Quite honestly there is nothing a solicitor can do that you cannot do yourself if you are pleading guilty. However, since the offence is imprisonable you will be able to take advantage of the duty solicitor at your first hearing only. If it goes to a second or subsequent hearing you will be either on your own or you will have to pay for representation. Perhaps you could point me to the legislation that provides for that to be done.

Then you will be subject to a minimum 12 month disqualification. No, custody is not likely. But as well as the disqualification you can expect a fine (of somewhat more than £100) or possibly a community order if there are aggravating circumstances or the reading was high. You will not have any points imposed (you can only have a ban or points, not both). There is no mandatory re-test for the offence and the court is unlikely to order a discretionary one.

Do you realise that if you have been charged under Section 5A of the Road Traffic Act you face a mandatory twelve month driving ban? As well as that, the offence carries a maximum of six month's custody for the most serious cases. What were your friends who were fined £100 accused of? Were they driving?

Quite honestly when speeding matters are dealt with in court the sentences are fairly prescriptive. Very rarely does mitigation materially influence the court's decision. Any solicitor who charges you £800 and says that they can save you money is taking you for a ride. Having said that, many drivers offer what they believe is mitigation when it in fact aggravates the offence. I would not attempt to get the court to treat you more leniently by telling them you drove home following a long day at work and after having been up for 14 hours.Their view will be that if you believed you were over tired you should not have driven at all. Best to keep it to "out of character (as borne out by my clean licence)...momentary lapse of concentration" etc. Whilst letters of support from your employer will not do you any harm (provided they don't mention "long day at work, may have been tired, etc.) they are unlikely to have much affect. The guideline fine for the offence (with a guilty plea) is one week's net income. You will also pay a "Victim Surcharge" of 10% of the fine (Min £30, Max £170) and £85 prosecution costs. You need to calculate your net income as best you can. So long as it looks reasonable it is unlikely to be queried. The maximum fine for speeding on a motorway is £2,500. That is the maximum without a guilty plea meaning that if your net weekly income exceeds that then that is the most you can be fined before your one third discount (for your guilty plea) is applied. So the most you can be fined if your weekly income is £2,500 or more is £1,667. As far as a ban or points goes, as I said earlier the normal disposal for such a speed is six points. You can suggest that the court imposes a short ban instead but do not mention that this is your preference so that you have some leeway in case of future offences are committed! But it is entirely a matter for the court.

I forgot to add that your partner is now considered by the DVLA to be a "High Risk Offender". This is for two reasons: (1) Because he recorded a reading (in breath) of more than 87.5 and (2) he has committed a second offence within ten years. This means that when he applies for a new licence at the end of his disqualification period he will have to undergo a "fitness to drive" assessment which may include an examination by a DVLA doctor.

That level does not cross the custody threshold (that is 120 in breath). Obviously a second offence aggravates the matter but the likely disposal is a hefty community order. The disqualification period, as I said, must be at least three years and I would not be surprised to see it set at a little more than that, especially as the matter is aggravated by him being uninsured.

Was that in breath (where the limit is 35) or blood (where the limit is 80)? It wouldn't have been in urine because the limit is 107. The intervening speeding offences will make precious little difference. The "signature" sentence (i.e. whether a fine, community order or custody) depends very much on the level of alcohol recorded. It's impossible to give a view without that. One thing is certain - he will be banned for a minimum of three years because he has a second alcohol-related offence within ten years.

Yes, Manxman has put you on the right track. You need to perform a Statutory Declaration (to declare, on oath, that you knew nothing of the court proceedings against you). You must do this within 21 days of learning about your conviction. You can either do so at a Magistrates' Court for which you will need to make an appointment. They may not be able to fit you in within 21 days but so long as you explain to the court that it was the earliest date available they will accept your declaration. Alternatively you can make the declaration before a solicitor. They may charge you a small fee (£5 - £10). Once this is done the conviction you have (for failing to provide driver's details) is set aside. The prosecution will almost certainly start proceedings again and in many areas they are now doing so immediately following your statutory declaration. Ideally it would be best if you could see the prosecutor before the court sits (ask when you check in at reception) and offer to plead guilty to the speeding charge provided the FtP charge is dropped. It is a common deal which is usually readily accepted. Under no circumstances should you plead guilty to either offence until you have had the chance to discuss this deal. If the deal is refused you should maintain Not Guilty pleas to both charges. They cannot convict you of speeding (they have no evidence you were driving) and the trial for FtP will be held at a later date. You can then consider your position for that offence. If they do accept your offer to plead guilty to speeding you might try asking if you can be sentenced at the Fixed Penalty level (£100 and three points) provided the speed is low enough (let me know the speed/limit and I will tell you if it qualifies).. Magistrates have guidance enabling them to do this 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. But first things first - make arrangements to do the Stat Dec.

