Free Traffic Legal Advice
Live cases legal advice => Speeding and other criminal offences => Topic started by: estevenin on February 26, 2026, 12:39:40 am
-
Latest new from the gatekeepers. I received that mail from the HMCTS SJS, this was 10 days ago I didn't see it, but they were basically sending me a form to fill up, apparently this is the correct procedure :
Understanding your options:
https://review-magistrates-court-decision.form.service.justice.gov.uk/
(1) You can tell the court someone has falsely given your details in connection to the offence.
(2) You can make a Legal Statement in court that you didn't know about the case.
(3) You can ask the court to Reopen your case because you didn't get the opportunity to make your case in court originally (you'll need to attend a court hearing).
(4) You can ask the Court to review your fine, because of a low income, benefits or change of financial circumstances. (you may need to attend a court hearing). This will not change the original outcome of your case including any penalty points.
What to do next:
(1) To complete the form click here - Review a magistrates' court decision form
(2) The attached document, Single Justice Procedure Notice (SJPN), has information to help you answer the questions on the webform. DO NOT post or email the SJPN this is for your records only.
(3) At the end of the webform, press submit.
(4) Once you submit the form, this is then provided to the relevant court. They will process this in line with their own processing times and can take up to 6 months for you to hear from them. Please do not chase this before the 6 months is up.
An email will be sent to Enforcement and Bailiffs (if involved) to advise them you have made an application for the court to review your case, any further action is at their discretion.
In the meantime, I also just received another answer from South London Magistrates Court, forwarding their conversation :
Good afternoon
Because you pleaded guilty to the matter, your option is to Appeal against the sentence.
Appeals are heard at the Crown Court, and you need to attend. You should seek independent legal advice before Appealing as should you lose your Appeal, you could incur further costs.
I have attached an Appeal form that must be receive at this email address by 24.04.26 to process within the time limits.
-----------------
From: DIB-London <DIB-London@justice.gov.uk>
Sent: 09 April 2026 16:26
Good afternoon,
That is correct. He can appeal the sentence.
Kind regards
========
From: LondonStatDec-Reopen
Sent: 09 April 2026 11:01
Good morning Legal
This gentleman seeks a reopening, but when you look at his case he pleaded guilty online and his sentence reflects that the online plea was taken into account.
He mentions not receiving a Conditional offer from the police, but this would have been seen by the Legal/Magistrate when sentencing, so is his only option to Appeal now, rather than reopen?
Many thanks
Regards
I'm assuming this is the resistance you were mentionning. I'm ready to send them this answer :
Dear South London MC Administration,
Thank you for your email and for providing the Appeal forms.
I note from the internal correspondence provided that the Legal Adviser suggested an Appeal is the required route because the "online plea was taken into account." Respectfully, this misses the core of my application. While I am aware of the right to appeal to the Crown Court, I wish to first exercise my right to apply for a variation of sentence under Section 142 of the Magistrates' Courts Act 1980.
This application is based on a specific sentencing oversight regarding the "Fixed Penalty Equivalent" guidance in the Sentencing Council’s Explanatory Material. This guidance states that where a Fixed Penalty was unavailable due to administrative reasons, the offender should not be disadvantaged.
As this is a request to rectify a sentencing oversight rather than a challenge to the conviction itself, the Magistrates' Court retains the jurisdiction to hear this in the interests of justice, without the need for a full Crown Court appeal. To clarify, my application is not regarding the 33% guilty plea discount (which was correctly applied), but rather the Court's failure to apply the Fixed Penalty Equivalent as per the guidelines.
Furthermore, the sentencing remarks have taken into account the guilty plea, but provide no indication that my declaration of income was considered. Based on my net annual income of £15,391 (£296 per week), the total penalty of £269 appears disproportionate and significantly exceeds the threshold suggested by the judicial guidelines for this offence.
