Free Traffic Legal Advice
Live cases legal advice => Speeding and other criminal offences => Topic started by: coffee pot on December 29, 2024, 02:41:37 pm
-
I'm not about to ask a judge to suck eggs, but it was the evidence that there was a temporary restriction correctly instituted that I required. In my experience Police Officers are rarely in any doubt, and I wouldn't take legal advice from one. The paperwork is interestingly geared to insisting you have done wrong and directing you down a path to admit it, rather than making an allegation and providing all the evidence to back that up. I recognise that had I contested the allegation the evidence would (may) have been presented, but again, you are dissuaded from normal Court activity by the variable penalties for different responses to the allegation. I went and found the relevant evidence, which is required at this early stage despite the fact that all I am presented with is an allegation. Just sometimes it turns out that some part of the process has not been correctly carried out, such as Clarke v CPS 2013 EWHC 366 (Admin). I am now satisfied that the order was in place, and this forum helped me with the missing link which was what that order was and how it may be found.
-
So I have done their work for them and found evidence that there was an apparently watertight restriction in place,...
Whose work have you done? I don't think the police needed confirmation that a restriction was in place. They didn't seem to be in any doubt and didn't need any evidence at this stage anyway.
-
So I have done their work for them and found evidence that there was an apparently watertight restriction in place, and have now been offered a NSAS course - which is fair enough, I guess. Thank you.
-
Many thanks, @andy_foster; my comment was deliberately worded in an open ended fashion to see if anyone could see anything immediately to criticise about it - I couldn't but it's always worth asking more experienced eyes which is the whole point of this forum. That's fine - I'll await developments.
-
Does anyone have any comments please?
Yes. You have received a copy of a notice that clearly states that the restriction came into place on 28th November, which appears to address the only live issue in your case.
It is not entirely clear from your somewhat brief post whether you have read the notice and are seeking confirmation of your unstated understanding of it, do not understand it and are asking us to tell you what it said, or simply couldn't be bothered to read it as you had already done more than your fair share of the work by asking NHL for it.
-
I have now received this response from a very efficient National Highways. Does anyone have any comments please?
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
Thank you, @CharlieVictor33 - that'a good start. @Southpaw82 - thank you too - obviously I'm simply making the enquiry - it's up to them how they respond.
It looks as if their response will be "Nothing to do with us".
You need to be contacting National Highways
-
Thank you, @CharlieVictor33 - that'a good start. @Southpaw82 - thank you too - obviously I'm simply making the enquiry - it's up to them how they respond.
However, this notice says this.
The restrictions are expected to be in place from 23.00 hours on 19 December 2024.
The allegation states, and this is common ground, that I travelled through the area on December 9 2024 at 10:29. Thus this order was not in place.
-
I've found this public notice (https://publicnoticeportal.uk/notice/traffic-and-roads/6760493005a501e9a9197b85) online.
-
I surmise that it is going to be handled as an FoI.
It can’t be, as it’s exempt information under s 21 of FOIA because it’s available to you by other means.
-
Thanks, 666; the request was couched as a request for supply of the document in the first instance and FoI if it wasn't otherwise available. As the holding reply has come from their FoI department, different from that I sent it to, I surmise that it is going to be handled as an FoI.
-
The TRO is a public document: you shouldn't need a FOI request. Try a quick phone call to the council.
-
Thank you; that was posted yesterday.
-
Don't forget to heed the advice given by NewJudge to make sure that you respond to the S172 request as this may well time out before you receive any response to your FOI request. (The council are allowed to take up to 20 working days for this which could mean that you may not hear anything until the end of January.
-
I have been unable to locate the TTRO online, although I have now found that the roadworks are listed as NOMS-406547. Having checked that no previous FOI request has been made for this information, I have therefore today submitted an FOI request to Cornwall Council.
-
If you are replying by post make sure you keep a copy of yor reply (you'd be surprised how many people don't...) and get a certficate of posting from a Post Office counter.
-
Yes Highways England put the limit in place with support from the police, council and local councillor after the recent fatality there. I think the temporary order may have been published in the Cornishman newspaper, or whichever one covers that area.
-
Many thanks. I do indeed, @NewJudge; you have to be careful as if you respond online it's all rolled up into one response. You only get three options; guilty, it wasn't me or I'm going to challenge this so won't respond online. I have completed the paper S172 reply as I need time to explore this a bit more. Christmas doesn't help! Thank you @Irksome as well; I am guessing that on the A30 it will be National Highways?
-
Bear in mind ha you must respond o the request for driver's details within the 28 days allowed and you must respond to it even if you establish that the limit was not lawful.
-
Contact the council or highways authority responsible and ask for the TRO that implements the temporary speed limit.
-
Thank you, @FuzzyDuck, for your swift reply. I have all those. If you use their online portal, you are given only the option of accepting guilt online or challenging - by post. I don't want to do either of those just yet; simply confirm it was me. I have waited for the traditional paper S172 form so I'm happy to complete that and agree it was me driving. However, I remember comments made on the original Pepipoo site that it was extremely rare for roadwork speed limits to be set up in compliance with the legislation and, having won a case against a council after proving their road signage was incorrect, I know it can happen. I am quite happy to do some legwork but don't know where to start looking.
-
You almost certainly would have to refuse any offer of a course or fixed penalty and take the matter to court and plead not guilty. However if you then discover you were indeed within the 50 MPH limit after all, it is going to cost you a lot more than the course or fixed penalty.
What you need to do is confirm the name of the driver. However if before you do that, you could ask for photographs to "Aid in the identification of the driver".
-
I have been sent a NIP of an alleged offence of 59 in a 50mph temporary roadworks with a picture taken by a camera van parked at the side of the road. I don't doubt or dispute that I was travelling at 59mph, but I'd like to see some evidence that the 50mph limit was correctly put in place. Where do I find this information or do I have to challenge the prosecution and put them to strict proof that the 50mph limit was correctly and legally instituted?