There's nothing to lose (provided no guilty plea to speeding is entered). The very worst that can happen is a conviction for FtF (which the OP already has) and there is the opportunity to (at best) do the deal and have the FtF dropped) or at least to see a discount and reduced costs applied for a guilty plea for the FtF.

Unlike an appeal to the Crown Court (where the time limit is 21 days) there is no time limit on S142 applications (as far as I can recall). However, you need to act asap because the longer you leave it the less likely the court is to accede to your request to reopen. It occurs to me from what you have said that if the court seemingly ignored your statement of income the likely explanation is they received neither that nor your guilty plea to speeding. There is no reason for the speeding matter to be dropped if you pleaded guilty, but it could not be proved without your guilty plea. There is a strong likelihood that neither were received and this could add a bit of weight to your request to have the matter reopened. If you do manage to get your matter reopened, whatever you do, do not plead guilty to either offence until you have explored the possibility of the deal. If your offer of the deal is declined you should maintain your NG plea to speeding (it cannot be proved without you providing your details in the form of a Section 172 response). You haven't mentioned why you failed to respond but if you have no valid defence and the prosecution insists on continuing it you may be forced into a guilty plea. At least you'll get a third off the fine (though not the points) and the costs will be limited to £85. Seems very strange to me they didn't allow an adjournment(?). Looks as if s.142 is your only likelihood of getting the six points reduced to three (and stopping insurance premiums rocketing because of the FtF conviction). I wonder if there's any potential downside to going down the s.142 route, or just be grateful you didn't end up with nine points. Perhaps Man in the middle can advise?

It seems there are a number of issues here. The first is that the matter was heard in your absence even though you informed the court that you would not be able to attend the hearing. It is most unusual for a court not to allow an adjournment for a minor motoring matter when the defendant has asked for one and has a good reason for asking. Unfortunately, pleading guilty to speeding was the worst thing you could have done. They have no evidence that you were driving (that comes from you providing your details). When I asked you earlier whether you intended to ask for the usual “deal” (to drop the FtF charge in exchange for pleading guilty to speeding) I assumed you knew that you must maintain Not Guilty pleas to both matters until the deal was agreed. What I don’t understand is why you have not been convicted of speeding in view of that plea (and, as mentioned, how you didn’t land up with nine points). The fine and costs seem to have been based on the default weekly income of £440 per week (the fine is 1.5 times weekly income). So, unless the income you stated was coincidentally £440 pw, it seems the statement of income you provided has not been used. This is a mess, some of it down to you and some, it seems possibly down to the court. An appeal to the Crown Court is not advisable. You have not mentioned why you failed to provide the driver’s details but without you being there to offer a defence (and it’s a difficult charge to defend anyway) you were probably properly convicted of that. You were also lucky not to have been convicted of speeding. If you appeal against conviction to the Crown Court it will almost certainly fail and you may end up with a speeding conviction plus the Crown Court costs (which may be around £1k) into the bargain. I believe your avenue of approach should be to the Clerk to the Justices of the area where the court is (details are available online from HMRC website). You should asked for the matter to be reopened under Section 142 of the Magistrates’ Court act. Paragraph 1 of that section says this: Power of magistrates’ court to re-open cases to rectify mistakes etc. (1) A magistrates’ court may vary or rescind a sentence or other order imposed or made by it when dealing with an offender if it appears to the court to be in the interests of justice to do so; and it is hereby declared that this power extends to replacing a sentence or order which for any reason appears to be invalid by another which the court has power to impose or make. You should make your request on the grounds that you were refused the adjournment you requested, were not informed of that refusal, and therefore had no opportunity to attend your hearing. I would attach a copy of your original request. You were therefore not able to properly state your case. You can also state that you were not fined in accordance with your means (though be a bit careful with that if your income is significantly above £440 pw). The issue really is that, faced with being unable to attend the hearing and learning only a short time beforehand that your adjournment had not been granted you were panicked into action that you had not properly considered (i.e. pleading guilty to speeding). I would not, however, put it like that (because that is what you intend to do anyway if you get a fresh hearing and are able to do a “deal”). The deal with the prosecution is conducted routinely every day and will be well known to the Clerk to the Justices, the prosecutor and the Magistrates. But you need to secure a fresh hearing, have the original conviction set aside, and start anew. A request under S142 is the only way to achieve that so I hope you succeed. You may want to seek legal advice to help you with the above. Alas to get representation in court will almost certainly cost you more than you might save but bear in mind you now have an endorsement code MS90 on your licence. Insurers absolutely hate that (because they wonder what you might have done that you didn't want to accept you were driving) and it will increase your premiums for up to five years (might be worth getting a couple of dummy quotes to see the effect). I don't think I can help much further but if so le me know.

The 14 day limit is for the police to serve a "Notice of Intended Prosecution" on the Registered Keeper. The only other time limit is one of six months to begin court proceedings. When you say she "got" a speed awareness course, what do you mean?

The first you will hear will be a "Single Justice Procedure Notice" (SJPN). As mentioned they have 6 months to produce this and usually take all of that. The usual sentence for that speed is 6 points (1mph slower and you would have been offered a Fixed Penalty of £100 + 3 points). Unless you opt for a court hearing (option will come with the SJPN) the SJ will sentence you to that in your absence (you cannot attend a SJ hearing). Only if a ban is considered by the SJ (unlikely)will it be transferred to a full court hearing. The SJ will not ban you in your absence. I'm not too clear why you would prefer a ban but if one is considered it will not be 56 days. Seven to fourteen is more likely. If you want to argue for that you must go to court but there is no guarantee that the court will accede to your request as the choice is not yours. I have limited internet access until Monday and if you have any questions I may not see them until then.

Provided he was the driver and he accepts the speeding charge he should ask to see the prosecutor before court begins and offer to plead guilty to the speeding charge provided the FtF charge is dropped. This is perfectly normal. I cannot give a detailed answer at present. Suggest you visit www.pepipoo.com where you can find more info

No, no time limit applies to a S172 request. If you are absolutely certain that: 1. You are the Registered Keeper of the vehicle (forget about ownership) and 2. That the V5C shows you as such and that the details are all correct in every detail (get it out and check it) and 3. That the "docref" date on the bottom is a good bit before the date of the alleged offence then you may have a cast iron defence in that the NIP was served late and a prosecution cannot succeed. However, you need to make absolutely certain of all those facts. A good strategy might be to include a letter when you send your S172 response (which, as has been explained, you must do regardless of any issues with the late NIP) asking why the NIP was served "out of time". They may (a) explain the reason, (b) drop the matter out of "embarrassment" or (c) make you an offer of a course or Fixed Penalty. The peril you must be aware of is that if there is a valid reason for the late NIP (which you don't discover) and you take the matter to court the chance of a course or Fixed Penalty will, by then be lost. If convicted you will then be sentenced in accordance with the Sentencing Guidelines and you will face prosecution costs which will be between £250 and £620.

Are you the Registered Keeper of the vehicle (i.e. do you hold the V5C?). Are all the details on it correct? Have you recently bought the vehicle or changed address? The dates that you quote make it likely that the first NIP (the only one subject to the 14 day rule) went to somebody else who nominated you as the driver. The comparison with Mr Beckham is not quite appropriate. In his case it was indeed the first NIP that was deemed served late but it went to Bentley Motors (the Registered Keeper) not him. As an aside, it is unlikely that you have seen action taken against you for crossing the stop line as the lights changed to red. Red light cameras only operate if any part of the vehicle crosses the line after the red light comes on. Your NIP should show how long "into the red" it was when you crossed the line.

Yes you can ask for the matter to be transferred and they should readily agree provided you intend pleading guilty. Though with the usual two offences charged I imagine you'll be wanting to do a "deal" (to get the FtF dropped if you plead guilty to speeding). you can ask for an adjournment but provide some evidence of your work posting along with your request.

It is the speeding matter which will cause you the most trouble. If you have been "flashed" a Notice of Intended Prosecution (NIP) and a request for you to provide driver's details will be sent to your old address. If you fail to respond to the request you will be prosecuted for failure to do so. A conviction for that offence carries a hefty fine, six points and an endorsement code that will see your insurance costs go through the roof for the next five years. You need to either get access to the post at your old address or contact the police in the area you believe you were flashed. How long ago do you believe you were flashed?

Indeed. Just for future reference (hopefully never needed) if you are served with a S172 request (to provide driver's details) you must respond to it regardless of any issues you might have with the underlying offence. Even if you had visited the site and discovered the speeding charge was erroneous you would still have committed a S172 offence if you failed to respond. The two matters are entirely separate and a false or mistaken allegation to (say) speeding does not mean you need not provide the information as requested.

