Wrong date on FPN - where do I stand?
Discussion
I got pulled on my bike by an unmarked motorway plod. He pulled me for averaging 96mph maxing at 99mph over 2.5 miles (time was 2.30am, M4 was virtually deserted). Fair cop says I. He actually let me off the speeding as my riding was of good standard, just "a little too fast, so slow it down a bit".
All top policing so far. :bigthumbsup:
He also gave me a rectification notice thingy for my smaller rear plate, and a FPN for said offence. Thing is - he filled in the date as 2006 not 2007.
Can I weasel my way out of it or should I just cough? I don't mind coughing but £30 saved is £30 earned!
Thanks for advice in advance!
All top policing so far. :bigthumbsup:
He also gave me a rectification notice thingy for my smaller rear plate, and a FPN for said offence. Thing is - he filled in the date as 2006 not 2007.
Can I weasel my way out of it or should I just cough? I don't mind coughing but £30 saved is £30 earned!
Thanks for advice in advance!
I think its a case of pay it or argue the case in court on the dates and hope the court disregard the ticket. Alternatively they may just accept it as an error as the officers PNB as well as vascar will show the correct date.
If you loose it will cost you more as court costs may well be added.
If it comes to court they will ask if you were stopped on the date in 2007. You will say yes. And thats gonna be that.
Consider yorself lucky not to be dealing with a speeding court appearance or a fixed penalty and points!
If you loose it will cost you more as court costs may well be added.
If it comes to court they will ask if you were stopped on the date in 2007. You will say yes. And thats gonna be that.
Consider yorself lucky not to be dealing with a speeding court appearance or a fixed penalty and points!
John Laverick said:
BliarOut said:
I'd say £30 for that was a right result. He was fair enough to you, why not return the courtesy?
Too right!!
I was caught, maxed out, on a deserted DC, by a PC on a bike. He said he didn't have any recording equipment, but reckoned with a sly smile that I was going about 97mph.
I was more than happy to pay.
hornetrider said:
I got pulled on my bike by an unmarked motorway plod. He pulled me for averaging 96mph maxing at 99mph over 2.5 miles (time was 2.30am, M4 was virtually deserted). Fair cop says I. He actually let me off the speeding as my riding was of good standard, just "a little too fast, so slow it down a bit".
All top policing so far. :bigthumbsup:
He also gave me a rectification notice thingy for my smaller rear plate, and a FPN for said offence. Thing is - he filled in the date as 2006 not 2007.
Can I weasel my way out of it or should I just cough? I don't mind coughing but £30 saved is £30 earned!
Thanks for advice in advance!
All top policing so far. :bigthumbsup:
He also gave me a rectification notice thingy for my smaller rear plate, and a FPN for said offence. Thing is - he filled in the date as 2006 not 2007.
Can I weasel my way out of it or should I just cough? I don't mind coughing but £30 saved is £30 earned!
Thanks for advice in advance!
Sounds like exactly the sort of use of individual discretion we're all crying out for. Well worth £30. Pay up and give him a bunch of flowers to pass on to his Mrs to make him and her feel good about how he is
Stated VDRS Notice issued AND a FPN for the offence.
The idea of the Vehicle Defect Rectification Scheme is that the person it is issued to rectifies the defect at his own cost and has it certified by a MOT Garage and he then produces the fact to BIB and matter ended.
It is only if they do not rectify in certain amount of time (28 days?)that matter taken to Court.
Issue of FPN at same time is a bit naughty and not in accordance with the VDRS and invokes two costs - rectification cost AND FPN.
Twas me I would consider forthwith rectification of the fault, get two copies from MOT that it had been done,(keep one just in case) then send one to BIB with letter pointing out the duplicity and asking that FPN be withdrawn. If it was as stated they just may revoke and save you £30.
Of course not a cast iron guarentee but you never know.
dvd
The idea of the Vehicle Defect Rectification Scheme is that the person it is issued to rectifies the defect at his own cost and has it certified by a MOT Garage and he then produces the fact to BIB and matter ended.
It is only if they do not rectify in certain amount of time (28 days?)that matter taken to Court.
Issue of FPN at same time is a bit naughty and not in accordance with the VDRS and invokes two costs - rectification cost AND FPN.