A guilty plea does not preclude the Court from exercising its power to vary a sentence under Section 142. This section exists specifically to allow a Magistrate to correct such an oversight, avoiding the need to force a defendant into a costly and time-consuming Crown Court Appeal process for an error that can be rectified at the Magistrates' level.
Please could you confirm that this written application will be placed before a Senior Legal Advisor or a Magistrate for a formal decision on whether the Court will exercise its Section 142 powers?
Thank you for your assistance.
Yours faithfully
Hopefully it's cordial enough. But given that they'v sent that online form, is that the way to go or this is another rabbit hole ? Or should I do both ?
Thanks a lot, I'll be following up on that.
-
Thank you for the guidance. I have modified paragraph 5, removed the last one, and toned down the whole draft to sound more like a request.
Noted that the court has to be the one dealing with that, I will insist if they refuse to pass it through.
That's all sent, I will phone up the enforcement team tomorrow, to see if they can pause the collection in the meantime.
I'll keep this post updated.
Thanks again.
-
Paragraph 5 is misleading. The fine was not £269 – that is the total with surcharge and costs included. An income of £15,391 is £296pw. Half of that is £148 and a third off that for your guilty plea is £99. So with £40 surcharge and £130 costs, it is absolutely spot on for sentencing at the normal level.
You should note that the guidance only suggests that the court should consider sentencing at the FP level, not that it must. It is entirely a judicial decision whether or not to do so. I have to say that I see no reason why they should not, but courts do not like being dictated to. I would alter the tone slightly.
I would also leave out the final paragraph. Magistrates are perfectly aware of the guidelines and of the mechanism used to arrive at a sentence at the FP equivalent.
The process for this is that your request will first be screened by an administrator. Be prepared to meet some resistance to your request. I notice that, helpfully, you have not used the word “appeal”. This is the usual reason for declining o put a request before the court and usually results in a form to appeal in the Crown Court being supplied. Only the court can decide whether or not to re-open your case. It is a judicial decision to be taken by Magistrates, not an administrative one to be taken by a clerk. You must persevere if you meet that resistance.
There will be a hearing firstly to decide whether or not to re-open your case and, if that goes in your favour, another to consider whether or not to set aside the sentence and impose a different one. he court will combine these two hearings, and you will be asked to attend.
You should note that they are separate decisions. If the court decides against reopening your case, that is the end of the matter. If they do decide to reopen, this does not necessarily mean they will reverse the first court’s decision.
-
I suggest you be more aware of speed limits in future. Make sure you inform them of your current status, if they find out via other methods they can revoke your PH licence. Double jeopardy I'm sorry to say.
I already do just that. On a long enough timeline, with a full time driving jobs and speed limits changing overnight little by little, it is simply unavoidable and that is by design (as well as regular PCN's too). Bath road seems to have recently dropped from 40 to 30MPH in some sections. I proactively informed TFL and got their feedback so hopefully that should be sorted.
Thank you all for your feedback, I will go the S142 route. Wrote a new draft and will send it tomorrow, this is Lavender Hill so at SJS@justice.gov.uk (I think that's the correct one, I'll probably CC it to the enquiries one too.
It is also possible that the court simply didn't read the full plea, and automatically applied the standard procedure for a guilty plea. I'm assuming they must have hundreds of cases to deal with everyday, so they perhaps overlooked my mitigation statement.
I haven't mentionned once again the email from Laura Drury, not sure if I should still set it aside or not, in doubt, I didn't include it :
Dear Clerk to the Justices,
I am writing to formally apply for my case (Ref: ) to be re-opened under Section 142 of the Magistrates’ Courts Act 1980, in the interests of justice.
1. On 3rd March 2026, I was sentenced to a total financial penalty of £269 for a speeding offence: exceeding a 30 mph speed limit (recorded at 35 mph). I believe the Court has erred by failing to apply the Sentencing Council’s guidance regarding 'Fixed Penalty Equivalents.'
In my original mitigation, it was submitted that:
2. I was eligible to receive a Conditional Offer of Fixed Penalty, as my recorded speed was well within the acceptable threshold for such an offer.
