Speeding ticket discussion thread

[peak4 262]

I would write a polite letter to the Police and ask them to drop the case because you can't honestly plead guilty or not guilty to the alleged offence after all this time. Drivers are prosecuted for going 5mph over the 30 mile a hour speed limit.

 

What an appalling piece of advice.

 

The Police don't know who was driving, so can't pursue anyone for that offence, hence they will look to prosecute the registered keeper for a S172 offence, if they fail to unequivocally name the driver.

That carries 6 points, a hefty fine and a nasty conviction code. Guessing the most likely driver is OK, deliberately naming the wrong one is likely to be PCOJ

 

There is decent advice on this thread/forum, along with lots of poor advice; since you're registered with Pepipoo, I'd use that for advising you on your next action.

I believe you have 28 days from service of the S172 to name the driver; you can't be far off that now, or even past it, so start thinking about your next action with some urgency.

Edited March 28, 2018 by peak4

[Guest]

Yep, I think you're right it says on mine - 12/07/2017

Sorry to keep on asking for more advice as I think you all were very helpful as far as now, but with that date registering me as a new keeper on the DVLA, could I try to use this as my defense? Or will that not help at all?

 

How can it be registered to you on that date when you didn't buy it for another 3 months after?

[Fogey 10]

Jesus, I just love how everybody in here acting like you've never done anything wrong.

Oh my I've done 37 on a 30. Stone me and burn me for this outrageous sin that I have made. "Don't go over the limit in a 30 zone" - wow, thanks Sherlock, I would never thought about this if it wasn't for you.

 

Yes, I was asking for an advice if I can dispute it, sorry I didn't make it more clear.

Why do you guys feel the need to act like the Holy Praise who will share his very "wise" advise that brings completely nothing in to what I was asking about?

 

Because people speeding is a contributing factor to accidents with higher speeds generally making such accidents more dangerous. Peer pressure is often a way to force behavioural change by making it clear that it is unacceptable behaviour and hopefully you will feel OK in future about sticking to the limit.

 

It seems to have been generally accepted amongst the posters on here that speedometers over read by about 10%. If that is true your speedometer was likely telling you that you were travelling at around 41mph in a 30mph speed limit. Why did you do this? were you aware of what you were doing?

 

The likely scenarios seem to be, -

1, - you were deliberately speeding.- you are a dangerous idiot who shouldn't be allowed on the road. You should pay the fine.

2, - you didn't know the limit because you hadn't been paying attention, - you needed a reminder to be more observant. You should pay the fine.

3, - you didn't know the speed limit because it isn't properly posted, - you should feel encouraged to raise the matter with the authorities and should then be rightly applauded as a good person who has gone out of their way to improve the safety of others, all fines should be dropped and you should be officially thanked.

 

And having read through the rest of the thread, -

4, - you weren't driving, - but you were responsible for the vehicle and failed to keep a record to protect yourself, - unfortunate, but, you have learned a valuable lesson, -pay the fine and keep proper records in future, be grateful the car wasn't involved in something like a hit and run that killed someone. It seems harsh but it would not have been unreasonable to expect that a speeding ticket could be issued. you yourself have stated your belief that most motorists speed.

Edited March 29, 2018 by Fogey

[Cyclone 10]

Give over Fogey. Deliberately speeding doesn't equal dangerous idiot.

You can quite clearly see that a large majority of drivers on the motorway choose to deliberately speed, but they don't all appear to be dangerous idiots.

 

Edit - To the OP, if you can't honestly remember who was driving, do you yourself have a cast iron alibi to show that you weren't driving? If you were somewhere else, with proof, then perhaps it might be worth taking it to court.

Otherwise, put your own name down, you'll probably be offered a speed awareness course, take that.

Edited March 29, 2018 by Cyclone

[Lockdoctor 10]

What an appalling piece of advice.

 

The Police don't know who was driving, so can't pursue anyone for that offence, hence they will look to prosecute the registered keeper for a S172 offence, if they fail to unequivocally name the driver.

That carries 6 points, a hefty fine and a nasty conviction code. Guessing the most likely driver is OK, deliberately naming the wrong one is likely to be PCOJ

 

There is decent advice on this thread/forum, along with lots of poor advice; since you're registered with Pepipoo, I'd use that for advising you on your next action.

I believe you have 28 days from service of the S172 to name the driver; you can't be far off that now, or even past it, so start thinking about your next action with some urgency.

