Free Traffic Legal Advice
Live cases legal advice => Speeding and other criminal offences => Topic started by: Just234 on September 19, 2024, 09:23:21 am
-
An update and a lucky result
Attended the court date in March and they dismissed the case because they had the wrong name in their paperwork.
Didn’t hang around to find out how or where just happy for the outcome!
-
Just an update so far. I submitted my paperwork to the SJP office and waited for it to be assigned to a court. I spoke to the court direct and they made an appointment to appear in court for a statuary declaration.
I requested it expedited due to the ban and they were very helpful and gave me a date within 2 weeks.
I attended and made the declaration that I was unaware of the proceedings along with my paperwork showing postal issues and they have re opened the case.
I have a date set for March next year and any points and resulting totting up ban has been wiped off my record.
Very grateful for everyone’s help and input
-
Many thanks that info is much appreciated
-
It is available on BAILII at https://www.bailii.org/scot/cases/ScotHC/2010/2010HCJAC96.html (https://www.bailii.org/scot/cases/ScotHC/2010/2010HCJAC96.html)
[/quote]
Thanks Pinkie.
-
A possible explanation for a seemingly late prosecution is that the police may have issued a second s172 request (for whatever reason). If they have, the ruling in the Scottish case, which I mentioned in post #30, may come into play. It depends very much why the second s172 request was issued.
Unfortunately the full transcript of that ruling seems to have disappeared from the Scottish Courts' "Opinions" list. I do know the case was Procurator Fiscal, Glasgow v. William Gordon Jackson [2010] HCJAC 96 because I found it mentioned here:
http://www.euanadowadvocate.co.uk/item/procurator-fiscal-glasgow-v-william-gordon-jackson-2010-hcjac-96.html
It is available on BAILII at https://www.bailii.org/scot/cases/ScotHC/2010/2010HCJAC96.html (https://www.bailii.org/scot/cases/ScotHC/2010/2010HCJAC96.html)
-
A possible explanation for a seemingly late prosecution is that the police may have issued a second s172 request (for whatever reason). If they have, the ruling in the Scottish case, which I mentioned in post #30, may come into play. It depends very much why the second s172 request was issued.
Unfortunately the full transcript of that ruling seems to have disappeared from the Scottish Courts' "Opinions" list. I do know the case was Procurator Fiscal, Glasgow v. William Gordon Jackson [2010] HCJAC 96 because I found it mentioned here:
http://www.euanadowadvocate.co.uk/item/procurator-fiscal-glasgow-v-william-gordon-jackson-2010-hcjac-96.html
-
Perfect
I am the registered keeper and the bundle of paperwork I’ve been provided by the court has my correct address and has the date of the NIP sent on the 12/04/2023
When you say proceedings must begin - I have a document ‘postal requisition’ which is dated 11/12/2023
Then I have a SJPN with a postal date of 16/01/2024 and written on there underneath the FtF is charge date of 10/01/2024
So what date and what document means ‘proceedings have begun’
OK - I didn't realise you had previously mentioned that you already had a copy of the NIP you never received originally - I thought you were using 12 April 2023 as the date you assumed it had been sent, not that you knew that that was when it was sent. My mistake. Apologies.
If you are confirming that you are the RK and that your NIP was sent to you at your correct address on 12 April 2023, then I think Andy Foster has already answered your question.
ie the offence of failing to identify would have been committed on or around 14 May 2023. So the police would have had until 6 months later - on or around 14 November 2023 - in which to charge you with failing to identify. If they only just got round even to checking whether you had replied or not on 22 November 2023, they would seem on the face of it to be out of time. Even more so if the date you have been given for the "written charge" is 10 January 2024 - nine months after the date of the NIP that was sent to you, so almost two whole months late.
But see what others say. I'd have thought it quite unusual for the police to charge someone so late, but who knows...?
