Pepipoo Pace letter

[sja]

Partner got a NIP for 38 in a 30, hidden camera van. She thought Dual carrigeway was 40, obvioulsy it wasn't!.. Read some post on Pepioo and took suggestion to send the PACE letter with the unsigned nip.. Now she is really panicking she will get a summons.. Any idea on what will happen next? Thanks...

[BliarOut]

This post explains what happens.... It's still a bit cloudy on the outcome.

http://pepipoo.com/NewForums2/viewtopic.php?t=4576

[Shnozz]

BliarOut said:

This post explains what happens.... It's still a bit cloudy on the outcome.

in our case it was satisfactory

[sja]

Cheers I have read it and I am thick, I think i understand it's just not usre what to do if sumons is received.. Partner worried about attending court, can you plead guilty by post if you get a summons?

Shnozz would you be kind enough to email me brief details of your outcome?

Thanks

Steve

[JonRB]

Yes, you can choose to bail out at the point of being issued a Summons if you wish and plead guilty by post. The penalty is generally the same points and fine + court costs of around £30, making a standard FPN of 3 points + £60 into 3 points + £90. Crucially the money goes to the court, not the Scamera Partnership.

[BliarOut]

Shnozz said:

BliarOut said: This post explains what happens.... It's still a bit cloudy on the outcome. in our case it was satisfactory

Was that a PACE letter that got it dropped?

Would be interested to hear what happened.... By PM if you don't want to draw too much attention to it

[lord summerisle]

isnt there that case that has gone to the European Court of human rights about the NIPs being against HR as its gaining a confession of guilt under duress? (or has that case been lost)

i cant remember where i read about it tho.

[anniesdad]

My Colleagues Wife has just settled at £60 fine + £60 costs. They genuinely did not know who was driving (local road, used by both of them at the same times of the day) but because court action was threatened, and my colleague's Wife did not want to go to court, she took the punishment. She does not know to this day whether she was driving or not. He was happy to go all the way. Photo evidence showed the number plate only. The Police Officer suggested that they just pick a name, any name, and take the punishment.

How can this be right and fair?

edited to say: the speed was 43 in a supposed 30 limit, however it seems that it was changed to a 30 limit after the offence. It is a busy dual carriageway, controlled by a good traffic light system and doesn't have a high attrition/RTA rate.



>> Edited by anniesdad on Tuesday 11th October 15:17

[Dwight VanDriver]

Sja

There has been hints that the Pace argument itself has resulted in SCP disengaging but I am not convinced that it is a valid argument. Have posted about this before. If it was as successful as stated then it would have been shouted out from the rooftops long ago and HMG quick to bring in a plug fro the gap.

One of two things either they (SCP) drop or they will go for failing to name and shame on the documnt sent by or on behalf of the COP or even speeding if it is considered that the signed details sent conform to what is required under Section 12 Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988 (proof of identity of driver by using signed statement of accused). I have also heard that some SCP do not have the courtesy to write back and advise NFA so it could be a long stressful wait of 6 months for an Information to be laid in that time scale and more for a summons to be served.

It is an area, as Lord Summerisle mentions, is subject to a number of appeals to the CHR as to incriminating oneself by signing the form, all are yet to be heard. Whilst one cannot prejudge the outcome there is some current evidence that through existing legislation they are non runners.

As far as anniesdad is concerned then they had the avenue to introduce the defence of genuinely not knowing who the driver was and showing that they made enquiries to try and acertain who it had been. This has to be tested before Magistrates as did the "Celebs" Hamiltons and were successful. Instead I gather they folded.

dvd

[7db]

anniesdad said:

My Colleagues Wife has just settled at £60 fine + £60 costs. They genuinely did not know who was driving (local road, used by both of them at the same times of the day) but because court action was threatened, and my colleague's Wife did not want to go to court, she took the punishment. She does not know to this day whether she was driving or not. He was happy to go all the way. Photo evidence showed the number plate only. The Police Officer suggested that they just pick a name, any name, and take the punishment.

Isn't this perverting the course of justice? Someone has made a false declaration.

[boiler]

Now forgive me if I am being stupid but...

You receive a NIP, fill in the PACE form so the driver details cannot (in theory) be used in evidence. All fine so far. In my mind they have got effectively a reason to believe that that person was speeding, even if it cannot be used in court. Surely that just invites either:

a) a court summons, in the name that has been supplied. The police still have the photographic evidence, so could prosecute using that. Perhaps a visit from the police to the address given to 'chat' to the named driver, and positive ID based on the photo.

b) another NIP, with an offer of 3 points to the driver that has been named previously in the PACE statement. You then have the option of accpeting the NIP, or taking it to court. If you don't accept - see option a.

Andy.

[lord summerisle]

having read thru a few threads on pepipoo this afternoon for future reference (a NIP is inevitable in this day and age)

seems at the moment get nip, send back nip saying see attached - PACE statement, receive possible second nip stating failure to declare means charged with something else under the section 17x and nothing happens...

or they write back making a surious mis quoting of another case saying such forms do not require a caution - please kindly incriminate yourself or someone else and forward payment details.

Tho i havent (in the 3hrs iv been reading the site) found a case as yet where the partnership have taken it to court to test their theory.. others have won having had the PACE statement declared inadmissable

I think.

I'm no lawyer - seek poffessional advice/read yourself *a wimps get out clause*

[sja]

Thanks for all the advice.. So basically wait and see. If after 6 months and nothing further receied we are in the clear. If in that time recieve a summons, hold hands up, plead guilty by post and pay slightly more fine?

[7db]

Usually about £35 for court costs, I think. May vary, and could be a lottery in terms of the actual points / fine given if you are near the borderline and don't get your guilty plea in early or there is no mitigation.

[bluepolarbear]

Dwight VanDriver said:

Sja There has been hints that the Pace argument itself has resulted in SCP disengaging but I am not convinced that it is a valid argument.

It hasn't got to be. It works on the basis that the botom line is nobody knows. The bottom line is that the SCP decide if they want to go to court and at the moment the numbers of people using PACE are small. It isn't worth the risk going all the way. They will go along way including the guy who went to court, stood up, pleaded not guilty, and the CPS immediately withdraw the case. There is no evidence that anyone ahs been found guilty if they have gone the PACE route - but the pressure is huge.

It is like the orginal non signing - lasted for a good 12 months - very sucesful into the numbers got to large, revenues were threaten and they just had to go all the way to get a judge to rule it non valid. Despite stacking the cards they had to twist the law quite someway to show it was non valid and in doing so open the door for PACE. Who knows what next?

Provides the numbers stay small, and your balls are big enough, it works.

[SS2.]

bluepolarbear said:

There is no evidence that anyone ahs been found guilty if they have gone the PACE route

Err, yes there is - http://pepipoo.com/NewForums2/viewtopic.php?t=4802&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=30 And there are more...

The PACE statement is most definitely not a get out of jail free card. There will almost certainly be the need to put up a fight after PACE has been submitted and success is not guaranteed. Whilst the scammers are not consistent in the way they deal with PACE, they are becoming increasingly aware of its presence

That said, using PACE rather than completing the NIP will decrease the chances of conviction either through timeout, scammers cocking up the summons bundle, CPS bailing over the PACE issue, Magistrates who actually understand the argument etc.

Plus any fines do not add to the scammers' coffers - a definite plus point.

The ECJ will confirm the validity of PACE one way or the other in the not too distant future



>> Edited by SS2. on Tuesday 11th October 22:05

[puggit]

SS2. said:

Err, yes there is - <a href="http://pepipoo.com/NewForums2/viewtopic.php?t=4802&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=30">http://pepipoo.com/NewForums2/viewtopic.php?t=4802&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=30</a> And there are more...

Sorry, but only users granted special access can read topics in this forum.

[SS2.]

Sh1t, sorry..

In short, red light camera offence, NIP received, PACE sent, ignored CoFP, summons received, attended court, guilty + fine + costs + points.

There are others....

[Raja]

How many points? if the points are the same whats £35 costs when all of it then goes to the courts instead of the scamera partnerships.

[SS2.]

In that case, £90 and three points. Costs were unusually high at £300... That's always a risk, particularly if the Magistrates are having a bad day and police officers and scammers have been called to give evidence at your trial.

Oh, and it wasn't me by the way...