Easy FPN question...
Discussion
Colleague of mine (no, honestly!) got stopped by 2 traffic officers for 95 on the M62 on Sunday. He's been given a FPN for £60 and because he didn't have both bits of his licence with him, has to take them down to his local copshop over the next couple of weeks.
Now, his FPN is a white piece of paper (and was the top copy): I thought that yellow was used for endorsable offences and white for non-endorsable. If this is the case, has he basically been given a slap on the wrists and told to pay £60 with no prospect of points being added? He's papping himself because he already has 6, and has been told by someone else that he could get another 6 for being so far over the 70 limit.
Sorry if this is a Noddy question but search doesn't work, and Pepipoo seems (after a cursory glance) to just concern itself with NIPs and court appearances.
Ta!
Now, his FPN is a white piece of paper (and was the top copy): I thought that yellow was used for endorsable offences and white for non-endorsable. If this is the case, has he basically been given a slap on the wrists and told to pay £60 with no prospect of points being added? He's papping himself because he already has 6, and has been told by someone else that he could get another 6 for being so far over the 70 limit.
Sorry if this is a Noddy question but search doesn't work, and Pepipoo seems (after a cursory glance) to just concern itself with NIPs and court appearances.
Ta!
Suffolk Police website said:
What are fixed penalty notices?
Fixed penalty notices are issued by police officers, traffic wardens and special constables.
There are two types of notice - white (non endorsable), for offences such as parking or not wearing a seat belt, and yellow (endorsable) for more serious offences such as excess speed or parking in a dangerous position. The offences for which notices may be used are prescribed by the Home Office, which also decides whether they are endorsable or non endorsable.
Fixed penalty notices are issued by police officers, traffic wardens and special constables.
There are two types of notice - white (non endorsable), for offences such as parking or not wearing a seat belt, and yellow (endorsable) for more serious offences such as excess speed or parking in a dangerous position. The offences for which notices may be used are prescribed by the Home Office, which also decides whether they are endorsable or non endorsable.
I doubt that if there's no points mentioned on the actual form that the cop shop will suddenly whack them on when he takes his licence in. If that's the case, he's a bloody lucky chap!
You can all probably ignore me now 
I've read it and at the top it specifically states "Fixed Penalty Notice - Endorsable Offence". So I guess that if he accepts the FPN and hands his documents in at the copshop, then the "police will take no further action" means it won't go to court but he will likely receive 3 points? Or maybe 6, since he was 25mph over the limit?
I've read it and at the top it specifically states "Fixed Penalty Notice - Endorsable Offence". So I guess that if he accepts the FPN and hands his documents in at the copshop, then the "police will take no further action" means it won't go to court but he will likely receive 3 points? Or maybe 6, since he was 25mph over the limit?
Edited by bigandclever on Monday 26th March 09:31
bigandclever said:
You can all probably ignore me now
I've read it and at the top it specifically states "Fixed Penalty Notice - Endorsable Offence". So I guess that if he accepts the FPN and hands his documents in at the copshop, then the "police will take no further action" means it won't go to court but he will likely receive 3 points? Or maybe 6, since he was 25mph over the limit?
I've read it and at the top it specifically states "Fixed Penalty Notice - Endorsable Offence". So I guess that if he accepts the FPN and hands his documents in at the copshop, then the "police will take no further action" means it won't go to court but he will likely receive 3 points? Or maybe 6, since he was 25mph over the limit?
Edited by bigandclever on Monday 26th March 09:31
If it's a FPN, I don't think there's jurisdiction to offer anything other than the minimum penalty. i.e. 3 points. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
RichBurley said:
bigandclever said:
You can all probably ignore me now
I've read it and at the top it specifically states "Fixed Penalty Notice - Endorsable Offence". So I guess that if he accepts the FPN and hands his documents in at the copshop, then the "police will take no further action" means it won't go to court but he will likely receive 3 points? Or maybe 6, since he was 25mph over the limit?
I've read it and at the top it specifically states "Fixed Penalty Notice - Endorsable Offence". So I guess that if he accepts the FPN and hands his documents in at the copshop, then the "police will take no further action" means it won't go to court but he will likely receive 3 points? Or maybe 6, since he was 25mph over the limit?
Edited by bigandclever on Monday 26th March 09:31
If it's a FPN, I don't think there's jurisdiction to offer anything other than the minimum penalty. i.e. 3 points. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
The officer *can* opt to not offer a Fixed Penalty Notice and have the case seen in the Mags court. It is possibly a coincidence, but probably not that 95 is the highest speed possible that a FPN can be offered for. Usually in these cases the speed is higher but the officers quite generously reduce the figure to one which can be dealt with less harshly.