(My comments assume the info and dates you have provided are accurate. I note that you did say in the previous Reply #14 that "I'm sorry I don’t know how to word things properly and my memory/processing is not great. I keep having to read and re read and it’s confusing for me." Somebody has already suggested that it might be a good idea to post up redacted copies of the NIP/172 and the SJPN you have received)
-
It sounds like the written charge (which will be something like “on [date] you failed to furnish the details of the driver of vehicle [VRM] contrary to s 172 etc”. The charge date seems to be 10/01/24.
-
The written charge.
Should I have received a ‘written charge’ in the post?
I’m just trying to work out which document a written charge is. And to clarify which date I need to be aware of.
I have no document with the name ‘written charge’ on it. I have a ‘police report:section s172 offence’ and a postal requisition. Is either of them the written charge? Both of these are dated 11/12/2023
On the police report within the witness statement section it states
‘on 22/11/2023 I checked the FPU system ….. absence of record or reply no reply recieved’
‘A requisition was issued.’
But that requisition is not dated until 11/12/2023
And to confuse me even more it says in the SJPN dated 16/01/2024 (which I gather is not the ‘written charge’) it says charge date is 10/01/2024
-
The written charge.
-
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/id/ukpga/1980/43
That link isn’t really that helpful unfortunately as it in no way relates to what I was trying to get you to explain from your words in your post.
If you do have the time please can you let me know what is the necessary paperwork that must be issued within 6 months of the alleged offence.
Or if anyone else can help with that question it would be much appreciated.
-
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/id/ukpga/1980/43
-
Thankyou
When you say
‘This is done when the necessary documents were issued.’
What are the necessary documents?
Please can you expand on which documents and dates you see as conflicting.
And you say ‘contact the prosecution’
Are you saying I contact the court prior to completing the online form I’ve been instructed to do or is this something I ask later down the line.
-
Proceedings must be instigated within 6 months of the alleged offence. This is done when the necessary documents were issued. They either were or they weren't.
You appear to have at least 2 conflicting sets of documents and dates. Which is unusual. If these are the only such documents that were issued, then it would appear to be out of time. As there are already seemingly conflicting documents and dates, it would not be prudent to rule out earlier documents having been issued in time.
You can put the prosecution to proof that the charge was instigated in time, but other than contacting them and asking nicely, there is no right to see the evidence in advance.
-
The court ruled that, providing there was no reason to make a subsequent request (because, for example, the police had been given a wrong address for the keeper) the first request determines the date by which proceedings must be taken.
So you actually have details of the NIP and s172 request which was sent to you including when was it dated?
Perfect
I am the registered keeper and the bundle of paperwork I’ve been provided by the court has my correct address and has the date of the NIP sent on the 12/04/2023
When you say proceedings must begin - I have a document ‘postal requisition’ which is dated 11/12/2023
Then I have a SJPN with a postal date of 16/01/2024 and written on there underneath the FtF is charge date of 10/01/2024
So what date and what document means ‘proceedings have begun’
-
Everywhere I’ve read there is no definite on when the 6 months timescales start and end.
Does it start with the first s172 request +29 days
The offence is committed 28 days after the s172 request for driver's details is served. This is 2 working days after it was posted (unless the contrary is proved). So they have six months from that date to begin proceedings.
Or depending on how many letters they send out they can pick at date off one of them?
No they can't do that. There was a case in the Scottish High Court where (IIRC) the police had issued a written s172 request to the keeper of a vehicle and, some time later, the keeper was visited by the police the make the same enquiry. They issued proceedings under s172 which was within six months of the personal visit, but outside six months from the date of written request.
The court ruled that, providing there was no reason to make a subsequent request (because, for example, the police had been given a wrong address for the keeper) the first request determines the date by which proceedings must be taken.
Whilst Scottish rulings are not binding on courts in E&W (and vice versa) it would be persuasive because it would mean the police could circumvent the six month rule potentially indefinitely by making repeated requests.
So you actually have details of the NIP and s172 request which was sent to you including when was it dated?
