Free Traffic Legal Advice
Live cases legal advice => Speeding and other criminal offences => Topic started by: Soadfan1 on November 28, 2024, 10:12:16 pm
-
Also, if she wants to be absolute in her knowledge rather than just 'sure', she should go onto the .gov website and do a licence check.
The difference between checking and knowing and just 'being sure' is that if she does only have 3 points, she can accept both COFPs and save several hundreds of pounds.
-
It isn't the only option.
She can decline both fixed penalties and wait for court proceedings to be issued for both offences.
The advantage of taking a FP for one is that it guarantees one of them being dealt with at the reduced level.
AS above, I think the "same occasion" argument might stand a better chance of success if both offences are dealt with in court. But even if that succeeds, it will still cost more
-
Ok so the best or rather, only option here is for her to accept both fixed penalty and 3 points and then wait for a court summons?
As I said she is accepting of taking a ban on the chin, it was me who mentioned to her that there were occasions when an offence could be merged into one, but I can see that it is unlikely in this case and could have bigger financial repercussions otherwise.
Thanks
-
edit2: Technically your post as quoted is correct. However, in the context of the question, the implication (or inference) from the was that both would need to be convictions.
Yes, Andy, I quite agree that a FP could be taken and only the second offence dealt with in court where the "same occasion" argument can be made. It certainly has the advantage of ensuring one of the offences is sentenced by way of a FP. But I think that argument does not have much chance of success and I believe what little chance it has may be enhanced by presenting the two infringements to the Bench together - even though the overall financial penalty may be greater.
As you know, magistrates are, in the main, simple country folk who don't like to be baffled too much by complications! ;D
Both give the option of accepting 3 points and a fine or going to court and neither say she has to go to court.
They may not say so but she will be required to attend court at the very least for the single charge that will take her to twelve points. If the ticket office people do their job properly, if she accepts a fixed penalty for the second offence her acceptance will be rejected and court proceedings issued.
-
So should she reply back accepting the fixed penalty or just choose the option to go to court now seeing as that she will anyway?
If she wants to make the "two offences committed on the same occasion" argument she will have to attend court.
Does she need to state that on one of the COFPS forms, or can she make that plea in court as will she have to attend court anyway if she has reached 12 points?
Thanks.
-
If she wants to make the "two offences committed on the same occasion" argument she will have to attend court.
<cough> Section 30 of The Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988 (https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/53/section/30) </cough>
edit: I make no comment as to whether or not it would be easier to persuade the bench that they were both "committed on the same occasion" if the bench were to hear both charges, whether taking the COFP would be the safe option insofar as it would "bank" the fixed penalty for that offence, or whether/how the "totality" principle would apply.
IOW, I can tell you what the law allows the bench to do. I am far less certain as to what a bench would be likely to do within their own gift.
edit2: Technically your post as quoted is correct. However, in the context of the question, the implication (or inference) from the was that both would need to be convictions.
-
So should she reply back accepting the fixed penalty or just choose the option to go to court now seeing as that she will anyway?
If she wants to make the "two offences committed on the same occasion" argument she will have to attend court.
-
Its a conditional offer. One of the conditions are that the accused will not be on 12 points as a result of accepting the COFP.
I believe that the sausage factory does not automatically know when sending these out how many current points the recipient has. It will be upon entering the information on receipt of the completed COFP and payment that the error will flag up and it will be sent to summons instead.
One of the offers can be taken up though, assuming that your friend has no more than 6 points currently. Strictly. it would only be one of the two offence that has to go to court, unless your friend opts for court on both to make an argument for them being 2 offences committed on the same occasion.
Ok I did wonder that. Yes she already has 6 points.
So should she reply back accepting the fixed penalty or just choose the option to go to court now seeing as that she will anyway?
She is sure she does have 6, it was only that neither of those two cofps that she admitted liability are a summons to court.
Im not aqware of the procedure so if its the case that once both are replied to it will then flag up, fair enough.
-
Its a conditional offer. One of the conditions are that the accused will not be on 12 points as a result of accepting the COFP.
I believe that the sausage factory does not automatically know when sending these out how many current points the recipient has. It will be upon entering the information on receipt of the completed COFP and payment that the error will flag up and it will be sent to summons instead.
One of the offers can be taken up though, assuming that your friend has no more than 6 points currently. Strictly. it would only be one of the two offence that has to go to court, unless your friend opts for court on both to make an argument for them being 2 offences committed on the same occasion.
-
If she has two fixed penalty offers and she accepts them both, if the second takes her to twelve points her acceptance should be refused and court proceedings initiated.
-
If there is any doubt about her current endorsements your friend should go the DVLA Driving Licence site on gov.uk and look up her licence details. The 'Penalties and disqualifications' tab will tell her what endoresements are currently appearing on her licence and when they expire.
It's clearly important she is sure of the current facts about her licence before deciding what to do next.
https://www.gov.uk/view-driving-licence
-
What was the date of the offence that led to the course? The dates used to calculate the three year period in which only one course can be taken are the offence dates.
The forms make no mention that she will automatically reach 12 points with this, should they?
No, because the police do not yet know who the driver was.
One continuous offence is obviously definitely out. The other option (2 offences committed on the same occasion) is up to the court. I would say it's unlikely to succeed but since It will cost nothing to ask for it to be considered, it's worth a shot.
When a driver reaches 12 points the court must impose a disqualification of a minimum of six months. This can be reduced (potentially to zero) if the driver can prove that he or others will face "exceptional hardship" if he is banned. Obviously every driver who is banned will face some hardship and to succeed with this argument the hardship must be over and above that "normal" level. If the argument is successful the ban is normally avoided entirely.