3. I never received any Conditional Offer of Fixed Penalty. While the Metropolitan Police witness statement claims one was issued, I state categorically that it was never served at my address.
4. The Sentencing Council guidance states: “Where a penalty notice was not offered... for reasons unconnected with the offence... the court should consider imposing a penalty equivalent to the fixed penalty.”
5. The current sentence of £269 puts me at a significant disadvantage compared to the £100 Fixed Penalty I would have accepted had I received the offer. Furthermore, based on my previous year’s net income of £15,391, this fine represents approximately 1.75% of my total annual income, which is disproportionately high for this level of offence.
6. I respectfully ask that the Court re-opens the case to adjust the fine, costs, and victim surcharge to match the Fixed Penalty Equivalent (a total of £100), as per the judicial guidelines.
I am not seeking to overturn the conviction (the 3 points), but rather to rectify an error in sentencing. According to the Sentencing Council’s 'Explanatory Material,' the Court should ensure an offender is not disadvantaged by the unavailability of a penalty notice. To achieve the Fixed Penalty Equivalent of £100, I propose the following structure: a fine of £72 and a victim surcharge of £28, with prosecution costs waived, as costs are not applicable in a standard Fixed Penalty scenario.
I also request a Stay of Execution on the current collection order while this application is considered.
I look forward to your response regarding a hearing date or a decision by a Single Justice to rectify this sentence.
Yours faithfully,
-
I suggest you be more aware of speed limits in future
Cough
I couldn't get an SAC as the last one was 2 years and 50 weeks ago! I seem to get nicked every 3 years, always late at night with nothing else around.
-
I suspect the courts take a more serious view of professional drivers breaking the law. I know driving these days is a nightmare with the plethora of signs and poor traffic management systems designed to reduce casualties, most of which do anything but that.
I suggest you be more aware of speed limits in future or you'll be of the rod for 6 months and your PH licencing office will be taking a look at revoking your licence. Make sure you inform them of your current status, if they find out via other methods they can revoke your PH licence. Double jeopardy I'm sorry to say.
-
Whilst the court can avoid ordering prosecution costs, it cannot avoid imposing the “Victim Surcharge”. The usual way to impose a sentence at the FP equivalent (so that “The offender should not be disadvantaged by the unavailability of the penalty notice…”) is to adjust the fine so that, together with the surcharge, it comes to the FP equivalent. For a £100 FP this would mean a fine of £72 and a surcharge of £28.
I’m quite sure the court in this case has simply sentenced in accordance with the normal guidelines and declined to sentence at the FP level.
-
When courts sentence at an equivalent level to a Fixed Penalty, they generally either set the fine at £100 and add the prosecution costs and the surcharge, or they bundle it all together and set a fine such that the total comes to approximately the level of the fixed penalty. It is a very long time since we heard of the second option happening - so effectively you were fined at £1 below fixed penalty level. The costs, as has been mentioned, are higher than we are used to seeing for a guilty pea, but far closer to the normal amount than they are to the amount you previously claimed were awarded.
-
Now that you have corrected the figures it seems about right for a sentence according to the normal Magistrates’ guidelines. £15k pa is getting on for £300 pw. The guideline sentence is half a week’s net income (£150) reduced by a third for your guilty plea - £100. So it was right if your declared income was around £14.850. The Surcharge is fixed at 40% of the fine and the costs, whilst a little high, are not outrageous (they vary from area to area).
The court decided to decline your request to sentence you at the FP level, which they’re entitled to do.
Your attempted remedy would be to ask the court to re-open your case under s142 of the Magistrates’ Court Act. Filling in a MC100 is not the answer as it seems your income has a been properly taken into account. Your request should be that the court should consider again whether to sentence you to the FP equivalent. This is risk free.
Do not go near the Crown Court under any circumstances. The last time I looked the cost of a failed appeal in the Crown Court was more than £1,500. That was some time ago. There is certainly no guarantee of success in either court, but the first option I outlined will cost nothing except a bit of your time.