-
All this reading you seem to be doing isn’t very effective.
AF has explained when a s 172 notice is presumed to have been served (subject to actual evidence to the contrary).
There is case law (albeit from Scotland) that says there is only one s 172 notice, which is the first one (to that person). So no, the police can’t seek to serve another to “stretch” the time limit.
The six months ends after six months.
Unless you can tell us when the s 172 notice addressed to you was deemed to be served nobody can tell you whether the prosecution is in time or not.
If speeding isn’t on the written charge then you generally can’t do a deal to plead guilty to it.
-
... The reason I was asking about the timescales is because I thought the speeding offence hasn’t been added because it is out of time.
If that is the case then there is question over the timescales for the FtF offence and whether that is also out of time.
Everywhere I’ve read there is no definite on when the 6 months timescales start and end.
Does it start with the first s172 request +29 days
Or depending on how many letters they send out they can pick at date off one of them?
It’s seems having read a few other instances that it’s normally the first - if I’ve been sent another letter and they’ve chosen that date to use isn’t that just them stretching the timescales in an effort to enable a charge saying that the speeding charge is out of time.
Then there is no info on where the 6 month timescale ends.
Is it that the SJPN has to be sent before the 6month deadline? ...
I don't think you understood what I tried to explain yesterday evening...
Please answer this: Are you the person recorded by the DVLA as being the Registered Keeper (RK) of the vehicle in question? In other words, do you have the car's V5C document in your possession, and does it correctly record both your name and your address?
If you are the RK AND your address is correct then yes, it seems strange that you committed the failure to identify offence some 4 - 5 months after the original speeding offence. If that is the case then it might be worth your while to find out from the police when the first NIP/s172 request was sent to you at your correct address.
If, however, you are not the RK (and that sounds quite likely) then the 4 - 5 month delay can be easily explained and doesn't give you a get out.
For example, let's assume that you aren't the RK and a finance company is. The police will have to have sent out a NIP to the finance company within 14 days of the original speeding offence committed on 01 April 2023, and the finance company has 28 days in which to respond. Lets assume the finance company names a car leasing company. They in turn will get their own NIP/s172 request and have a further 28 days in which to respond naming the next person in the chain. Let's assume the car leasing company names your employer (it's a company car). Your employer gets their own NIP/s172 request and has a further 28 days in which to name you. Let's assume the police then send you your own NIP/s172 request at the end of July 2023. You don't get it and fail to respond. As far as the police are concerned, you failed to identify the driver by the end of August 2023 and that's when you committed the offence.
That's just one possible example and one possible reason to explain the apparently long delay between the original speeding offence and the failure to identify offence. Whether that particular example applies in your case we don't know as you haven't given enough detail.
So are you the RK, or aren't you?
To try to clear up your other queries:
1. Yes, the speeding has timed out, so if you've only been charged with failure to identify and not with speeding, you can't really do a plea bargain because you have nothing to offer the prosecution. You could try asking but it almost certainly won't be accepted.
2. AIUI, for the purpose of committing the offence of failure to identify, it's 28 days from the first NIP/s172 served on you that counts, and as I've tried to explain to you above, the first NIP served on you could have been several months after the original speeding offence. The police can't keep extending the 6 month deadline by reissuing requests to you. (And - in any case - you don't even appear to know for sure when the first request for information was sent to you... Perhaps you should try to find out?)
3. No, the SJPN does not have to be sent to you before the 6 month deadline. What needs to be done within 6 months is the issuing of the written charge which originates the SJPN. The SJPN itself can be sent outsde 6 months so long as the written charge was within 6 months.
4. I can't comment on whether your problems receiving post constitute a defence or not - with or without confirmation from your solicitor
-
The failure to furnish is also a far more serious offence with 6 points minimum penalty. You basically have to decide whether you want to pursue the fail to furnish which is possible but often fraught with difficulties, or following the stat dec and re prosecution of both offences, do a plea bargain to accept the speeding charge if the FtF is dropped. They nearly always oblige.
Thankyou
The SJPN has only the failure to furnish charge on it.
Not the speeding offence which it refers to.
Does that make any difference in the options you have outlined above?
The reason I was asking about the timescales is because I thought the speeding offence hasn’t been added because it is out of time.
If that is the case then there is question over the timescales for the FtF offence and whether that is also out of time.
Everywhere I’ve read there is no definite on when the 6 months timescales start and end.
Does it start with the first s172 request +29 days
Or depending on how many letters they send out they can pick at date off one of them?
It’s seems having read a few other instances that it’s normally the first - if I’ve been sent another letter and they’ve chosen that date to use isn’t that just them stretching the timescales in an effort to enable a charge saying that the speeding charge is out of time.
Then there is no info on where the 6 month timescale ends.
Is it that the SJPN has to be sent before the 6month deadline?
I know I’m probably clutching at straws but I do have solicitors letter regarding the mail going missing at the property dated around the same time period, so I do think I stand a good chance of arguing the not received.
-
I hope the OP has taken note of Andy Foster's comment above about the driving ban. Ban means Ban. DO NOT drive until the ban has been lifted or you will be in deeper do-do if caught.
-
The failure to furnish is also a far more serious offence with 6 points minimum penalty. You basically have to decide whether you want to pursue the fail to furnish which is possible but often fraught with difficulties, or following the stat dec and re prosecution of both offences, do a plea bargain to accept the speeding charge if the FtF is dropped. They nearly always oblige.
-
For an offence committed on 29/08/23 they have until the following February to commence pro, so they were well in time in January.
This is what I’m trying to work out - if I was caught speeding 04/23 then given 28 days to respond my failure to respond offence would be on the 29th day so 05/23
Why have they then recorded my failure to respond offence as 08/23 ?
You seem to be assuming that s172 request was sent to you immediately (or shortly) after the alleged speeding offence. But
how do you know when your s172 request was sent to you if you never received it?
How do you know that your s172 request wasn't sent to you at the end of July?
Sorry if I've missed this from earlier in the thread, but are you the Registered Keeper with the DVLA, and if you are, is your address on the car's V5C correct? If you aren't the Registered KeeperK, who is?
The s172 request issued to you that you never received might not be the first in the chain...
Edit: To clarify further for you, the first NIP/s172 after a speeding offence has to be served on the Registered Keeper (RK) of the vehicle within 14 days of the offence. The RK then has 28 days in which to identify the driver.
If your car is a company car or a lease car, you are almost certainly not the RK so the first NIP/s172 will not have been sent to you, but to the RK. Depending on how many different people or companies there are between you and the RK, you may not receive your NIP/s172 request until several months after the original speeding offence if each person takes the full 28 days to reply.
Do you see how, if you are not the RK, your failure to identify offence could be committed several months after the date of the speeding?
-
So, a postal requisition was issued on 11/12/2023 and a summons was issued on 16/01/2024, which was also a written charge.
And you are asking us if December is more than 6 months after May.
As I said previously, if you tell us what happened, we will tell you how the law applies. If you want to be told how the law applies so that you can work it out for yourself, the OU do law courses.
-
Thankyou
So am I right in thinking that that then means the the offence being committed in May, the Postal requisition dated 11/12/23 is outside of the 6 month window?
-
An s. 172 offence is committed at the expiration of 28 days beginning with the date of service of the NIP (or notice requiring information under s. 172).
If the NIP was sent to you on 12/04/2023, it would be deemed served (unless the contrary is proven) on 14/04/2023 and the s. 172 offence committed on 11/05/2023.
-
When did you receive the s 172 notice? If you didn’t receive it, do you know when it was sent to you? Are you the registered keeper?
-
For an offence committed on 29/08/23 they have until the following February to commence pro, so they were well in time in January.
