Jump to content

Man in the middle

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Posts

    642
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    15

Man in the middle last won the day on May 15 2023

Man in the middle had the most liked content!

Reputation

810 Excellent

1 Follower

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. They remain active for “totting up” purposes for three years, they are removed from your driving record after four years and you must declare them to most insurers for five years. Only offences involving driving under the influence of drink or drugs remain on your record for eleven years. It is officially simply a “surcharge”. It is popularly known as a “Victim Surcharge” because it was introduced to fund organisations which provide help for victims (such as Victim Support, the Witness Service, domestic violence charities, etc.). It is imposed on all defendants subject to a fine regardless of the offence and it is set at 40% of the fine (and of the highest fine only if the defendant has more than one fine imposed at a single hearing). The Magistrates must impose it and have no discretion over the amount. As an aside, your figures do not add up and I suspect the £90 you mention was prosecution costs, but no matter. What? For a minor, non-imprisonable traffic offence which can only be dealt with by way of a fine? There must be something we don’t know about. Good luck to you with that (and to the court that has to deal with your claim).
  2. Not on here you haven't (and nor elsewhere that I've seen). Those notions came from your vivid imagination and were dismissed on here (which you chose not to believe). Which was in line with most suggestions, though the fine is a bit generous for such serious overloading. That's principally because, from your description, they were ridiculous. You don't need a lawyer to plead Not Guilty. I would suggest your guilty plea was very wise since, again from your description of events, you clearly were guilty. Thanks for letting us know the outcome.
  3. You do not need legal advice and you will not need to attend court unless you specifically want to. The more serious offence will be dealt with under the "Single Justice" Procedure. This involves a single Magistrate sitting in an office with a Legal Advisor, dealing with matters "on papers" only. Nobody else can attend. The sentencing guidelines for 68mph in a 40mph limit suggest a fine of a week's net income (which includes a discount of one third if you plead guilty) and either a ban of between 7 and 56 days or six points. The overwhelming likelihood is six points. You will also pay a "victim surcharge" of 40% of the fine and prosecution costs of around £90. You will learn when court proceedings have begun by way of a "Single Justice Procedure Notice." The police have six months from the date of the offence to bring proceedings and in many areas they take all of that, so you may not hear until a week or two after the deadline. You will have 21 days to enter a plea and you will also be asked to provide details of your income. You will be advised of the outcome of your case by post. In the (very unlikely) event that the Single Justice believes a ban should be considered your case will be listed for a hearing in the normal Magistrates' Court and you will be invited to attend to make representations. A Single Justice will not disqualify you in your absence. Let me know if I can help further.
  4. Thanks for the cut & paste from the solicitor's site. What intrigues me is that at least two County Court judges have disagreed with your contention. Now of course, judges are not always correct. But it does seem odd that two cases, hinging on the same issue, but judged by different judges in different parts of the country, have turned out the same way. Of course there may be more. I wish you well with your crusade.
  5. Thanks for the solicitor's explanation of the Burden of Proof. Unfortunately it doesn't explain how your understanding of the overriding principle of the Civil Procedure Rules differs from the aim stated in those rules themselves. Indeed. But you can live in it until they do.
  6. From your claim document: Where did you get that from? Here's the opening provision of the Civil Procedure Rules: The overriding objective 1.1—(1) These Rules are a new procedural code with the overriding objective of enabling the court to deal with cases justly. [my emphasis] Could there possibly be any more misunderstandings where your grasp of the law and procedures may be a little less complete than that of the judge?
  7. Since it seems we're not likely to see the statements I'll go on what the Site Team has said about them. If you have statements from two police officers (who have nothing to gain and everything to lose by committing perjury) that say they saw you handling your phone, you will have to ask them both to attend court and give evidence in person. After they have done so (with their "live" evidence almost certainly agreeing with their written statements) you will have the opportunity to question them. What will you ask them? SImply calling them liars will end badly. Suggesting they were "mistaken" is the way to go, so why were they mistaken? Do you suggest they couldn't see you? After that, you will have the opportunity to give evidence in your defence (though you don't have to). What will you say? You've told us on here that you picked up your phone cradle, with the phone attached to it, after it had fallen.Will you tell the court that? Bear in mind that after you have given your evidence you can be questioned (by the prosecutor). But you said the phone was attached to the holder. The officers' evidence is what the prosecution will rely on to convict you. I wish you every success with your defence. Do let us know how it goes.
  8. That is irrelevant as the issue of control oft the vehicle is not an element of the offence. Then how did you pick it up? How many hands do you have? Would you care to post it up here (suitably redacted) so we can comment. If you plead Not Guilty you will have to ask for the officer who made the statement to attend so that you can cross-examine him to cast doubt on his evidence (unless, as it stands, it does not support the charge). Do you feel able to do that? My view is that if there is evidence that you picked up the phone (and you don't seem to dispute that you did) then the court will find that you were using it. It doesn't matter what else you were or were not doing with it. The principal point of the law is to prevent people faffing about with hand-held phones whilst driving. As soon as it leaves its secure place your phone becomes "hand held" and you were faffing about with it. If I see the officer's statement I'll reconsider. But purely on your version of events I stand by my earlier comment.
