I think i know the answer, but i'll ask anyway.
Mrs Mare got flashed last September. We went through the nominate the driver business and had a letter that it was too high to be dealt by fixed penalty.
The last correspondance was from Safecam to say that the case would be considered for prosecution.
Yesterday we had;
1 - a letter from the DVLA asking for Mrs Mare's licence to be endorsed
2 - a letter from Taunton Deane magistrates entitled Notice of Fine and collection order, asking for £425.00.
WE HAVE HAD NO SUMMONS.
Mrs Mare would have of course pleaded guilty. I'm not here to defend her driving. She would have liked the opportunity to discuss sentence and fill out her statement of means and the like.
At present, we know Mrs Mare has a fine. What we don't know is the damage to her licence.
Any flashes of inspiration? Do you get another go if there's no summons?
Thanks
|
....fill out her statement of means and the like....
However it's happened, the case has been dealt with by the magistrates in Mrs Mare's absence.
With no information in front of them, the bench is obliged to assume 'average income' and calculate the fine accordingly.
Obviously, if Mrs Mare is loaded, this will have gone in her favour, on t'other hand, if she's potless, the fine should be lower.
|
|
Thanks. We can handle the fine, what we wanted to avoid was a ban. Currently neither of us where she stands, and she does need to drive.
|
Given you have a letter from DVLA asking for the licence for it to be endorsed, don't think Mrs M can be banned, unless the Taunton points put her over the totting-up limit.
Worth ringing Taunton Deane mags tomorrow, they should at least be able to explain what's happened.
|
If Mrs Mare received no indication whatsoever of the Court case hearing, within 21 days of learning that proceedings have taken place, she can apply to have things set aside and a new hearing arranged which she can then attend and plead mitigation.
Speak to the Magistrates Clerks Office and they will advise.
dvd
|
|
Missus should contact the court ASAP and have the case set aside as you have not received a summons. This will restart the case and a summons will be re-issued and you can go to court. Post this on www.pepipoo.co.uk for legal guidance. Regards Peter
|
If i were to be a suspicious man.....(sadly I am).....the timings above give me a small cause for concern. There's a six month limit for service of a summons in matters like this. Last September until 6 months is up = March 09....has someone mucked up, got worried that they're getting out of time for the summons and put it through the system quickly (without Mrs Mare being aware)...I hope not, because that would be well out of order....but that's the angle i'd be enquiring about.... with Legal Advice if you're stonewalled.
Edited by Westpig on 27/04/2009 at 12:40
|
Tut tut Westpig.......
The information for speeding has to be laid within 6 months. From that a summons is raised and this can be served anytime after the 6 months limitation on proceedings imposed on the information.
dvd
|
Tut tut Westpig.......
thanks dvd
Edited by Westpig on 27/04/2009 at 19:28
|
|
|
|
Isn't the term you are looking for
' conspiracy to pervert the course of justice ? "
|
Hi I'm back.
Got onto the court first thing this morning.
Missus has 6 points and the fine (£350 plus £60 plus £15). In the circumstances, best to let sleeping dogs lie. The main concern was that she might have been banned without knowing, which given she's been driving around oblivious has obvious issues.
As regards the 6 months; last communication we had from officialdom was 22 October last year, and the court date was 20th April. Hmm, two days to go. Cynical?
Thanks for advice. Glad that's over. Mrs Mare will be more aware in future
|
...let sleeping dogs lie...
Mare,
Tend to agree.
You could insist on your day in court, but it's points and a fine in any event.
Skilful mitigation might reduce the fine a little bit, but it would cost you something to go to court in terms of time off work, petrol, parking, stress, etc.
Six points is a fair few, so I apprehend Mrs Mare was going at the gallop rather than a canter.
Go for a fresh hearing and there's always the risk of a grumpy bench and the result Mrs M ends up in a worse position than she is now.
What was it? 90-odd on the M5? :)
|
|
She'd have to be present to be banned - its an evidential requirement.
|
ends up in a worse position than she is now.What was it? 90-odd on the M5? :)
51 in a 30. Stupid, not necessarily because of the risk to pedestrians, but it's a dual carriageway for 250 yds with two sets of traffic lights. Someone in a fast car who doesn't know the area will come up to the lights just going onto green, duck into the right hand lane, toe it and pass the queue before the car at the head has got in gear. It was the Brislington Tramways on the A4 if you know it.
Not defending her, mind. She knows she was wrong.
|
|
|
|