You must bear in mind that there has been nothing sinister or outrageous in any of this. The police had no option but to prosecute you when you failed to take up the FP(whether that was heir fault or yours) and the court is entitled to sentence you in accordance with the normal guidelines if they think fit. They have guidance which suggests they might sentence you at the FP level if they believe it is just to do so and it is that aspect which you need to concentrate on.
-
Did you mention the fact that you did not receive the Fixed Penalty offer when you responded to your SJPN?
Yes I did. Exactly as discussed above and removing the extra paragraphs.
The police have no obligation to offer a fixed penalty at all. It is entirely at their discretion. They could, if they wanted to, simply proceed to prosecute every alleged offender.
That is shocking, to say the least.
That said, £240 costs is a bit steep. It’s normally around £100 (assuming you entered a guilty plea).Have you asked the court why this is?
Yes it was a guilty plea. No I didn't ask, I entered the plea online, and I just received this by post. Is there a way to ask ?
I’m not sure the costs/fine are the right way round.
Made a typo in the costs, but the total is still what I mentionned :
- 3 points
- 99GBP fine
- 130GBP costs
- 40GBP victim surcharge
Total : 269GBP
However, without knowing whether the OP pled guilty, or what income (if any) he disclosed, this is getting close to the level of pointless speculation I have been known to criticise others for.
Yes it was a guilty plea. I disclosed a net income of around 15k, which was my last year's income. However the system didn't allow for attachments, so I couldn't send any evidence of it. The whole paper only mentions the sum that I specified above, with only one single note at the bottom from the judge I assume :
"Guilty plea taken into account when imposing sentence."
(It does not say income taken into account when imposing sentence)
I would say more of a disorganised racket if anything. Obviously there is another cunning way to beat the system.
Indeed, makes me feel completely helpless as I'm not sure what could have been done differently. Sounds like the system is not made to be beaten.
I'm assuming there's no way to complain/appeal to overturn that judgement ? I read that there could be 2 options :
1. Appeal at the Crown Court. Would that be even worth it ? I assume there's a cost to it, and perhaps they could decide to put an even worst sentence / points for wasting their time ?
2. Fill in a MC100 form and send it to the court for review. I assume that this process is free and risk free ?
In any of those 2 cases, I suppose that I should not pay and instead ask for a pause of enforcement. Option 2 sounds like the best course of action.
Thank you all again for your feedback, I'm all hears if that sounds like something I should do or not.
-
Is that process even legal ? If it is, then technically the Met Police doesn't have to send any conditional offer even to motorists when they exceed the speed limits, and they could just charge 2.5x what they would charge normally ?
An organized racket scheme ?
Correct. The Met do not have to send out a COFP to anyone. It is a system to enable the fast processing of motorists that meet the criteria to be offered one and are willing to accept guilt.
They could just send all of them to SJPN, albeit quickly overwhelming the system I would suspect.
Looking at the time line in your case, I would say more of a disorganised racket if anything.
Obviously there is another cunning way to beat the system.
-
We've heard of cases where the fine has been reduced to account for the costs - e.g. £35 fine and £65 costs - but this seems to be the other way around - fine at FP level (although why £99 instead of £100) and costs increased to stop the OP getting off too lightly.
However, without knowing whether the OP pled guilty, or what income (if any) he disclosed, this is getting close to the level of pointless speculation I have been known to criticise others for.
-
I wondered that, sp. But the VS amount fits the fine.
-
I’m not sure the costs/fine are the right way round.
-
Did you mention the fact that you did not receive the Fixed Penalty offer when you responded to your SJPN?
If it is, then technically the Met Police doesn't have to send any conditional offer even to motorists when they exceed the speed limits,…
The police have no obligation to offer a fixed penalty at all. It is entirely at their discretion. They could, if they wanted to, simply proceed to prosecute every alleged offender.
….and they could just charge 2.5x what they would charge normally ?