  9. You won’t need to do that. You will probably be offered a fixed penalty (£200 and six points) for the offence. If you decline that offer you will face prosecution in court. If you plead not guilty it will be for the court to decide whether or not you were “using” your phone whilst driving and they will do this based on the evidence from the police officers and you. The mobile phone legislation was changed in March 2022 and now doing just about anything with a mobile phone is considered to be “using” it. From your description I believe the court will find you guilty. If you are convicted you will face a fine of half a weeks net income, a surcharge of 40% of that fine, prosecution costs which will be a minimum of £620 and six points.
  10. Thanks for letting us know. It seems they thought better of it, but it would have been nice of them to have let you know. Just as an aside, the police no longer have to prove a mobile phone is being used for "interactive communication." The law was changed in March 2022 following the failure to convict Ramsey Barreto (a case which I mentioned). Now, doing just about anything with a mobile phone whilst driving will amount to "using" it and see a successful prosecution.
  11. That's a very good result! Did you pay prosecution costs as well (usually around £90)? If not, it was better than the fixed penalty(£200). Thanks for letting us know.
  12. The position you are in at the moment is what you need to concentrate on. You need to respond to the "Request for Driver's details" within the time allowed (28 days). If you fail to do that you will be charged with that offence and a conviction carries six points, a hefty fine and an endorsement code (MS90) which will see your insurance premiums rocket. Once you've done that you will almost certainly be offered a course for that speed, provided you have not done one for an offence that occurred within three years of this one. If you are not eligible or don't fancy that, a fixed penalty of £100 and 3 points is the alternative. If you decline or ignore that you will be prosecuted in court. Before you enter a plea you will not be served with all the evidence the police have, but only that which they intend to rely on to convict you. It is at that point that you can begin your challenges. The "Equity at Arms" (or perhaps "Equality of Arms") which you mention is provided by the Criminal Procedure Rules and the Rules of Evidence to which your trial (should you plead Not Guilty) will be subject. I'm really not sure what "dynamic risk assessment" you suggest should be undertaken, or by whom (or why). In general, an approved mechanical device is assumed to be working correctly unless the contrary can be proved. If you take your case to trial, the police will probably show that your speed was detected by an approved device operated correctly. The burden then shifts to you to show that it cannot be relied upon. The cost of failure is high - you will pay a fine of half a week's net income and a surcharge of 40% of that fine. You will also pay prosecution costs. These will begin at £620 and may go considerably higher than that if the prosecution has to enlist the help of an expert to counter your challenge. Best of luck.
  13. When you say your licence had expired, what do you mean? Do you mean that your photocard was more than ten years old?
  14. Wherever you gained that belief you are wrong and you have no basis to challenge the charges on that basis. The only avenue for consideration is whether or not the two instances constituted one single offence. At 80mph in four minutes you will cover a little over five miles. Was there any change of speed limit in that time? You could try a begging letter to the police asking them to consider the offences to be one continuing offence. If they refuse your only other option would be to decline any out-of-court disposals and have the matters heard in court (making the same request). Here's the likely outcomes: If the police accept your "one offence" argument you should be offered a course (provided you have not done one in the last three years - with the offence dates being used to calculate that period). If they do not accept your argument you should be offered a course for one offence and a fixed penalty (£100 and 3 points) for the other. If you decide to take the matter to court and the court accepts your "one offence" argument you should be sentenced in accordance with the normal sentencing guidelines (but see below). These suggest a fine of half a week's net income (reduced by a third for your guilty plea) plus around £90 prosecution costs and a "Victim Surcharge" of 40% of the fine. If they do not accept your argument, you face two fines at that level, but only one lot of costs and one Victim Surcharge. Three points (for each offence, whether one or two) will also be imposed. In the event the court accepts your argument you might ask them to sentence you at the fixed penalty level. The court has guidance which says this: "Where a penalty notice could not be offered or taken up for reasons unconnected with the offence itself, such as administrative difficulties outside the control of the offender, the starting point should be a fine equivalent to the amount of the penalty and no order of costs should be imposed. The offender should not be disadvantaged by the unavailability of the penalty notice in these circumstances." Whilst you being unable to accept a FP was not due to administrative difficulties, that reason is not exclusive and if you could persuade the court that you would have accepted a fixed penalty for the single offence had it been offered, you may be successful.
  15. The court has no power to order a course and the fixed penalty is the best offer you will get. Are you sure it was 23mph? Enforcement normally begins at 24mph.
×
×
  • Create New...