This is what I’m trying to work out - if I was caught speeding 04/23 then given 28 days to respond my failure to respond offence would be on the 29th day so 05/23
Why have they then recorded my failure to respond offence as 08/23 ?
-
The S172 request for information was sent 12/04/23
-
The failure to provide drivers details being 4 months later suggests to me either the address on the V5c is wrong or you are not the registered keeper, the latter may be useful to you.
-
What is the date of the s172 request?
-
For an offence committed on 29/08/23 they have until the following February to commence pro, so they were well in time in January.
-
By issued i mean committed the offence
(I'm sorry I don’t know how to word things properly and my memory/processing is not great.
I keep having to read and re read and it’s confusing for me.) I’ll explain
So…
I was caught speeding sent an s172 request for info
I’m assuming (I did not receive it) I would have been given ‘X’ amount of days to respond. Let’s say 28 days. You would think on the 29th day I’ve passed the deadline date and therefore have committed a offence of failing to provide which would give reason for a charge with a s172 failure to reply offence…..?
So why if I’ve been sent a s172 request on 12/04/2023 has the charge of failure to notify been dated 4 months later?
The Postal requisition sent and dated 11/12/23 stating charge of failure to supply details 29/08/23
I’m just trying to work out the 6month timescales - do I have an argument to say the August date is wrong and that 6 months from the date of the original speeding offence plus 1month would mean the postal requisition sent in December is out of time?
-
The s 172 offence is often committed about a month after the speeding offence. Assuming by “issued” you mean proceedings commenced by written charge, no.
-
Thankyou
So it is the failure to provide offence that is the factor here and is within the 6 month timescale
The speeding fine is not being from April
So that being the case I am required to plead only on that failure to provide charge.
I’ve read somewhere else that usually a failure to notify would be issued and recorded a month after the date of the speeding offence.
Why is mine dated 4 months later? Is this normal practise?
-
Six months from the date of each offence.
NB: the date of the speeding offence and the date of the s 172 offence are different.
-
It would be really helpful if you could explain the 6 month timescale.
-
Given there is apparent confusion as to what the document issued on 16th January is, you may wish to show us a copy of it.
-
And if it’s called a written charge edited to clarify -
A Written Charge is called a written charge. A Summons is called a summons. A stale ham and mustard sandwich is called a stale ham and mustard sandwich.
You have told us that a summons was issued on 16/01/2024. You now appear to be saying that if the thing you previously called a summons is actually a written charge, then that was issued on 16/01/2024. You might as well be talking about a ham sandwich.
What was issued on 16/01/2024? Most official documents have a title at the top in big letters. Ham sandwiches, not so much.
You tell us what actually happened, and we will explain how the law applies.
edit: If you are looking for a potential technical defence (and there is nothing wrong with that), then accurate details are everything. You are currently banned, and potentially will remain so until the 6 months expires. We aren't. Who has most to gain from you posting clear and accurate information?
-
And if it’s called a written charge edited to clarify -
Speeding offence recorded on 01/04/23
Failed to Notify of drivers details 29/08/23
Written Charge issued 16/01/24
-
My apologies on my rule break
Please explain where the 6 month rule comes in then please if at all possible.
-
Please could anyone clarify
No. Not from the information provided in your new thread.
Rule #1 Do not start new threads for existing cases.
Also motoring offence prosecutions are instigated by issuing a written charge, not a summons, so the date of any subsequent summons is immaterial.
-
Please could anyone clarify the timescales for me for the following
Speeding offence recorded on 01/04/23
Failed to Notify of drivers details 29/08/23
Summons issued 16/01/24
I know there is a 6 month time limit but don’t know when the clock starts on that time limit. Is it date of speeding offence? Or the offence of failed to notify date?
Please could anyone clarify
-
Thankyou for all of the above
Really grateful
So just to clarify
Proving that I didn’t receive my mail is a mountain clime I guess even with a dated solicitors email demonstrating this exact issue and request for email correspondence due to mail going missing….?