Being honest is my appalling piece of advice then? There seem to be contradictions in the original posters comments. He has said he was only doing 37 mph in one post and yet in another post says he doesn't know who was driving. The length of time since the alleged offence mean he will not be eligible for a speed awareness course assuming he would have met the criteria to be offered that option. My guess is the original poster has already got points on his licence, which most likely is the reason he is looking for a way to avoid further points.

[Obelix 11]

It can take some period for the DVLA to update the records.

 

When was this done - was the date on the new V5 in your name after the date of the offence?

 

Assuming it was, then the original NIP will have gone within 14 days to the old keeper. They then send to you. Unless you can prove that original NIP wasnt sent within time then you are getting nowhere with an out of time defence.

 

You MUST fill out the S172 form and send it back. If not you will get about £600 fine and six points. Even if the NIP was processed incorrectly etc you still are required to do that.

 

37 in a 30 limit is within the guidelines for a speed awareness course - assuming you have no previous speeding points within the last 3 years you will be offered that and it's the easiest way out of this.

 

---------- Post added 29-03-2018 at 09:39 ----------

 

Being honest is my appalling piece of advice then? There seem to be contradictions in the original posters comments. He has said he was only doing 37 mph in one post and yet in another post says he doesn't know who was driving. The length of time since the alleged offence mean he will not be eligible for a speed awareness course assuming he would have met the criteria to be offered that option. My guess is the original poster has already got points on his licence, which most likely is the reason he is looking for a way to avoid further points.

 

The police havnt had a s172 back yet, so the option for a course should still be open. The guidelines state that a defendant who is unwittingly unknowing that there is an allegation shall not be disadvantaged, and a speeding ticket crossing over with a correctly submitted change of details isn't going to raise any problems on that - there should be an offer of a course after he sends the 172 back.

[Lockdoctor 10]

 

The police havnt had a s172 back yet, so the option for a course should still be open. The guidelines state that a defendant who is unwittingly unknowing that there is an allegation shall not be disadvantaged, and a speeding ticket crossing over with a correctly submitted change of details isn't going to raise any problems on that - there should be an offer of a course after he sends the 172 back.

My understanding is that there is a time limit from the date the alleged offence occurred for a driver to attend a speed awareness course. if that option is available. I might be wrong and the procedure might be different in different Police force areas.

[peak4 262]

37 in a 30 limit is within the guidelines for a speed awareness course - assuming you have no previous speeding points within the last 3 years you will be offered that and it's the easiest way out of this.

 

---------- Post added 29-03-2018 at 09:39 ----------

 

 

The police havnt had a s172 back yet, so the option for a course should still be open. The guidelines state that a defendant who is unwittingly unknowing that there is an allegation shall not be disadvantaged, and a speeding ticket crossing over with a correctly submitted change of details isn't going to raise any problems on that - there should be an offer of a course after he sends the 172 back.

 

Obelix, As you quite rightly point out, the police apparently haven't received a S172 reply yet; i.e. they don't know who was driving, so currently any speeding charge is dead in the water.

 

Have a look at the timescales; 4 months to receive the NIP/S172, and now just over 28 days later, and still no S172 reply sent. The S172 offence looks to be complete, though the Police may accept a late driver nomination.

 

Unfortunately, I understand that a course offer is normally only made up to 4 months from the date of the alleged offence, in order that a course be booked and completed, whilst still leaving time for the speeding charge to be resurrected and progressed within the 6 month time limit.

 

There may be a defence against the S172, if the keeper can prove due diligence to the Magistrates Court, that they couldn't identify the driver. ( the time delay helps, but has the OP checked phone bills, bank statements, cellphone tracking, diary appointments etc. and asked all possible drivers to do the same)

 

For Lockdoctor, have a read through sites like Pepipoo to see how many motorists have been convicted of a S172 offence, by genuinely trying to be honest in claiming that they couldn't identify the driver with 100% certainty.

Hence writing to the Police asking them to drop it, is likey to just end up with a conviction of 6 points, large fine etc, when originally a course might have been offered.

Provided that the most likely driver is named unequivocally, the requirements of the notice should be satisfied; that's different to knowingly naming the wrong driver, and thus being guilty of PCOJ.

 

OP. since the stakes are now pretty high from your point of view, I really would suggest chasing up the Pepipoo thread, where you will receive advice from those who are genuinely experienced in these matters, and sometimes legally qualified.

Not saying there isn't good advice on here, but there is also both poor and judgemental advice as well.

Since you are in a position where you feel you need to seek advice on legal matters, you may not be best placed to discriminate between good and bad advice.