The police do not charge you anything. They get no revenue from either fixed penalties or court fines. The court decides what the penalty will be.
That said, £240 costs is a bit steep. It’s normally around £100 (assuming you entered a guilty plea).Have you asked the court why this is?
An organized racket scheme ?
No, just the law.
-
Hi all, got the result :
- 3 points
- 99GBP fine
- 230GBP cost
- 40GBP victim surcharge
Total : 269GBP
So as I understand it, I am ordered to pay 269GBP instead of the 100GBP I should normally be paying ? Is that process even legal ? If it is, then technically the Met Police doesn't have to send any conditional offer even to motorists when they exceed the speed limits, and they could just charge 2.5x what they would charge normally ?
An organized racket scheme ?
-
Thank you all for the advice, it's been sent.
-
As a professional Private Hire (PHV) driver, I am acutely aware of the importance of maintaining a clean driving record for my livelihood.
You may be. However:
This conviction will bring my total to 9 penalty points.
The court may ask itself how acute your awareness really is.
Bin everything after the first paragraph. Amend that to explain that, although a COFP was sent, it was not received and ask the court to kindly consider sentencing you at a level equivalent to the FP.
-
Thank you for the reply
How can you know whether a COFP was sent?
If on January the MET Police just about confirm that they have received my NIP's response, it means they would not have started to deal with it before, so the probabilities that they sent anything in October (or could have been lost in administrative mayhem due to them updating their system), is high.
What you have shown us are not the evidential photos, but presumably cropped versions of the evidential photos - with the data block removed for some unspecified reason.
The pictures are not cropped, that's all I have from the SJPN on page 20. I did forget to include the data block for some reason, here's the full page : https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/nslfswzt5zrew9kxr8ooc/SJP-blank-printed_Page_20.jpg?rlkey=oxqg63r467x5oq0csvd7vn7os&dl=0
unless you can show that such a ban would cause exceptional hardship
Understood, so exceptional hardship could only be pleaded in case it would get to 12 points. I'll keep that for the next one if and when it comes. I'm assuming that even with 9 points, I could still get a speed awareness course if the last one was more than 3 years ago, so that could still give me one more if I'm still at 9 points when and if it happens.
cunningly hidden at the top of this forum.
I did find it and had a read, was useful to respond for other questions I had.
In Conclusion : The best (and only) course of action is to plead guilty, and ask for the the judge to sentence the equivalent of the conditional offer. I have written the response (no need to read it I think it's pretty straightforward), just putting this down here for the sake of any future visitor seeking help on a similar matter :
I am pleading guilty to the offence of speeding (35mph in a 30mph zone). I accept full responsibility for the error. However, I respectfully request that the Court considers sentencing me in line with the 'Fixed Penalty Equivalent' principle (specifically £100 and 3 penalty points), as per the Sentencing Council’s guidelines for cases where a Conditional Offer was not received due to administrative reasons.
I would like the Court to consider the following timeline, which demonstrates that I have acted in good faith but was denied the opportunity to resolve this without court proceedings:
1. NIP Response: I attempted to respond to the NIP online up until 10/10/2025, but the Metropolitan Police portal was non-functional (recorded by a system error message). Consequently, I responded by post on the same day, including a letter explaining the technical delay.
2. Missing Conditional Offer: The witness statement claims a Conditional Offer was sent on 23/10/2025. I state categorically that no such offer was received at my address, which is the correct address of service.
3. Contradictory Correspondence: On 14/01/2026, I received an email from the Metropolitan Police (Laura Drury) stating they were in 'receipt of my admission' (which is 3 months after it was sent), and that they were only then 'implementing a new business process' for digital documentation and asking me to opt-in or out of digital service.
4. Action Taken: I responded immediately on 15/01/2026, requesting to continue via post. The police confirmed receipt of this preference on 16/01/2026.
It is my submission that if the police were just dealing with my NIP's response and still establishing my communication preferences in mid-January 2026, it is highly likely that the Conditional Offer supposedly sent in October 2025 was never successfully served or was caught in an administrative backlog.
As a professional Private Hire (PHV) driver, I am acutely aware of the importance of maintaining a clean driving record for my livelihood. This conviction will bring my total to 9 penalty points. Given the high stakes involved for my career, I would have had every incentive to accept and pay a £100 Conditional Offer immediately to resolve the matter. I would never have ignored such an offer and allowed it to escalate to court proceedings voluntarily.
In light of the above, and given that my speed (35mph) falls well within the threshold for a Fixed Penalty, I request that the fine be limited to £100 and that no victim surcharge or court costs be awarded, or that they be kept to a minimum, to reflect the position I would have been in had the offer reached me.
Exhibit A: Screenshot of the Met Police website error.
Exhibit B: Photo of the stamp/proof of postage.
Exhibit C: The email from Laura Drury.
Will send that on tuesday the 3rd, if no issue with the website!
-
No, a Conditional offer or Fixed Penalty was not sent.
How can you know whether a COFP was sent?
Is that a ground for (a successful) appeal ? My current research shows that I could only plead guilty and ask for the Conditional Offer to be applied, following a failure of the administration to send it.
Your current research is correct.
For the sake of completeness, DPP v Holden is the authority that a defect in a COFP does not prevent court proceedings being instigated after the end of the 28 day suspended enforcement period.
2. I was traveling near that bus. We are nearly at the same level, but I'm still a bit behind. I assume that would not be a successful reason for appeal (that the camera could have caught the bus given how close we were) ?
What you have shown us are not the evidential photos, but presumably cropped versions of the evidential photos - with the data block removed for some unspecified reason. However, if having more than one vehicle in the image negated the evidence, installing the cameras in London would seem to be somewhat futile.
3. I looked up the signs on the road, unfortunately for me, there are 2 signs on the left hand sign, which I would have missed traveling near that bus, however there is another one on the right hand sign, about 30 seconds before, very small and unlit, but nevertheless, it's there. Besides, a road without any specified speed limit and with lamp posts, is meant to be 30MPH by default. So I'm assuming a judge would not take that, but I still ask... would the lack of good visible sign and considering the bus on the left blocking the view, be a good ground for appeal or is that a blunder ?
Blunder
4. I am a private hire driver. This will bring me up to 9 points. I should not loose my PHV licence (I might, but I think they are more relaxed now with all those 20MPH roads nowadays. Fingers crossed), however if it does (or even if it doesn't, one more strike and I'm out) this will put me in a very tough spot, with a risk of loosing my work.
Could I claim for the points not to be applied ? Or would that only be in case of a 4th and final fine ?
No, and your second question begs the question as to whether the obligation to endorse somehow did not apply when it would result in totting.
Upon conviction, the court is required by law to order your licence to be endorsed (either with points or a ban) unless it finds that there are special reasons not to endorse. Such reasons would have to be compelling mitigation regarding the commission of the offence (e.g.; speeding because of a genuine emergency), rather than the effect of the punishment. This applies regardless of how many points you currently have on your licence.
The difference as regards totting up is that if the points take your total to 12 or more relevant points, the court are also required by law to ban you for 6 months unless you can show that such a ban would cause exceptional hardship (to you or to others). This has no bearing on how you get to the 12 points (other than guidance to issue points rather than issuing a ban for an offence if the points would trigger totting up.
You are grasping at straws. You appear to recognise this. There is nothing inherently wrong with grasping at straws - it is generally better to ask a stupid question than to stupidly not ask a question that you should have asked - although much of this is covered in the "READ THIS FIRST" post cunningly hidden at the top of this forum.
