Notice of endorsement of driving record

[Man in the middle]

Can you give us a timeline of these events because much of what you say is confusing. For example:

 

Quote

I received a speeding fine in august...

 

Nobody "receives a speeding fine". The first approach from the police is normally to the Registered Keeper asking them to provide the driver's details at the time of the alleged offence.

 

Quote

sent the paperwork back identifying myself as the driver at that time as the car is registered to my partner .

 

If your partner is the Registered Keeper, he or she would have received the request for driver’s details, not you.

 

Quote

I have now received a single justice procedure saying I must plead guilty or not guilty and I must respond by 29/12/2022 which I did do I responded straight away.

 

When did you receive this? How and when did you respond?

 

There are possibly ways to have this situation reverted to the original speeding offence, but without knowing who received what and when, and how it was responded to and when, it is impossible to give proper advice.

[Man in the middle]

Yes that's better. Two last questions:

 

When did you receive the SJP Noticed which you say was dated 8/12/22?

 

And did it mention just the one charge or was speeding included as well? It's important to know this before advising you how to proceed.

[Man in the middle]

Quote

So I guess they are doing me for failure to identify myself and speeding

 

Not speeding. They have no evidence that you were driving.

 

I think it’s clear now. Tell me If any of this is wrong:

• The vehicle was detected speeding on 29/8/22.
• Your partner (the Registered Keeper) received a “Request for Driver’s Details” in September.
• He responded to that request, naming you as the driver.
• You received a similar request.
• You responded confirming you were the driver.
• On 15/12/22 you received a “Single Justice Procedure Notice”, dated 8/12/22.
• The notice mentioned one charge only – “Failing to Provide Driver’s Details.”
• You responded to this and have now received notice of the sentence (Fine/costs/points).

 

Did you respond to that SJPN of 8/12/22 by pleading guilty to the one and only charge that it mentioned (i.e. “Failing to Provide Driver’s Details”)?

 

If the answer to that question is "Yes", you have a serious problem from which it may not be possible to recover (though there is a slim hope which I'll explain when you confirm the answer).

[Man in the middle]

Quote

Probably a bit late if they simply pleaded guilty to the failure to identify without being aware of the consequences.

 

Indeed, Manxman. That's what I'm getting to. Perhaps akania can tell us exactly what was done in response to the SJPN and we can go from there. At this stage, provided I have grasped the facts correctly,  it's not looking good.

Edited January 12, 2023 by Man in the middle

[Man in the middle]

Quote

If I remember correctly I was only 6mph over the limit .

 

You still misunderstand. From the information you have provided here, you have not been convicted of speeding, you have been convicted of "Failing to Provide Driver's Details." Whatever speed you were doing is irrelevant.

 

It is difficult to provide proper advice because I am still not 100% sure of the chain of events. Did you keep a copy of your response to the SJPN? When you sent it, did you include a statement of means (i.e. your income and outgoings)?

[Man in the middle]

Quote

 Would it be easier if I took a screen shot of the letters and attached them ?

 

Yes, definitely. 

 

If you didn't respond to the SJPN then you will have been convicted in your absence (of failing to provide driver's details). But attach the letters and I'll see what I can make of them.

[Man in the middle]

I think that's a fairly good stab at it, Manxman.

[Man in the middle]

What did you do in response to the "Single Justice Procedure Notice" (that is the letter dated 8th December))?

[Man in the middle]

Yes, it does mean you have a criminal record.

 

I'm sorry to be the bearer of bad news but you don't seem to have much in the way of options here. What has happened roughly aligns with my thoughts in post #8, except that you did not respond to the SJPN. You knew of the proceedings against you but did not respond. The court was entitled to proceed without your response and they have. In the absence of any input from you it was certain that a guilty verdict would result.

 

The only option you have is to ask the court to reopen your case (under Section 142 of the Magistrates’ Court Act) though quite what reason you would give for making that request would be difficult to understand (certainly for the court, who would have to agree to your request).

 

Had you responded to the SJPN, you may have been able to successfully defend the charge (since you say you did respond to the request for driver's details). It would have been tough. Slightly easier would have been to have persuaded the prosecutor to raise a speeding charge against you instead (again, a tough task but not impossible as it was still within the six month time limit). But now you have been convicted those ships have sailed and I cannot see the court agreeing to reopen your case for either of those reasons.

 

You could ask them to reopen your case to reconsider your sentence. The fine was based on a default weekly income of £440pw and if your income is significantly less than that the request would be worthwhile. But once again, I can see the court turning down your request.

 

If all this fails you could appeal to the Crown Court against either your conviction or sentence (or both). You do not need permission to do this but must do so within 21 days of conviction, so you only have until next Friday to lodge your appeal. In my view you have close to zero chance of success and the Crown Court costs in the event of a failed appeal are more than £1,000 

 

In short, the court has acted properly and had no real choice but to proceed when you did not respond to the SJPN. In these circumstances it is hard to gain a second chance.

 

Others may have some realistic suggestions but I haven't, I'm afraid.

[Man in the middle]

Quote

I will have to appeal the decision or at least try I guess I have nothing to lose now.

But, as I've explained, you don't have a route of appeal that has a realistic chance of success. I cannot see the Magistrates' Court agreeing to reopen your case - there's no justification for them to do so. The only other option is an appeal to the Crown Court, but what would be the basis of your appeal? You have been properly convicted and sentenced in accordance with the sentencing guidelines, based on the information the court had when your case was heard.

 

It is not the court's fault that you did not respond to the SJPN. On your own admission, you simply forgot and I cannot see them agreeing to visit your case again. Even if they did, what evidence, other than your own testimony,  do you have that you responded to the request for driver's details?