[Obelix 11]

Obelix, As you quite rightly point out, the police apparently haven't received a S172 reply yet; i.e. they don't know who was driving, so currently any speeding charge is dead in the water.

 

Have a look at the timescales; 4 months to receive the NIP/S172, and now just over 28 days later, and still no S172 reply sent. The S172 offence looks to be complete, though the Police may accept a late driver nomination.

 

Unfortunately, I understand that a course offer is normally only made up to 4 months from the date of the alleged offence, in order that a course be booked and completed, whilst still leaving time for the speeding charge to be resurrected and progressed within the 6 month time limit.

 

There may be a defence against the S172, if the keeper can prove due diligence to the Magistrates Court, that they couldn't identify the driver. ( the time delay helps, but has the OP checked phone bills, bank statements, cellphone tracking, diary appointments etc. and asked all possible drivers to do the same)

 

For Lockdoctor, have a read through sites like Pepipoo to see how many motorists have been convicted of a S172 offence, by genuinely trying to be honest in claiming that they couldn't identify the driver with 100% certainty.

Hence writing to the Police asking them to drop it, is likey to just end up with a conviction of 6 points, large fine etc, when originally a course might have been offered.

Provided that the most likely driver is named unequivocally, the requirements of the notice should be satisfied; that's different to knowingly naming the wrong driver, and thus being guilty of PCOJ.

 

OP. since the stakes are now pretty high from your point of view, I really would suggest chasing up the Pepipoo thread, where you will receive advice from those who are genuinely experienced in these matters, and sometimes legally qualified.

Not saying there isn't good advice on here, but there is also both poor and judgemental advice as well.

Since you are in a position where you feel you need to seek advice on legal matters, you may not be best placed to discriminate between good and bad advice.

 

it's 28 days to return a s172, so assuming it's on the 28th feb then yes it's just over time, although if it's dated 28th feb then allowing for service you can nominate today if you dropped it in the post with a proof of postage (I think I'd have to check).

 

The four months is problematic but the guidelines state that he shouldnt be disadvantaged, and since there is a good reason for him receiveing the late NIP they should agree. however I suspect that it'll be going to court as he wont move fast enough on the 172 and he will get a dual summons for that and the underlying speed offence hopefully will also rest on file... in whcih case he will need to do a deal with the CPS at court.

[peak4 262]

it's 28 days to return a s172, so assuming it's on the 28th feb then yes it's just over time, although if it's dated 28th feb then allowing for service you can nominate today if you dropped it in the post with a proof of postage (I think I'd have to check).

 

The four months is problematic but the guidelines state that he shouldnt be disadvantaged, and since there is a good reason for him receiveing the late NIP they should agree. however I suspect that it'll be going to court as he wont move fast enough on the 172 and he will get a dual summons for that and the underlying speed offence hopefully will also rest on file... in whcih case he will need to do a deal with the CPS at court.

 

I'd kind of go along with that, but my understanding of "not being disadvantaged" relates when it gets to court.

i.e. he should be able to ask for the sentence to be at the fixed penalty equivalent, rather than the court starting point (4 points and a larger fine???)

 

By the time it does get to court, the chance of a course will be long gone, as it's a means of avoiding prosecution, hence needing to complete the course within the 6 month timeframe, leaving enough slack at the end to permit prosecution of the OP fails to attend.

[Obelix 11]

I'm trying to remember when the SJPN comes in on this... and how you can make representations then which you should be able to do and ask.

 

I've certainly seen cases where a sympathic bench has agreed it wasnt the defendants fault it was late and ordered a course to be made available outside the six months. But that needs a reasonable ear to listen...

[peak4 262]

I'm trying to remember when the SJPN comes in on this... and how you can make representations then which you should be able to do and ask.

 

I've certainly seen cases where a sympathic bench has agreed it wasnt the defendants fault it was late and ordered a course to be made available outside the six months. But that needs a reasonable ear to listen...

 

SJPN, as far as I'm aware, equates to legal person in office accepting early guilty pleas. (and thus a discount on costs)

 

In order to argue your case for a not guilty plea, or do any sort of a deal, a formal court appearance is necessary.

 

I'll stand to be corrected, ( as I'm no lawyer, armchair or otherwise ), but I didn't think a court could order/offer a speed awareness course, as the course is offered as an alternative to prosecution for those who accept their guilt, much like a fixed penalty notice.

I'd be interested to see an example, as I'm sure would the folks over at Pepipoo

 

A reduction of sentence for a alcohol related driving offence, on completion of a related course of treatment, is a different matter.