Sorry, these forms are the ones after she admitted being the driver and both forms say she can either take 3 points or go to court.
Now they know who the driver was should they automatically just say court if she had reached 12 points?
There is no offer of a course so that must have been within the 3 years, but she seemed a little unclear ( to me) as to whether she was 100% about to reach 12 points.
Would she only go to court and a ban once accepting the 3 points on both COFP forms, or would it already have told her she will reach 12 points?
Hope Im not making it sound too confusing.
Thanks.
-
What was the date of the offence that led to the course? The dates used to calculate the three year period in which only one course can be taken are the offence dates.
The forms make no mention that she will automatically reach 12 points with this, should they?
No, because the police do not yet know who the driver was.
One continuous offence is obviously definitely out. The other option (2 offences committed on the same occasion) is up to the court. I would say it's unlikely to succeed but since It will cost nothing to ask for it to be considered, it's worth a shot.
When a driver reaches 12 points the court must impose a disqualification of a minimum of six months. This can be reduced (potentially to zero) if the driver can prove that he or others will face "exceptional hardship" if he is banned. Obviously every driver who is banned will face some hardship and to succeed with this argument the hardship must be over and above that "normal" level. If the argument is successful the ban is normally avoided entirely.
-
Also I meant to ask, is a totting up ban automatically 6 months or can it be reduced?
Thanks.
-
There are two possibilities:
The first is that she committed a single continuous offence. That is, she exceed the speed limit once, remained above that limit, and was caught by two cameras during that single transgression. That is obviously not applicable here as it was the same camera.
The second is that she committed two separate offences but they were committed “on the same occasion.” When a driver is convicted in that way, two fines and endorsements are imposed, but only one lot of points (for the most serious).
“On the same occasion” is not defined and it would be for a court to decide the issue if it was claimed. Twenty minutes apart would seem a bit of a stretch to meet that definition. However, since it seems one of the offences will take her to 12 points she will have the matter dealt with in court anyway and it will cost her nothing to make that argument.
Has she taken a speed awareness course in the las three years?
Thanks.
So the situation as I have been told is that she had a incident that she took a speed awareness course for in 2022 so there is no option for that.
She had a 3 point speeding incident circa 2023.
She had a 3 point speeding offence earlier this year around August
She then had 2 3 point offences exactly 20 minutes apart, but I have noted on the COFP papers that one says NorthBound and one says southbound.
They are the following cameras.
A594 TIGERS WAY ( SOUTHBOUND) LEICESTER AT 13:15
A594 TIGERS WAY ( NORTHBOUND) LEICESTER AT 13:35
The forms make no mention that she will automatically reach 12 points with this, should they? Or will they only send a summons to court once the COFP has been returned and the licence is endorsed with the 6 points that takes it to 12.
I now expect- but correct me if I am wrong, that the time between the two coupled with the fact one is Northbound and one southbound will mean they will uphold this as two different offences and 6 points?
Is there anything at all that she can do?
She is prepared to accept the 6 month ban, as there are no exceptional hardships either.
As it happens these points are the only ones she has ever had and has had a family bereavement plus a break up which sent her mental health into decline. She feels that she should really have been driving due to lapses in concentration ( I am aware this is all irrelevant to the case I just felt compelled to add so that she wasnt thought of as a habitual reckless driver).
-
Thanks, sp. "Senior Moment" >:(
-
Has she taken a speed awareness course in the las three years?
It seems so.
-
There are two possibilities:
The first is that she committed a single continuous offence. That is, she exceed the speed limit once, remained above that limit, and was caught by two cameras during that single transgression. That is obviously not applicable here as it was the same camera.
The second is that she committed two separate offences but they were committed “on the same occasion.” When a driver is convicted in that way, two fines and endorsements are imposed, but only one lot of points (for the most serious).
“On the same occasion” is not defined and it would be for a court to decide the issue if it was claimed. Twenty minutes apart would seem a bit of a stretch to meet that definition. However, since it seems one of the offences will take her to 12 points she will have the matter dealt with in court anyway and it will cost her nothing to make that argument.
Has she taken a speed awareness course in the las three years?
-
My friend ( genuinely) has committed 3 speeding offences
Send three and fourpence, we're going to a dance.
Is there any way in which it could be reduced to 9 points if the 2 incidents so close to each other are counted as 1.
That would tend to depend largely on the facts of the case(s), which you have so far chosen not to trouble us with.
What would you need to know? Sorry I dont know everything about it myself just yet but can ask them. They wont go onto websites like this so I offered to help as I have been/was on the old forums.
Thanks.
-
My friend ( genuinely) has committed 3 speeding offences
Send three and fourpence, we're going to a dance.
Is there any way in which it could be reduced to 9 points if the 2 incidents so close to each other are counted as 1.
That would tend to depend largely on the facts of the case(s), which you have so far chosen not to trouble us with.
-
My friend ( genuinely) has committed 3 speeding offences relatively recently, 2 of which are the same camera within 20 minutes of each other all 3 are for doing between 36 and 38 in a 30.
she then discovered she still has 3 points on her licence that doesn't expire until Jan 26 so is terrified of getting a totting up ban.
Obviously she is devastated and having been here before I remember there used to be talk of going to court and having some offences merged into one if they were very close to each other.
Is there any way in which it could be reduced to 9 points if the 2 incidents so close to each other are counted as 1.
She cannot do a speed awareness course for any of them as one was already done within 3 years.
Please forgive my ignorance if it obviously cant, I cannot remember under which circumstances it was considered.
Thanks.