To answer the question, a fixed penalty notice is exatly what it says it is - the penalty is fixed at 3 points and £60.
justinp1 said:
RichBurley said:
bigandclever said:
You can all probably ignore me now
I've read it and at the top it specifically states "Fixed Penalty Notice - Endorsable Offence". So I guess that if he accepts the FPN and hands his documents in at the copshop, then the "police will take no further action" means it won't go to court but he will likely receive 3 points? Or maybe 6, since he was 25mph over the limit?
I've read it and at the top it specifically states "Fixed Penalty Notice - Endorsable Offence". So I guess that if he accepts the FPN and hands his documents in at the copshop, then the "police will take no further action" means it won't go to court but he will likely receive 3 points? Or maybe 6, since he was 25mph over the limit?
Edited by bigandclever on Monday 26th March 09:31
If it's a FPN, I don't think there's jurisdiction to offer anything other than the minimum penalty. i.e. 3 points. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
The officer *can* opt to not offer a Fixed Penalty Notice and have the case seen in the Mags court. It is possibly a coincidence, but probably not that 95 is the highest speed possible that a FPN can be offered for. Usually in these cases the speed is higher but the officers quite generously reduce the figure to one which can be dealt with less harshly.
To answer the question, a fixed penalty notice is exatly what it says it is - the penalty is fixed at 3 points and £60.
Now when you say quite generously... do you really mean that
mr_annie_vxr said:
justinp1 said:
RichBurley said:
bigandclever said:
You can all probably ignore me now
I've read it and at the top it specifically states "Fixed Penalty Notice - Endorsable Offence". So I guess that if he accepts the FPN and hands his documents in at the copshop, then the "police will take no further action" means it won't go to court but he will likely receive 3 points? Or maybe 6, since he was 25mph over the limit?
I've read it and at the top it specifically states "Fixed Penalty Notice - Endorsable Offence". So I guess that if he accepts the FPN and hands his documents in at the copshop, then the "police will take no further action" means it won't go to court but he will likely receive 3 points? Or maybe 6, since he was 25mph over the limit?
Edited by bigandclever on Monday 26th March 09:31
If it's a FPN, I don't think there's jurisdiction to offer anything other than the minimum penalty. i.e. 3 points. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
The officer *can* opt to not offer a Fixed Penalty Notice and have the case seen in the Mags court. It is possibly a coincidence, but probably not that 95 is the highest speed possible that a FPN can be offered for. Usually in these cases the speed is higher but the officers quite generously reduce the figure to one which can be dealt with less harshly.
To answer the question, a fixed penalty notice is exatly what it says it is - the penalty is fixed at 3 points and £60.
Now when you say quite generously... do you really mean that
If a copper caught you on vascar say doing 115mph in a 70 but reduced it to 95 because you had shiny shoes (or other such pointlessnes) if you then decided to go to court over it would it be enforceable seeing as the evidence proves the statement of speed by the office was false?
Or am i talking cack?
Silent1 said:
If a copper caught you on vascar say doing 115mph in a 70 but reduced it to 95 because you had shiny shoes (or other such pointlessnes) if you then decided to go to court over it would it be enforceable seeing as the evidence proves the statement of speed by the office was false?
Or am i talking cack?
I would assume it enforceable under the laws of physics - to get to 115 you must have been doing 90 at some point
He is (relatively) lucky that it's down as 95, whether or not that was the actual speed detected. If it had been 96 then he would have had to go to court in person, as there would have been the possibility of a ban (either outright for that one offence, or as a result of getting 6 further points). The fact that he was on a major motorway may mean that he doesn't live anywhere near the court, but even if he does, it's still a day off, and an expensive one at that.
Going off on a tangent slightly: while it is fairly "generous" of officers to lower the speed to 95, and I certainly wouldn't complain myself, isn't it basically an admission that they don't think the punishment fits the crime at higher speeds? Most of the sensible people here seem to realise how preposterous it is that someone can be banned for doing 100 in the right conditions (let's face it, for a reasonable driver on an empty, high-quality motorway in the dry, it doesn't even really feel fast, it's more or less the natural speed...so I'm told). I suppose we should be glad that officers like this one apparently feel the same way, but it would be nice if the books reflected reality a bit more, or at least offered a lesser sentence if conditions were good.