 

Failure in the Crown Court (almost a certainty for the same reasons) will cost you in excess of £1,000 and the original sentence including the fine and costs will remain to be paid. 

 

 

Quote

Can’t believe k have a criminal record . Is that forever now ? 

 

The conviction means the points will remain on your driving record for three years. This is important because if you receive six more in that time you will face a mandatory six month disqualification. The endorsement remains visible on your driving record for four years and the conviction becomes "spent" (meaning you do not have to declare it except if applying for certain positions) after five years. That said, it is not a conviction which should cause too many problems for most people. What you should be prepared for is a considerable increase in your insurance premiums. The endorsement code (MS90) is one which insurers really dislike and do not be surprised if your premiums double for a year or two.

 

You can try an application to the Magistrates' Court to reopen your case, but in the very unlikely event that they agree, I don't really see the point. They are unlikely to set aside the conviction. As above, an appeal to the Crown Court must be lodged by next Friday and you will find yourself in exactly the same situation. Basically, you have no grounds for appeal that I can see.

 

Wait to see if anybody else on here comes in with any suggestions.

[Man in the middle]

Quote

 

…isn't the standard procedure to dual charge the driver with both speeding and failure to identify, thus giving the person charged an opportunity (if they were the speeding driver) to plea bargain their way out of the failure to identify charge?  

 That doesn't seem to have happened here.  Is that unusual?

 

 

It’s not usual but not uncommon. With the dates being a bit “cloudy” it may well be that the speeding offence had already timed out, though probably not. However, Akania had the opportunity to go down that road (if the speeding had timed out, it is not unheard of for prosecutors to raise an “out of time” speeding charge) but the time to do so was at the SJ stage.

Quote

why don’t they send these extremely important letters recorded delivery ?

 

I know you are only ranting, but it would not have made any difference would it? You received the SJPN on 15th December and you had two weeks to respond; it’s just that you didn’t act on it. 

Quote

They have absolutely no proof when or if I received this mail and placing your faith in Royal Mail is laughable especially over Xmas coupled with a postal strike .

 

They don’t need proof that you received it, only that they posted it. The law (Interpretation Act 1978, Section 7) says that a notice sent in the post is deemed “served” two working days after posting. If the recipient wants to argue that it was not received, it is up to him to prove it.

Quote

I will contact the court in the morning and see what they say about the postal strike ,…

 

But the strike isn’t an issue, is it? Although it took seven days to reach you, you received the SJPN in plenty of time to respond to it. I’m not criticising you here; what’s done is done and I’m not in the criticism business. I’m just trying to explain how a court will view this. I’ve been wracking my brains to identify a way out of this and regrettably  I can’t.

 

I really do not recommend the Crown Court route. You don’t have much of a case and the cost of failure is high. I can only suggest you approach the Magistrates’ Court with a request to reopen your case on the basis that you were not mentally in the right place to deal with the SJPN in time. This will cost you nothing. I can tell you that you will have a struggle with this, not because of the merits of your case but because the administrative staff who you contact usually don’t know the correct procedure.

 

Your request can only be dealt with by being put before Magistrates. It is a judicial decision, not an administrative one that can be made by court staff. You will have to insist it is put before the court and you should be prepared to contact the Clerk to the Justices if necessary. As I said, I still don’t think you have the makings of a defence to the charge. But you may persuade the court to allow you to enter a guilty plea and be fined according to your means. This will considerably reduce the damage, but the conviction and six points will remain. 

Quote

Will I have any issues as I’m now a granny with a criminal record ?

No. Although the offence results in a criminal conviction, it is not a “recordable offence” and you should encounter no difficulties.
 

[Man in the middle]

Make sure you get any agreement to put the fines etc. on hold in writing (or e-mail). You don't want bailiffs knocking at your door.

 

When you make your request to reopen you need to provide a reason and, as earlier, I recommend you major on the "not in a fit state to respond" angle. If you say you simply forgot, it will not fly. But your request (however it is put) should not be rejected by administrators; it should be put to the court. So be prepared for a struggle to get that done.

[Man in the middle]

Quote

They agreed to accept to reopen the case based on the postal strike so that’s my only glimmer of hope at the min 

 

Alania, you really must get a grip of this. From your description, the postal strike had no bearing on this at all. All you can say is that the SJPN took a week to reach you when it should have taken perhaps a couple of days. It meant you had a little less time to respond, but it doesn't explain why you didn't respond at all. That's why I said you should emphasise your poor state of mind at that time.

 

But more than that, it is most unlikely that the court has already agreed to your request. As I said, it cannot be agreed by administrative staff; it must go before Magistrates. You only sent your e-mail late this afternoon and whilst I'm not saying it's impossible to have gone before a court so soon, it's most unlikely. You need to check what stage it's at. Just for your information, the law under which you are making this request says this:

 

"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 can see it is a court that has this power. It does not extend to court staff, however senior. I would imagine that at this stage, at best, somebody has agreed to put your request before a court (which, in itself, is a good result if it is true). I don't want you to get your hopes up prematurely.

[Man in the middle]

One other thing that I should have mentioned last night is that when your request to reopen is listed to be heard you will be asked to attend. The Magistrates will almost certainly want to question you regarding your request. If they agree to reopen and they set aside either your conviction the prosecution will be asked how they wish to proceed. That is why I'm quite certain your request to reopen has not yet been put before the court.

[Man in the middle]

Yes that's more like it.

 

You will almost certainly be asked to attend court when they look at your request and it's important you attend (otherwise your request is unlikely to be considered). Let us know if you do.