Free Traffic Legal Advice
Live cases legal advice => Speeding and other criminal offences => Topic started by: Fr3ddi3 on May 18, 2024, 03:54:49 pm
-
The driver has received 2 x conditional offer fixed penalties of £100 and 3 points each.
As expected from his exchange with the CTO
His mindset is to pay the first one and let the second one go to court (I disagree with him, I think he should pay both and move on).
He will be going back to the site in the week so will check road signs, but his argument seems to be that there was probably just one 30mph sign that he passed (and missed) for both offences. It is one error from him that has been fined twice and he thinks that is unreasonable.
If there is a system of street lighting then only the initial terminal sign is permitted. The limit is conveyed correctly for the section of road. However, even without street lights and the need for repeaters instead, this is a bloke who claimed he hadn't gone all the way round the roundabout when he had and missed a speed camera van twice. If I was him I wouldn't be relying on his observation skills to defend this, even after checking.
Edit: Google maps suggests repeaters back in 2022
https://www.google.com/maps/@50.9641991,0.4814418,3a,31.3y,111.17h,83.01t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sTPCtlTm1PZgbdjAa4jw92A!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?authuser=0&coh=205409&entry=ttu
We have queried with the police the exact location of the cameras because the Site ID listed on the photograph does not show up on the map of camera locations. (and he genuinely does not know where the speed gun was located - the 30mph zone continues both sides of the roundabout - we suspect it was on the north side).
I'm not sure what this is to achieve? Unless you believe both the the camera and the offence was in the 50mph section?
He is unlikely to get the second offence overturned based on his can't remembers and not sures. So overall what would he like to achieve?
Does he want 6 points and £200 in fines (i.e. two fixed penalties) or take a chance on getting 3 points but higher fines and costs?
-
The driver has received 2 x conditional offer fixed penalties of £100 and 3 points each.
His mindset is to pay the first one and let the second one go to court (I disagree with him, I think he should pay both and move on).
He will be going back to the site in the week so will check road signs, but his argument seems to be that there was probably just one 30mph sign that he passed (and missed) for both offences. It is one error from him that has been fined twice and he thinks that is unreasonable. I personally know that section of road and it is an unusual one in that 30mph seems a strange limit for that section and if you don't see the sign, I can understand that you wouldn't normally expect the speed limit to be 30mph.(I figure that last sentance is probably irrelevent to the case, but thought I would share it anyway)
We have queried with the police the exact location of the cameras because the Site ID listed on the photograph does not show up on the map of camera locations. (and he genuinely does not know where the speed gun was located - the 30mph zone continues both sides of the roundabout - we suspect it was on the north side).
I've just checked streetview for speed limit signs - there are at least 3 heading south towards the roundabout (final one is only on the opposite side of the road) and after going round the roundabout, there is one shortly after the streetlights end. Doesn't seem to me his argument can hold up (he might see that next week when he goes back to the site himself)
-
I personally know that section of road and it is an unusual one in that 30mph seems a strange limit for that section and if you don't see the sign, I can understand that you wouldn't normally expect the speed limit to be 30mph
Does the location have a system of street lighting?
Looking at Streetview, there is street lighting around the roundabout (and 2 streetlights on the approach to the roundabout), but probably no streetlighting where the speed camera was (we don't currently know the exact location)
-
I personally know that section of road and it is an unusual one in that 30mph seems a strange limit for that section and if you don't see the sign, I can understand that you wouldn't normally expect the speed limit to be 30mph
Does the location have a system of street lighting?
-
The driver has received 2 x conditional offer fixed penalties of £100 and 3 points each.
His mindset is to pay the first one and let the second one go to court (I disagree with him, I think he should pay both and move on).
He will be going back to the site in the week so will check road signs, but his argument seems to be that there was probably just one 30mph sign that he passed (and missed) for both offences. It is one error from him that has been fined twice and he thinks that is unreasonable. I personally know that section of road and it is an unusual one in that 30mph seems a strange limit for that section and if you don't see the sign, I can understand that you wouldn't normally expect the speed limit to be 30mph.(I figure that last sentance is probably irrelevent to the case, but thought I would share it anyway)
We have queried with the police the exact location of the cameras because the Site ID listed on the photograph does not show up on the map of camera locations. (and he genuinely does not know where the speed gun was located - the 30mph zone continues both sides of the roundabout - we suspect it was on the north side).