I do know the full details of the offence I’ve been charged with as all the information was supplied in email from the court along with the form link.
The only reason why I know it was me driving the vehicle on that particular day was because my son broke both bones in his leg and it was an emergency run to hospital. It wasn’t the best idea to take him in the car in hindsight but he was in so much pain with morpheme and gas and air administered when we got to A&e it was a absolutely traumatic time and will save you the gory details.
I think I could provide enough to the court to prove this was extreme circumstances and not a normal appointment or day having had a clear license for 7 years.
The other question was about the amount of information I add to the online form- do I write it all out as if presenting my full case to the court?
The form gives no guidance at all on this.
I’ve spoken to the court and they’ve said submit the online form and then it will be expedited due to the ban. I just have to ring the court back in about 2 weeks.
-
So I’m looking for advice on how to appeal.
You don't, as you then correctly say you submit a statutory declaration which is NOT an appeal.
Pedantic much?
Technically, the OP could appeal to the Crown Court, but a stat dec is a far better solution.
Currently, the OP has been convicted of an offence in his absence and received a totting ban. He is seeking to challenge this conviction. If he was asking whether to do a stat dec, appeal to the crown court or appeal by way of case stated, stat dec, not appeal would be an appropriate response, but in the context of his post, the distinction is pedantry.
So I would plead not guilty to the charge of failure to notify on the basis I did not receive the notice sent.
What matters is not whether you didn't receive it but whether it was served or not, as a number of items of post (as least 3, more likely 4) were not received by you it suggests the Police did not have the correct address for you (despite what you say, as 4 items going missing is 'unlikely' I would suggest), perhaps you moved and forgot to update the V5c registration document address with the DVLA?
Spouting bollox after being pointlessly pedantic is not a good look!
There are 2 potential "defences" (for practical purposes) to the s. 172 charge - whether the notice was served, and whether it was reasonably practicable to provide the information. Not receiving the notice is not in itself a complete defence, but if the circumstances were such that it would not have been reasonably practicable for the OP to ensure that such notices were brought to his attention and he was not aware of it, then it was not reasonably practicable to provide the information.
The speeding charge I was driving my son to hospital - can I plead not guilty? Or do I plead guilty and ask for mitigating circumstances?
Of course you can (and should currently) plead not guilty, whether you then continue that is a different matter, if the S172 notice was properly served (and you have to prove it wasn't) you will currently be found guilty of the more onerous S172 offence, as such offering to plead guilty to the speeding (when you can't then offer a defence) in exchange for the S172 being dropped seems the pragmatic option.
I agree that based on what the OP has told us, he should plead not guilty to both charges. It is uncertain from his account whether he has sufficient information to enable him to plead guilty (in theory you cannot plead guilty to an offence without knowing what the charge is and what material facts are being alleged - because that is what you are pleading guilty to) - although that is largely academic.
Some areas send guidance with the SJPN stating that if the accused pleads guilty to one of the offences, the other will automatically be dropped. If the OP has been provided with such guidance, then it might be advantageous to "do the deal" at the earliest opportunity, or not - depending on the strength of his defences if the charges went to trial.
The fact that the OP was taking his son to hospital is not in itself a [complete] defence. It depends on the circumstances. I am not going to hypothesise about what possible circumstances might constitute a defence - we apply the law to the facts, not the other way round.
There is also the question of whether the OP could be asked whether he was driving when defending the s. 172 charge, or whether inferences could be made. However, if the OP's defence to the s. 172 relies largely on his credibility, running a technical defence to the speeding charge may not be helpful.
Driving your son to hospital is, of itself' meaningless unless you are suggesting it was some form of an emergency, obviously to a routine appointment is no different top driving to a book shop.
That.
There was a driving ban issued on the same day the points were added to my license but it’s not mentioned in the paperwork supplied in the email but is shown on my license online - driving ban due to totting up of points
Very unfortunate, this is where applying online is going to probably be bad, if you contact the court in person and speak to someone you may get your hearing expedited, whatever you put in an online application will probably not be looked at until it reaches the front of the queue - in some time from now.
Also, that.
The ban has been imposed by a court of law. Unless and until a court of law quashes or suspends the ban, you are banned - regardless of what defence you may be able to present. The stat dec would set aside the conviction and sentence, but you are banned until then - unless you can get a court to suspend it before then.
-
So I’m looking for advice on how to appeal.
You don't, as you then correctly say you submit a statutory declaration which is NOT an appeal.
So I would plead not guilty to the charge of failure to notify on the basis I did not receive the notice sent.
What matters is not whether you didn't receive it but whether it was served or not, as a number of items of post (as least 3, more likely 4) were not received by you it suggests the Police did not have the correct address for you (despite what you say, as 4 items going missing is 'unlikely' I would suggest), perhaps you moved and forgot to update the V5c registration document address with the DVLA?
The speeding charge I was driving my son to hospital - can I plead not guilty? Or do I plead guilty and ask for mitigating circumstances?
Of course you can (and should currently) plead not guilty, whether you then continue that is a different matter, if the S172 notice was properly served (and you have to prove it wasn't) you will currently be found guilty of the more onerous S172 offence, as such offering to plead guilty to the speeding (when you can't then offer a defence) in exchange for the S172 being dropped seems the pragmatic option.
Driving your son to hospital is, of itself' meaningless unless you are suggesting it was some form of an emergency, obviously to a routine appointment is no different top driving to a book shop.
There was a driving ban issued on the same day the points were added to my license but it’s not mentioned in the paperwork supplied in the email but is shown on my license online - driving ban due to totting up of points
Very unfortunate, this is where applying online is going to probably be bad, if you contact the court in person and speak to someone you may get your hearing expedited, whatever you put in an online application will probably not be looked at until it reaches the front of the queue - in some time from now.
-
I have just realised I’ve got a failure to notify of driver for a speeding offence which I did not know about after checking my drivers license online. 6 points and a fine.
So I’m looking for advice on how to appeal.
I’ve read all about the statutory declaration but the process seems to have changed since that was all written as it’s all done online on a form.
I was given a number to call who sent me a link for an online form to complete which I had various options to select to appeal.
It asks on the form would I like to request to reopen my case or make a statutory declaration that I did not know about the case.
So I’ve chosen the latter.
Then it asks do I plead
a,guilty or
b,not guilty or
c, both guilty/not guilty to more than one charge.
(I did not know about any of the charges against me as we don’t receive some of the mail delivered at our house through a combination of no mailbox in the property with communal hallway where mail is delivered to/ transient flat residents/non residents residing here/ fallout with neighbours and police involvement all of which I can evidence of chasing up mail, and emails requesting to companies for email correspondence only.
So I would plead not guilty to the charge of failure to notify on the basis I did not receive the notice sent.
The speeding charge I was driving my son to hospital - can I plead not guilty? Or do I plead guilty and ask for mitigating circumstances?
The form then asks for information regarding your plea- do I have to fill in every detail here as to why I feel I’m not guilty/guilty?
It later on asks for any further information and a place to upload any documentarian. Do I have to upload all evidence here to support my claim? Ie. Show emails regarding lost mail etc? Hospital paperwork?
There was a driving ban issued on the same day the points were added to my license but it’s not mentioned in the paperwork supplied in the email but is shown on my license online - driving ban due to totting up of points
How do I address this? Do I just add this in to ‘ further information’?
Once my form is completed it says they will then decide whether to reopen the case - will the ban be stayed until a court hearing? Do I need to request the court to lift the driving ban? They said it takes 6 months currently to get a court hearing, but can be treated as urgent because of the ban but no timescales were given for urgent cases.
I can’t work without my license so it’s vital to me.
Any help would be much appreciated.
And given the lost mail can I request further mail to be sent to a different address? Or email?