-
Hi all,
Got some questions regarding a live speeding fine I'm dealing with. First, the timeline :
07/09/2025, the camera flashes my car at 35MPH instead of 30MPH, thinking Bath road was at 40MPH
11/09/2025, they send the NIP
10/10/2025, I'v been trying to respond to the NIP online, but their website kept on returning an error for days "Please accept our apologies that the Portal is not currently available, work is ongoing to restore this at the earliest opportunity"
11/10/2025, I then respond by post and are forced to pay for a stamp (bouh), and explain also why I'm 1 day late to send the NIP's response
14/01/2026, After not hearing anything for months, I receive an email from the MET Police :
Dear Driver / Rider
We are in receipt of your admission and you have provided us with your email address.
The MET is implementing a new business process where communications and documentation are sent digitally rather than via Royal Mail.
If you wish to opt out of digital service please respond to this email within 48 hours.
If no response is received further communications and documentation may be sent to you digitally via this email address you previously supplied.
Please therefore ensure that you regularly check your spam folder for any communications from us.
Thank you
15/01/2026, I respond that I wish to continue by post, hoping that'll make me win some time
16/01/2026, they confirm that my choice has been recorded
26/02/2026 (today), I receive the Single Justice Procedure Notice (8 days short from the 6 months period!). However the notice seems to be dated from 11/02/2026, so it has been recorded within 5 months and a week. Based on that, they are then on time. not sure why I received it so late… But that means I only have a few days left to respond.
Here's the SJPN just for the record : https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/cwvo1viqjksfewi5khxxn/SJP-blank-printed.pdf?rlkey=p89kzrzqgtanfyzejvf9knd7l&dl=0
Here's the image evidence : https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/pk840exy81289fmhxh1o7/Capture-d-cran-2026-02-25-235829.png?rlkey=jxc6eae5a6x7vtbvaa364s4gi&dl=0
(https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/pk840exy81289fmhxh1o7/Capture-d-cran-2026-02-25-235829.png?rlkey=jxc6eae5a6x7vtbvaa364s4gi&dl=0)
Everything seems to be correct in the SJPN, except for a small twist, so here are my questions :
1. In the witness statement, one particular paragraph caught my attention :
A Conditional offer of Fixed Penalty was sent to *** on 23/10/2025.
The driver/ rider failed to satisfy the requirements of the Fixed Penalty, by not paying the Fixed Penalty and failing to provide their licence details for electronic endorsement.
The driver/ rider did not satisfy the requirements of the Fixed Penalty offer within the specified timeframe. As a result, the offer of a Fixed Penalty has been withdrawn.
The matter was therefore referred to the Prosecution Team for a Single Justice Notice to be issued ..
No, a Conditional offer or Fixed Penalty was not sent. In fact, the (accidental I suppose) acknowledgement of receipt from the met police of my NIP response by mail on the 14/01/2026, means that they just started looking up at my case, back in January. I reckon they were doing some tweakings in their system, looking to digitalize it, and they got caught in some kind of backlog or something.
Is that a ground for (a successful) appeal ? My current research shows that I could only plead guilty and ask for the Conditional Offer to be applied, following a failure of the administration to send it.
2. I was traveling near that bus. We are nearly at the same level, but I'm still a bit behind. I assume that would not be a successful reason for appeal (that the camera could have caught the bus given how close we were) ?
3. I looked up the signs on the road, unfortunately for me, there are 2 signs on the left hand sign, which I would have missed traveling near that bus, however there is another one on the right hand sign, about 30 seconds before, very small and unlit, but nevertheless, it's there. Besides, a road without any specified speed limit and with lamp posts, is meant to be 30MPH by default. So I'm assuming a judge would not take that, but I still ask... would the lack of good visible sign and considering the bus on the left blocking the view, be a good ground for appeal or is that a blunder ?
4. I am a private hire driver. This will bring me up to 9 points. I should not loose my PHV licence (I might, but I think they are more relaxed now with all those 20MPH roads nowadays. Fingers crossed), however if it does (or even if it doesn't, one more strike and I'm out) this will put me in a very tough spot, with a risk of loosing my work.
Could I claim for the points not to be applied ? Or would that only be in case of a 4th and final fine ?
Thank you all for taking the time of looking up at my case.