Is there any other offence where "criminals" are routinely charged with a lesser "crime" just because the officer feels like it (as opposed to when they grass someone up etc)? IMHO it undermines respect for all laws, although of course the general obsession with numerical speed is doing a great job of that anyway.
Going off on a tangent slightly: while it is fairly "generous" of officers to lower the speed to 95, and I certainly wouldn't complain myself, isn't it basically an admission that they don't think the punishment fits the crime at higher speeds? Most of the sensible people here seem to realise how preposterous it is that someone can be banned for doing 100 in the right conditions (let's face it, for a reasonable driver on an empty, high-quality motorway in the dry, it doesn't even really feel fast, it's more or less the natural speed...so I'm told). I suppose we should be glad that officers like this one apparently feel the same way, but it would be nice if the books reflected reality a bit more, or at least offered a lesser sentence if conditions were good.
Is there any other offence where "criminals" are routinely charged with a lesser "crime" just because the officer feels like it (as opposed to when they grass someone up etc)? IMHO it undermines respect for all laws, although of course the general obsession with numerical speed is doing a great job of that anyway.
gpshead said:
He is (relatively) lucky that it's down as 95, whether or not that was the actual speed detected. If it had been 96 then he would have had to go to court in person, as there would have been the possibility of a ban (either outright for that one offence, or as a result of getting 6 further points). The fact that he was on a major motorway may mean that he doesn't live anywhere near the court, but even if he does, it's still a day off, and an expensive one at that.
Going off on a tangent slightly: while it is fairly "generous" of officers to lower the speed to 95, and I certainly wouldn't complain myself, isn't it basically an admission that they don't think the punishment fits the crime at higher speeds? Most of the sensible people here seem to realise how preposterous it is that someone can be banned for doing 100 in the right conditions (let's face it, for a reasonable driver on an empty, high-quality motorway in the dry, it doesn't even really feel fast, it's more or less the natural speed...so I'm told). I suppose we should be glad that officers like this one apparently feel the same way, but it would be nice if the books reflected reality a bit more, or at least offered a lesser sentence if conditions were good.
Is there any other offence where "criminals" are routinely charged with a lesser "crime" just because the officer feels like it (as opposed to when they grass someone up etc)? IMHO it undermines respect for all laws, although of course the general obsession with numerical speed is doing a great job of that anyway.
Going off on a tangent slightly: while it is fairly "generous" of officers to lower the speed to 95, and I certainly wouldn't complain myself, isn't it basically an admission that they don't think the punishment fits the crime at higher speeds? Most of the sensible people here seem to realise how preposterous it is that someone can be banned for doing 100 in the right conditions (let's face it, for a reasonable driver on an empty, high-quality motorway in the dry, it doesn't even really feel fast, it's more or less the natural speed...so I'm told). I suppose we should be glad that officers like this one apparently feel the same way, but it would be nice if the books reflected reality a bit more, or at least offered a lesser sentence if conditions were good.
Is there any other offence where "criminals" are routinely charged with a lesser "crime" just because the officer feels like it (as opposed to when they grass someone up etc)? IMHO it undermines respect for all laws, although of course the general obsession with numerical speed is doing a great job of that anyway.
Crimes are different to speeding. The officers obviously felt in this chaps case that 3 points and 60 pounds was a fairer way of dealing with it but they did still deal with him as opposed to giving him a verbal warning or letting him go full stop.
There will be the odd circumstance where I would maybe have liked to deal with a general member of the public differently but thats not for me to decide, even less so now that the CPS decide the majority of our charges. One example would be the situation where a burglar is severely injured in a house by a house onwer. The house owner has been excessive and is charged and goes to court. Now most juries won't convict but sometimes they do. I sometimes think that criminals taking peoples property when confronted by the owner should not have any real rights not to expect to be hurt. Unfortunately then we would start to go down the route of vigilantism which is not acceptable. I have certinatly had sympathy for a few normal members of the public who have fallen foul of the law as I always think it could happen to any of us. The vast majority of criminals though are not like me or those that post on here so I have no sympathy for them at all.
mr_annie_vxr said:
[quote=gpshead]
There will be the odd circumstance where I would maybe have liked to deal with a general member of the public differently but thats not for me to decide, even less so now that the CPS decide the majority of our charges.
There will be the odd circumstance where I would maybe have liked to deal with a general member of the public differently but thats not for me to decide, even less so now that the CPS decide the majority of our charges.
How wonderful that even decent spirited police cant have discretion in simple matters any more.Then again, the Govt needs to screw you every way & the motorist is one of the best after all. Makes you wonder where this will all end -that laws an ass now, how much worse can it get?
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff