Free Traffic Legal Advice
Live cases legal advice => Speeding and other criminal offences => Topic started by: mrbluejay on September 26, 2025, 03:24:35 pm
-
It wasn't my intention to be smug and condescending and I apologise if I hurt your feelings however you need a reality check.
9 Points + 2 incoming NIP's
You have had 3 convictions and another 2 instances of speeding in 16 months. Plus a speed awareness course somewhere in the last 3 years. At this rate, any special reasons argument you make seems academic as your ability to avoid these instances appear to be very difficult for you.
Or to use the scenario I was arguing against being likely, 'So Mr Bluejay, you have had 5 instances of speeding in the last 16 months yet here you are saying you need to keep your licence. Why should we let you when it just seems to be delaying the inevitable?'
So what are you going to say that you have done to modify your driving and avoid future points? And why didn't you do it before when you were on 9 points?
If you think I'm being condescending, you're going to hate the prosecution.
-
What relevance does the cars being EVs have?
And 6 & 7 mph over a 30 limit is not "just over".
Nobody is being smug or condescending - just warning of a possible hurdle.
I qualified the statement by saying I know it is not an excuse. I ahve personally found EV's to take some getting used to in terms of accelaration, but to be clear I appreciate this is down to me and not an excuse.
Just over referred to the 9 points already on my licence, apologies I did not make this clear.
As for nobody being smug or condescending, I suggest you read the last sentence of BertB again.
-
What relevance does the cars being EVs have?
And 6 & 7 mph over a 30 limit is not "just over".
Nobody is being smug or condescending - just warning of a possible hurdle.
-
Surely the majority of people facing a totting ban are there because they risked their licence by continuing to accrue points when they were in danger of totting. I very much doubt such a question would be asked.
It may be rhetorical, mentioned after is his plea is rejected, but I doubt it being used otherwise.
However it does not deny the OPs ability to present an EH argue to avoid a ban and shouldn't influence under the circumstances. Considering the OP would not be able to make the same argument twice in quick succession, any avoidance of a ban may be academic anyway given their love of collecting points.
I don't love collecting points, all of these points coincide with getting electric cars and have been 'just' over the limit. Before anyone else jumps in, I know this is not an excuse, but is there any need for such smug condescension? If you don't wish to help, then simply don't.
-
I think the issue is this:
Her job means so overnight travel, so where that does happen I provide that care and there is no other reliable alternative.
This will have to be explained in some detail.
Hi,
Yes this is the issue.
-
...do not commit two further speeding offences when they are on nine points.
Or possibly just one... (Either way not ideal)
-
I very much doubt such a question would be asked.
If the guidance is being followed, it should be, Bert.
The idea of the EH provision is for Magistrates to examine the hardship a driver or others might face. The circumstances behind the offences which led to him facing a totting ban should not be considered. But the guidance makes it clear that the court can consider the circumstances when a driver commits further offences in the knowledge that he would face a ban.
In my view it gives the court an additional angle which, if they were to examine only the hardship faced, they would not have. It helps them assess just how important it is for the defendant to be able to drive. I would suggest that drivers who really, really need their licences do not commit two further speeding offences when they are on nine points.
That said, early this year I helped a lady formulate a successful EH argument only to find last month that she had committed a further offence just two days before her “active” points total reduced to six. Fortunately, although she had earlier taken a course, it was just outside the three year period and she was offered another!
Seems you can’t help some folk! :(
-
Surely the majority of people facing a totting ban are there because they risked their licence by continuing to accrue points when they were in danger of totting. I very much doubt such a question would be asked.
It may be rhetorical, mentioned after is his plea is rejected, but I doubt it being used otherwise.
However it does not deny the OPs ability to present an EH argue to avoid a ban and shouldn't influence under the circumstances. Considering the OP would not be able to make the same argument twice in quick succession, any avoidance of a ban may be academic anyway given their love of collecting points.
-
I think the issue is this:
Her job means so overnight travel, so where that does happen I provide that care and there is no other reliable alternative.
This will have to be explained in some detail.
-
Picking up on NewJudge's and other comments, if your wife was probably involved in one of the speeding offences, then why can she not drive herself to MIL, and drive granddaughter to her competitions?
I wondered about that too
-
Picking up on NewJudge's and other comments, if your wife was probably involved in one of the speeding offences, then why can she not drive herself to MIL, and drive granddaughter to her competitions?
-
Yes, ManxTom makes very good point.
There is this passage in the Magistrates' guidance which they refer to when hearing "Exceptional Hardship" arguments:
If a motorist continues to offend after becoming aware of the risk to their licence of further penalty points, the court can take this circumstance into account.
It seems you have committed six speeding offences in two years, the last two when you knew you faced a disqualification if you committed further offences. Although you otherwise might have the makings of a successful EH argument, the court must question whether it is really as important as you suggest that you are able to drive when you have continued to offend with nine points.
You will certainly need strong evidence to back up your claims. Contrary to the above I believe the best feature of your argument is the care needed for your M-I-L. You will need to flesh that out and substantiate it. I would forget the bit about your granddaughter. Again, contrary to the above, I believe what you describe is not hardship but inconvenience.
If you are responsible for both the recent offences, you need to ensure you have them both heard together when presenting your argument. The last thing you want is to present a successful argument for one only to have to have the second heard later. You will face disqualification again and you cannot use a second EH argument using the same reasons within three years.
-
As has already been stated, EH is something that is ultimately for the Bench to consider but to give you some idea of what may be considered relevant:
Loss of job - no chance, in fact this is specifically mentioned in the guidance.
Being in considerable debt that only your job will allow you to service - simply irrelevant.
Your Mother-in-law being cared for by your Wife - possibly but you would need a very convincing argument as to why your wife can't attend her mother without you driving her.
Your teenage Granddaughter being a national level Athlete, an activity which she would have to stop if you were unable to drive her - potentially your strongest argument but is it really the case? Is there no other way she can get there? Public transport, taxi, friend, anything at all?
Your ability to obtain future employment - again, irrelevant.
I could imagine a sympathetic Bench wanting to prevent your law-breaking to adversely affect your Granddaughter but you would have to demonstrate that she really would be affected in the way that you describe.
Finally, don't forget that you don't go to court and simply state your case. You will be cross-examined in detail (under oath) by an experienced CPS advocate. This will include any evidence you wish to produce to the court to support what you are saying. Make sure that any claim you make can be backed-up by hard evidence.
-
Not presenting an exceptional hardship argument will result in a 6 month ban.
Presenting one might reduce or avoid a ban. Or it might not.
Hi, would what I've already listed not constitute exceptional hardship?
How would you answer if the magistrates were to ask you why - if your driving licence is so important to you and to others - have you collected another potential 6 points when you've already accumulated 9 during the last 18 months and did a speed awareness course just two years ago?
-
Not presenting an exceptional hardship argument will result in a 6 month ban.
Presenting one might reduce or avoid a ban. Or it might not.
Hi, would what I've already listed not constitute exceptional hardship?
That's for the bench to consider - the guidance has been posted.
IMHO the arguments aren't wholly convincing. You would be expected to collect evidence to back up your claims and highlight the 'impact on others'.
You may well be challenged why public transport or taxi's could not suffice for example.
I've recieved the images for both alleged offences. All 4 photos for each face the rear of the car, so do not asisit in identifying the driver
Is there any doubt who the driver is? The photographs are only intended to identify the vehicle.
Potentially yes, genuinely could be my Wife on one of them.
Which implies at least one is you - which will still trigger totting.
-
I've recieved the images for both alleged offences. All 4 photos for each face the rear of the car, so do not asisit in identifying the driver
Is there any doubt who the driver is? The photographs are only intended to identify the vehicle.
Potentially yes, genuinely could be my Wife on one of them.
-
I've recieved the images for both alleged offences. All 4 photos for each face the rear of the car, so do not asisit in identifying the driver
Is there any doubt who the driver is? The photographs are only intended to identify the vehicle.
-
Not presenting an exceptional hardship argument will result in a 6 month ban.
Presenting one might reduce or avoid a ban. Or it might not.
-
I've recieved the images for both alleged offences. All 4 photos for each face the rear of the car, so do not asisit in identifying the driver.
I forgot to add to the potential mitigation above, that I am a volunteer listener & leader for the Samaritans and would have to end this if I was disqualified - Does anyone have a view on whether all of the mitigation would prevent a ban?
-
On the off chance that your wife is responsible for only one of these, have you done a speed awareness course in the last 3 years?
Have you asked for images 'to assist in identifying the driver'?
Thanks for replying. I've not asked for images as yet.
I attended an awareness course in October '23.
-
On the off chance that your wife is responsible for only one of these, have you done a speed awareness course in the last 3 years?
Have you asked for images 'to assist in identifying the driver'?
-
Thanks for the replies.
I need to look in to the dates, my Wife could have been driving as it was around that time that she was waiting on her new car, but as I say I need to check.
In terms of exceptional hardship...
Loss of job.
I am in considerable debt that the job allows me to service, however without it I may need to go bankrupt or similar - Need to look into this.
My recently widowed Mother-in-law is cared for by my Wife, not in a full time capacity but she needs to visit her most evenings to organise medication etc. Her job means so overnight travel, so where that does happen I provide that care and there is no other reliable alternative.
My teenage Granddaughter is an Athlete who competes on a national level, I am the only family member who can driver her to her pre & post school sessions, without which she would have to stop competing.
I'm of an age where being re-employed from a unemployed basis, may not attract the same kind of salary, so the chance of me being able to service the debt I mention previously could be a non-starter even if I do obtain future employment.
Hopefully this adds some colour to my enquire.
Thanks Again.
-
Hopefully you've now read he Magistrates' guidance (especially para. 36) which they refer to when hearing an "Exceptional Hardship" argument.
If so, what hardship will you suffer that is exceptional?
-
Unless you have a successful defence to one or both of the current offences (which you haven't suggested), you will get six points, bringing you to 15.. A minimum 6-month ban is mandatory, unless you can convince the court that it would cause exceptional hardship.
Note the word "exceptional". Loss of employment is not exceptional.
The guidelines for the courts are here https://sentencingcouncil.org.uk/guidelines/driving-disqualification/#header_3 (Paragraphs 33 to 38.)
A solicitor may not be necessary, if you are confident and have prepared a good case.
Others will provide more detailed advice, and can comment on any hardship you may suggest..
-
Hi All,
I've received 2 NIP's for alledged offences withion 5 days of each other from the same camera :
36mph in a 30mph zone
37mph in a 30mph zone
I already have 9 points :
Exceeding Speed on a Motorway (SP50) - Offence Date Nov 2024
Exceeding Speed on a Public Road (SP30)- Offence Date May 2024
Exceeding Speed on a Motorway (SP50)- Offence Date Apr 2024
I need my licence for my job, do around 40k miles a year across the country.
So I guess a couple of questions...
Do I need a solicitor?
How likely is it for me to avoid a ban?
For background, I've driven for over 30 years and up until this last year or so, never had more than 3 points on my licence.
Thanks in advance.