Error on fixd penalty notice

[longbow]

My friend has just pointed something out on my fixed penaly notice for speeding which is quite interesting!! The reason I am most interested is that I've clocked 6 points within the last 2 month for very minor speeding infringements (empty dual carriageway at night in clear conditions). Anyway, I was stopped at the roadside and have already surrendered my license at the local police station. But looking at the ticket, the police officer has made a clear error in recording my number plate. Does this mean that if I take the matter to court it will be invalid???

[bryan35]

interesting. I think that if a police officer stops you then the NIP is deemed to be served so making an error about your number plate isn't a problem.
If the NIP was in the post then they can't correct for the numberplate being incorrect, but can for other errors, including your name, time, location etc.
They'll just send you another NIP with it corrected.

I think you're stuffed, but no doubt Von or DVD will quote the actual wording of the law!

[vonhosen]

The fact the VRM is incorrectly entered on the FPN doesn't mean that you can't be convicted.

[andmole]

vonhosen said:

The fact the VRM is incorrectly entered on the FPN doesn't mean that you can't be convicted.

I find that interesting, surely if the BiB at the roadside can't get a simple detail like your numberplate correct, then can any other matter of fact about the incident be reliable?

I'd check out peepipoo if I were you.

[Hollywood Wheels]

I think you'll be on a sticky wicket. We've had posters here before in a similar situation. An error of index plate or even time/date won't sway the offence I'm afraid, but do a bit of digging anyway, you never know if you appeal it....

[andmole]

Hollywood Wheels said:

I think you'll be on a sticky wicket. We've had posters here before in a similar situation. An error of index plate or even time/date won't sway the offence I'm afraid, but do a bit of digging anyway, you never know if you appeal it....

I'm afraid to say that I accept that you are probably technically correct on this, but does that make it right?

How on earth can an offence be proven if details like time/date/place/reg number are recorded incorrectly?

I know what you're saying, it just seems to offend common sense that's all. Still when has common sense had anything to do with the law?

[IT10]

It does seem strange that errors on a FPN do not invalidate it when they do on a de criminalised parking penalty notice.
I would expect a higher standard for a FPN than a decriminalised parking penalty notice

[justinp1]

andmole said:

vonhosen said:

The fact the VRM is incorrectly entered on the FPN doesn't mean that you can't be convicted.

I find that interesting, surely if the BiB at the roadside can't get a simple detail like your numberplate correct, then can any other matter of fact about the incident be reliable?

I'd check out peepipoo if I were you.

That does of course make perfect sense, however will not disprove a case.

My appeal at crown court was won by the CPS on the fact that although the police officer who zapped me with a laser gun and chased down my car had not written down the fact he had performed the daily checks to ensure accuracy, he gave evidence that he could distinctly remember this fact from a year ago...

However, this testimony based solely on memory was not affected by the fact that the officer could not even remember the colour of my car... That would be bad enough, but it was a bright yellow TVR!

[Balmoral Green]

But if you had been burgled, or mugged, and the bib had apprehended the culprit and had gotten a signed confession off them, would you not be a bit miffed if the courts then threw it out due to a minor spelling mistake?

[2 sMoKiN bArReLs]

Balmoral Green said:

But if you had been burgled, or mugged, and the bib had apprehended the culprit and had gotten a signed confession off them, would you not be a bit miffed if the courts then threw it out due to a minor spelling mistake?

Judge: "Aha! So you are Ronnie Briggs then? "

[gently bentley]

vonhosen said:

The fact the VRM is incorrectly entered on the FPN doesn't mean that you can't be convicted.

Very well worded VH.

[Hollywood Wheels]

andmole said:

[I'm afraid to say that I accept that you are probably technically correct on this, but does that make it right?

I think it does. An FPN written quickly (very common due to other committments), or under a possible tirade of verbal abuse, or written at night, in the rain etc, all fairly feasible reasons for maybe getting one digit wrong. If we're talking multiple or completely wrong vrm then that's different...

I remember writing an FPN for a parking offence when I was a probationer (the last time I DID one!!! ). I'd put the wrong date on it, I think it was the following days date I put on it. The owner came into the nick to query it. The ticket would have still been valid, the vrm, time, location, all correct. As it was they were nice people, so I tore the thing up, but if I hadn't the ticket would still have been valid.

[bi9_jk]

Oh my god.

Did they ask for you address when they stopped you?

I mean for clarification purposes the ticket would have to be changed. But if they had incorrectley taken down your details and hadnt taken a note of your address then its presumable that you would have got away on a technicality.

Imagine the prosecuting this in court. "So officer you were unable to read a numberplate from two metres away". Do you think the officer would press this? He would be made out a total ass.

But you have surrendered your licence which by all standards is admitting guilt. Even though the facts on the FPN were incorrect you have admitted the libel of the offence.
Cant really think what you could do now.

[Hollywood Wheels]

bi9_jk said:

Imagine the prosecuting this in court. "So officer you were unable to read a numberplate from two metres away". Do you think the officer would press this? He would be made out a total ass.

Not a problem at all, and certainly not a 'total ass'. My answer would be "no, I read it correctly, but somehow managed to write it down wrongly, I can give no other reason for this other than it being a genuine mistake your worship". Not a problem at all. Have you ever given evidence at Court? Things such as that aren't an issue at all.

[longbow]

Thanks for the replies guys. I'm not after trying to discredit the copper, I can understand its easy to make a typo. Its just you do hear about people walking away from these things due to errors in the paperwork. However it sounds as though its a bit of a grey area. I might try my luck with a letter and see what happens.

[Hollywood Wheels]

longbow said:

Thanks for the replies guys. I'm not after trying to discredit the copper, I can understand its easy to make a typo. Its just you do hear about people walking away from these things due to errors in the paperwork. However it sounds as though its a bit of a grey area. I might try my luck with a letter and see what happens.

What the hell, give it a go, you never know. I've certainly taken no offence and I'm sure none of the other BiB have.

[bi9_jk]

Genuine mistake perhaps but Police + mistake = a big question. I mean to ridicule an officer, unfair perhaps but saying i made a mistake in writing it down. Not really very good is it?

Remember a court is not biased. They will have to look at all the facts and ascertain what happened. It is enough for the most minor mistakes to bring down a case and this possibly would be one of them.

The way you look at a situation like this is that you will have a feeling of whether you think the person should be punished or not be punished. Clearly i am the latter and you are the former. The outcome of this is that this person who posted will have 3 points, higher insurance ect. ect. so remember if it was you in their shoes would you want to fight it?

[justinp1]

Hollywood Wheels said:

bi9_jk said:

Imagine the prosecuting this in court. "So officer you were unable to read a numberplate from two metres away". Do you think the officer would press this? He would be made out a total ass.

Not a problem at all, and certainly not a 'total ass'. My answer would be "no, I read it correctly, but somehow managed to write it down wrongly, I can give no other reason for this other than it being a genuine mistake your worship". Not a problem at all. Have you ever given evidence at Court? Things such as that aren't an issue at all.

Agree completely with HW on this one. There is a difference between an honest mistake and sloppy/poor evidence. The 'slip rule' I believe? I am sure HW or Von will confirm that!

Can also agree with the fact that the police in gathering evidence are given a lot of leaway as long as it does not make a difference to the material facts. For example, in a case where I defended myself an officer in his statement quoted me as saying in my defence when I was accused of running a red light, "The light was green when he passed through it". As the officers failed to take contempraneous notes of my defence I did belive that it was being harmed, as I explained my version of events at the time and *did* later rely upon these as evidence. Of course my explanation of events when asked was a bit longer than what was recorded, and I certainly did not refer to myself in the third person (!) - however I took objection to this being entered as evidence of what I had said.

With relation to this case, playing the devils advocate, it could be used to your advantage.

For example, if you did not show ID at the roadside, and your cars number plate is different than was recorded then you could hire a solicitor to act on your behalf, show evidence that your car has a different registration, then ask the CPS to prove it was 'his client' driving. If you are not their personally, they may find this impossible.

Waiting for Von to show how the CPS would retort (!), however I do know this has been used in the past with success.

[vonhosen]

If the officer admits they've made a genuine mistake on something quite trivial then it shouldn't adversely effect the outcome.

I have given evidence in court where I have genuinely written the wrong road name down completely. I admitted in court it was a simple error. The court accepted that & the accused was convicted.

The road I was in was not a major material fact in the evidence against the accused. What I observed was.

Similarly where a VRM is noted down slightly wrong, it is not a hugely important part of the evidence for speeding. I mean if you had been displaying no VRM at all & had been stopped for speeding, would the fact no VRM was displayed stop you being prosecuted ?
No it wouldn't.

Edited by vonhosen on Monday 27th November 23:40

[Ricardo Bertone]

What is the position if a 'manned' speed check is logged on the notification and court papers as 'unmanned' - does this invalidate it?