Arrive early for your hearing and ask to see the prosecutor for your case. Tell him or her that you will offer to plead guilty to speeding if the FtF charge is dropped. It is a process undertaken routinely in courts across the country. In the very unlikely event that your offer is declined plead Not Guilty to both charges. The matter will be listed for trial and you can then decide your way forward. Do not under any circumstances plead guilty to speeding without the deal in place as you may end up with nine points. What were the circumstances that led to you not providing the driver's details? Depending on them you may be justified in asking the court to sentence you at the Fixed Penalty level (£100 and three points with no surcharge or costs). There is guidance enabling them to do so where the failure was not entirely attributable to you. The speed would have qualified for a course but the court cannot deal with the offence in that way. I'll provide the text of the guidance for you if you wish to use it so that you can mention it in court.

No. Maybe because I've been driving for many years and know the difference between a tax and a fine or fixed penalty (or even a fee for a course if that is what the OP is offered and he accepts). But let's not allow the thread to degenerate into an unnecessary argument as it won't help the OP one little bit.

The difficulty you face with that line of reasoning is that the presence of a system of street lighting (spaced at no more than 200 yards) bestows a default 30mph limit. Only if that default is to be modified are small "repeaters" necessary. In fact it is not permissible to install 30mph repeaters where there are streetlights and the default applies. Street lighting is an important part of speed limit provision. Case law has determined that the lights themselves provide notice of the limit (making the stretch a "restricted" road) and it is no defence if, say, one gap is 201 yards or if one or all of the lights are inoperable. Courts have also ruled that it does not matter if the terminal signs (which you contend are inadequate) are obscured by, say vegetation thus making your contention unlikely to cut the mustard. A simple rule for street lighting is that it denotes a 30mph limit unless you see repeaters to the contrary (you will not see repeaters showing 30). Where there is no street lighting the default is the National Speed Limit unless you see repeaters to the contrary. +1 (though I do not accept that the penalty is an "unofficial tax!).

They are not trying to deal with it under UK law. They are processing the matter under French law. Like just about every other European country (bar the UK) Speeding offences in France become the liability of the vehicle's keeper. If you had no intention of visiting France again you could ignore the demand and be fairly sure it would not be pursued in the UK. However, in your position I would pay up because this is almost bound to catch up with you on one of your future visits.

Yes it seems as if the National Speed Limit and end of roadworks signs are for the road to the left which is presumably a slip road off the dual carriageway. It is sited inside the Armco protecting that road. Was there similar signage on the left of that road (so making a matching pair either side of it?) Though it is not mandatory signs indicating changes to speed limits are usually provided in such pairs. Pairs of signs are particularly useful where parallel roads exist and the change only applies to one of them. If there was not a pair serving that slip road it may amount to a defence but I believe you would struggle and the cost of failure (vs the cost of the course) is high. You don't "appeal" this allegation (as you have not been convicted). You will have to decline the course and the fixed penalty option. You will then receive a Single Justice Procedure Notice (probably about six months after the event). You would respond to this by pleading Not Guilty and a full court hearing will be arranged. By then the cheaper options will have long sailed into the sunset and even if you change your mind and plead guilty you face a fine of half a week's net income (reduced by a third if you plead guilty), a surcharge of 10% of the fine (Minimum £30), £85 costs and three points. If you defend the matter and fail you obviously receive no reduction for a guilty plea and the costs rise to a minimum of £300 and possibly as high as £620 (depending how much work is required for the trial). You can see immediately that it makes the course or fixed penalty quite attractive..

Firstly, there is no requirement to display camera warning signs. If you want to challenge the legality of the signs be prepared for an expensive day out in court. Many of the road signage regulations have been downgraded from mandatory to advisory (note the use of "should" rather than "must" in the notes you have provided). The Magistrates will be concerned with whether the signage sufficiently conveys the change of limit in time for the driver to adjust his speed. Slowing from 40mph to 30mph does not require a long distance and you may struggle to convince a Bench that the signs (as displayed in the photograph) were insufficient. If you were to defend the matter on the basis you suggest I believe you would fail. The cost of failure will be high. You will face an income related fine of half a week's net income (half a week's net income with obviously no discount for a guilty plea) but most crippling would be prosecution costs. These will be at least £300 and possibly as high as £620. And of course you will receive three penalty points. If it was me? I'd take the course. But you makes your choice a pays your money (or very hopefully, not!)