, then he can write in and say that he is Not Guilty and elect for the matter to be heard at Court. There the CPS will outline their evidence of the offences and it is then the turn of the[bold] defendant to disprove[/bold] what CPS are alleging. dvd And theres me thinking it was the obligation of the prosecution to prove guilt Well it's wrong that's why. It is the burden of the prosecution to prove the offence. you dont have to disprove anything,the right to silence remains.Prosecution have to prove your guilt beyond reasonable doubt

And that's what I said (when I said it's wrong it's wrong what DVD said), it's the burden of the prosecution to prove the offence & yes you don't have to testify if you don't want to in your defence, you can maintain silence.

>> Edited by vonhosen on Sunday 14th May 09:22