-
Does he want 6 points and £200 in fines (i.e. two fixed penalties) or take a chance on getting 3 points but higher fines and costs?
-
I confess I don't really understand the legal quotes above or what it means for the driver and what his best course of action will be when he receives a response (I guess it partially depends on what response he receives)
It means that where a driver is convicted of two or more offences that occurred “on the same occasion”, although he may be fined for each of them and also have his driving record endorsed with each of them, he should only be given one lot of penalty points (for the most serious).
The interpretation of “on the same occasion” is crucial in your friend’s case. If, say, you were stopped for speeding and you also had no insurance, it is clear that you committed those two offences on the same occasion and as a result you would only receive points for the no insurance offence. “On the same occasion” is not defined. However, southpaw seems quite confident that your friend’s circumstances are covered by that phrase. I’m not aware of any case law which addresses that issue (which southpaw may be aware of) but I’m not so sure your friend’s circumstances stretch to be seen as “on the same occasion”. If he was detected speeding an hour later I would argue that does not amount to being “on the same occasion.” So how long does an “occasion” last? Only a court can answer that.
Now that the police have stated that they do not consider this to be a single offence it is likely that they will offer your friend a fixed penalty (£100 and three points) for each. If he allows both matters to go to court to argue that they took place on the same occasion he may be successful and walk away with only three points. But if he is, it will cost him a whole lot more money than the fixed penalties. The total cost (fine, prosecution costs and "Victim Surcharge") for just one of the two will almost certainly be at least three times the cost of one fixed penalty and possibly much more, depending on his income. He will still also have a conviction and an endorsement on his record for the second offence which will have to be declared even though it did not attract penalty points.
From that, sounds like his best option is probably to accept both Fixed Penalties and avoid court, even though it sounds like it could reasonably be argued both offences were on the same occasion.
-
I confess I don't really understand the legal quotes above or what it means for the driver and what his best course of action will be when he receives a response (I guess it partially depends on what response he receives)
It means that where a driver is convicted of two or more offences that occurred “on the same occasion”, although he may be fined for each of them and also have his driving record endorsed with each of them, he should only be given one lot of penalty points (for the most serious).
The interpretation of “on the same occasion” is crucial in your friend’s case. If, say, you were stopped for speeding and you also had no insurance, it is clear that you committed those two offences on the same occasion and as a result you would only receive points for the no insurance offence. “On the same occasion” is not defined. However, southpaw seems quite confident that your friend’s circumstances are covered by that phrase. I’m not aware of any case law which addresses that issue (which southpaw may be aware of) but I’m not so sure your friend’s circumstances stretch to be seen as “on the same occasion”. If he was detected speeding an hour later I would argue that does not amount to being “on the same occasion.” So how long does an “occasion” last? Only a court can answer that.
Now that the police have stated that they do not consider this to be a single offence it is likely that they will offer your friend a fixed penalty (£100 and three points) for each. If he allows both matters to go to court to argue that they took place on the same occasion he may be successful and walk away with only three points. But if he is, it will cost him a whole lot more money than the fixed penalties. The total cost (fine, prosecution costs and "Victim Surcharge") for just one of the two will almost certainly be at least three times the cost of one fixed penalty and possibly much more, depending on his income. He will still also have a conviction and an endorsement on his record for the second offence which will have to be declared even though it did not attract penalty points.
-
Email response this morning from Sussex police.
"Thank you for your e-mail.
If you have been able to view the photographic evidence, it will show that your vehicle is showing going different directions.
At 16:31:09 your vehicle is shown from the front.
At 16:31:58, your vehicle is shown from the behind
Therefore, this would be classed as two offences, therefore we cannot treat this as a single offence.
Please return the Notice Of Intended Prosecution to our office, this can be by e-mail at the above e-mail address or by post."
I confess I don't really understand the legal quotes above or what it means for the driver and what his best course of action will be when he receives a response (I guess it partially depends on what response he receives)
-
That’s fortunate for the OP.
-
Unless the statute was drafted somewhat haphazardly and the relevant provision was 2 sections later...
(1) Sections 28 and 29 of this Act shall have effect subject to this section in any case where—
(a) a person is convicted of an offence involving obligatory endorsement, and
(b) the court is satisfied that his driving record has been or is liable to be endorsed under section 57A or 77 of this Act in respect of an offence (referred to in this section as the “ connected offence ”) committed on the same occasion as the offence of which he is convicted.
(2) the number of penalty points to be attributed to the offence of which he is convicted is—
(a) the number of penalty points to be attributed to that offence under section 28 of this Act apart from this section, less
(b) the number of penalty points required to be endorsed on his driving record under section 57A or 77A of this Act in respect of the connected offence (except so far as they have already been deducted by virtue of this paragraph).
-
Where a person is convicted (whether on the same occasion or not) of two or more offences committed on the same occasion and involving obligatory endorsement, the total number of penalty points to be attributed to them is the number or highest number that would be attributed on a conviction of one of them (so that if the convictions are on different occasions the number of penalty points to be attributed to the offences on the later occasion or occasions shall be restricted accordingly).
As accepting a fixed penalty isn’t a conviction, probably not.
-
Several thing were disclosed in the OP, mainly about a dance which had an admission charge of 3 shillings and four pence.
That said, I probably should have re-read it before offering irrelevant advice.
If a course is not on the cards, if the best option, as always is if the police will drop on of the allegations. If not, then it would seem to be a choice of accepting 2 fixed penalties, or going to court to argue the same occasion. Not sure whether the same occasion legislation has a provision for fixed penalties - IOW whether it is viable to accept a fixed penalty for one and only be fined in court for the other.
-
For multiple offences committed on the same occasion, the court should fine for each offence but only give points for the most serious - in which case he would almost certainly be better off with a fixed penalty and a course, assuming that the police don't decide to play nice.
Unfortunately a course isn't an option as it is disclosed, in the original post, that the driver has completed a course in the last 3 years.
-
A plea for clemency is a plea for clemency regardless of how it might be categorized if it gets to court. The police have a discretion in the disposal of offences/allegations that the courts do not. Whilst the police are statistically unlikely to show leniency, it costs nothing to ask.
As the driver is adamant that he didn't double back on himself, I would suggest that the chances of him being able to give compelling evidence that he maintained a speed in excess of 30mph throughout the roundabout that he never doubled back on himself on, is even more remote than the chances that he did so - so it is almost certain that he had separately exceeded the speed limit on both occasions, so not a single continuing offence.
For multiple offences committed on the same occasion, the court should fine for each offence but only give points for the most serious - in which case he would almost certainly be better off with a fixed penalty and a course, assuming that the police don't decide to play nice.
-
I think that strictly speaking it’s not a single offence (for which only one penalty will ensue) but rather two offences committed on the same occasion (two fines, one set of points).
-
We have 2 legitimately issued NIP is 49 seconds that both need to be accepted and dealt with properly?
It isn't a question of "accepting" anything as there is nothing to accept. Both of the accompanying "Requests for Driver's Details" must be responded to, naming the driver. The driver could ask the police to consider the two as a single offence but, if they really did turn round, I doubt very much they will do that.
A course should be offered for the 37mph offence and a fixed penalty (£100 and 3 points) for the other.
I have completed both NIP and posted them. I have also requested that they be considered as a single offence.
Are you able to ask for the two allegations to be treated as one if you weren't the driver and weren't there? Isn't that down to the driver to do?
As a no doubt irrelevant aside the "Explanation of photographic evidence" in the two photos is confusing. The second line of the explanations refers to "N/R - New recording followed by the film frame number" but that isn't what is shown on the photo.
If they don't need to give an explanation why give one that is confusing...
When I say "I" did it, the forms were completed by the keeper, with my guidance. He wrote on the form and he signed it.
For the request for it to be completed as a single offence, I wrote the email, then read it out to the keeper for his approval, before sending it from the keepers email address.
Yes, like you, I couldn't understand the reference to New Recording, which is not what was shown in the photos.
-
We have 2 legitimately issued NIP is 49 seconds that both need to be accepted and dealt with properly?
It isn't a question of "accepting" anything as there is nothing to accept. Both of the accompanying "Requests for Driver's Details" must be responded to, naming the driver. The driver could ask the police to consider the two as a single offence but, if they really did turn round, I doubt very much they will do that.
A course should be offered for the 37mph offence and a fixed penalty (£100 and 3 points) for the other.
I have completed both NIP and posted them. I have also requested that they be considered as a single offence.
-
We have 2 legitimately issued NIP is 49 seconds that both need to be accepted and dealt with properly?
It isn't a question of "accepting" anything as there is nothing to accept. Both of the accompanying "Requests for Driver's Details" must be responded to, naming the driver. The driver could ask the police to consider the two as a single offence but, if they really did turn round, I doubt very much they will do that.
A course should be offered for the 37mph offence and a fixed penalty (£100 and 3 points) for the other.
-
The driver remains adament that they did not go round the roundabout and return the way they came.
However the passenger has a clearer memory of the journey and says that they travelled south down the A21 to the roundabout, but their exit was closed, so they went round the roundabout and returned north down the A21.
It seems clear to me that the driver is mistaken.
Where do we stand, assuming the passenger is correct and the driver is incorrect? We have 2 legitimately issued NIP is 49 seconds that both need to be accepted and dealt with properly?
-
For clarity, I am neither the registered keeper, nor the driver, but posting on their behalf.
Send three and fourpence, we're going to a dance!
-
The driver was travelling southbound and did not travel back on themselves.
Actually, that might not be accurate.
For clarity, I am neither the registered keeper, nor the driver, but posting on their behalf.
The driver was adament that there was no way he travelled back on himself around the roundabout. I added the part of travelling southbound, thinking that's was the direction, but knowing where he was travelling from and where he was travelling to, it makes sense that he was on the A21, but not that he was as far south as John Cross. I need to ask the driver more questions, but unfortunately he isn't available for the next few hours.
-
The driver was travelling southbound and did not travel back on themselves.
-
Officer number and site number are the same for both - on the face if it the same camera (operator).
The speed and distance are not "live" but are calculated over ~0.3seconds and then overlaid onto the video for a short time. As there is no timeout indicator showing, the short time(s) are trivial compared the the apparent 49 seconds from first to second ping.
The hedge/vegetation behind the car in both photos looks similar. My money is on the camera being close to and facing away from the roundabout, and the driver using the roundabout to double back on himself. Assuming an average speed of 40mph (and a clear roundabout, that would put the van somewhere within 300m of the roundabout
-
Did the driver turn around in between the captures?
-
My layman thoughts are for the driver to deal with and pay the 37mph (Band A) offence as fast as possible, and for the 45mph (Band B) offence to be delayed and then appealed as settled when the 37mph offence was dealt with and the driver can't be reprosecuted for the same crime. However all feedback welcomed.
Both those speeds are low enough for a fixed penalty to be offered (£100 and 3 points). The "Bands" you refer to only come into play if you are sentenced in court.
Regardless of any issues you have with the allegations, you must respond to both the "Requests for Driver's Details". Before you do this You could try a bemused phone call to the ticket office explaining your confusion and ask if they can shed any light on the matter (though do not delay your responses beyond the 28 days you have to reply). Otherwise, include a letter with your responses asking for clarification.
-
I have received a NIP for the alleged offence of travelling at 37mph in a 30mph zone at 16:31 and 9 seconds on 6th May 2024. The photograph for this shows the vehcile travelling towards the camera.
I have received a further NIP for the alleged offence of travelling at 45mph in a 30 mph zone at 16:31 and 58 seconds on 6th May 2024. The photograph for this shows the vehicle travelling away from the camera.
The location was on the A21 at John Cross (just north of Hastings). We can not identify the exact location. (It was a mobile camera, not fixed). The online NIP refers to this website for identifying the location of the Camera. https://ssrp.shinyapps.io/dataportal/ I can see Site ID 1158 in John Cross, but no sign of Site 686 referenced in this case.
I understand that it should be a single offence, so long as the driver didn't reduce speed below 30mph. The driver doesn't have any reason to believe that this is the case, and no evidence has been offered to suggest that this is the case.
However some quick maths shows something appears amiss.
Photo 1 was taken at a distance of 94.6 metres. Photo 2 was taken at a distance of 91.0 metres. Add on 5 metres (estimate) for the length of the vehicle and a total of 190.6 metres was travelled in 49 seconds. This converts to an average speed (if my maths is right) of under 9mph. (Different cameras with unsyncronised times?)
My layman thoughts are for the driver to deal with and pay the 37mph (Band A) offence as fast as possible, and for the 45mph (Band B) offence to be delayed and then appealed as settled when the 37mph offence was dealt with and the driver can't be reprosecuted for the same crime. However all feedback welcomed.
For full disclosure, the driver has no penalty points on their licence currently, however has already completed a speed awareness course within the last 3 years.
[attachimg=1][attachimg=2]
[attachment deleted by admin]