Twas me I would consider forthwith rectification of the fault, get two copies from MOT that it had been done,(keep one just in case) then send one to BIB with letter pointing out the duplicity and asking that FPN be withdrawn. If it was as stated they just may revoke and save you £30.
Of course not a cast iron guarentee but you never know.
dvd
the tuscan rat said:
Dwight VanDriver said:
Stated VDRS Notice issued AND a FPN for the offence.
The idea of the Vehicle Defect Rectification Scheme is that the person it is issued to rectifies the defect at his own cost and has it certified by a MOT Garage and he then produces the fact to BIB and matter ended.
It is only if they do not rectify in certain amount of time (28 days?)that matter taken to Court.
Issue of FPN at same time is a bit naughty and not in accordance with the VDRS and invokes two costs - rectification cost AND FPN.
Twas me I would consider forthwith rectification of the fault, get two copies from MOT that it had been done,(keep one just in case) then send one to BIB with letter pointing out the duplicity and asking that FPN be withdrawn. If it was as stated they just may revoke and save you £30.
Of course not a cast iron guarentee but you never know.
dvd
The idea of the Vehicle Defect Rectification Scheme is that the person it is issued to rectifies the defect at his own cost and has it certified by a MOT Garage and he then produces the fact to BIB and matter ended.
It is only if they do not rectify in certain amount of time (28 days?)that matter taken to Court.
Issue of FPN at same time is a bit naughty and not in accordance with the VDRS and invokes two costs - rectification cost AND FPN.
Twas me I would consider forthwith rectification of the fault, get two copies from MOT that it had been done,(keep one just in case) then send one to BIB with letter pointing out the duplicity and asking that FPN be withdrawn. If it was as stated they just may revoke and save you £30.
Of course not a cast iron guarentee but you never know.
dvd
I aggree with DVD above, you can only have one or the other.
However this is the risk.....You contest and end up in court, the video from the car is played at court which will start when the officer first saw you. The speed issue will be shown to the bench who have the power to over-rule the officer’s decision to warn you and are feeling very militant and give you the full punishment for your speed...maybe 6 points, maybe much bigger fine.... they might Disqualify you.
Not trying to scare you, you are a grown up you can make your own mind up. This is just the worst case scenario...
Bollards.
IANAL - but if you're in court on a defect charge then speeding is not an issue. By that point the time for a valid NIP will be long gone (s presumably no verbal notice for the speeding offence at the scene) - so the potential speeding conviction is a dead duck.
I would personally say you stand in line with your thirty pounds and call it a "fair cop" this time. The date, I would say, on a defect is immaterial, and it seems reasonable if you're getting a fine for defective vehicle that you should also have to fix it.
tigger1 said:
The date, I would say, on a defect is immaterial, .
Now,slightly off topic,on these threads there have been times where it's been said that errors on a NIP are "inconsequential" for want of a better word eg wrong date,reg.number,name of keeper etc.Is there any other sphere of law where such "slips" are allowed to go on without the case being unanwerable?eg if I'd been accused of mugging an old lady on the 4th yet it was actually the 6th and I could prove I was elsewhere on the 4th ,could BiB just say oh,sorry we really really meant the 6th?I suppose threre are,aren't there? (hope you get my drift....not very articulate this p.m.)
Edited by esselte on Tuesday 15th May 15:29
That later part Pete seems to refer to evidence as opposed to process,. If they said woman mugged on x and evidence showed you at y then an aquital would be line.
As far as process goes much laid down and at end of the day it will be for the Mags to consider and pronounce.
Example of three line of guidance from the @bible@:
An error so fundemental that it cannot be rescued by any appropriate and reasonable amendment:this will cause prosecution to fail without more.
An error substantial enough to requirement amendment, the Court has the power to allow an amendment
An eror so trivial that no amendment is required if the defendant was always aware of the true basis of the information a conviction will be upheld even on an unamended in formation.
dvd
As far as process goes much laid down and at end of the day it will be for the Mags to consider and pronounce.
Example of three line of guidance from the @bible@:
An error so fundemental that it cannot be rescued by any appropriate and reasonable amendment:this will cause prosecution to fail without more.
An error substantial enough to requirement amendment, the Court has the power to allow an amendment
An eror so trivial that no amendment is required if the defendant was always aware of the true basis of the information a conviction will be upheld even on an unamended in formation.
dvd
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff