Free Traffic Legal Advice
Live cases legal advice => Speeding and other criminal offences => Topic started by: nihalramsheed on December 08, 2025, 12:48:18 pm
-
Court proccedings (SJPN and Written Charge) would need to have been issued within 6 months of the offence in question. Whilst it is technically possible that this could have been done separately to the s. 172 charge, and be winging its way to you in the post as we speak, it wouldn't have been. The speeding typically times out at least a month before any s. 172 offence would, and the timing of the s. 172 charge is usually at the last minute for any speeding charge.
-
Thank you all for your valuable responses.
What I just realised is that it has been more than 6 months after the speeding incident occurred. So Am I right in thinking that there would not be any additional offense other than s172 as the others would be time barred?
Thanks
-
The speeding offence isn't shown on the SJPN simply because at the moment, the prosecution have no idea who was driving so it's imppoosible for them to charge anyone with this.
It is common practice for the police to "dual charge" those accused of a s172 offence (though occasionally, as here, they don't).
Without that practice the "deal" that is often recommended would be impossible. The very reason the police lay a s172 charge is because they do not know who was driving.
-
Is that your final answer?
Do you want 50/50 - to choose between your original answer and "Band C - starting point 150% RWI - reduced by 33% to 100% RWI for an early guilty plea (+costs, surcharge and ticketmaster fee)"?
-
OP, the guideline fine is Band B, that is a weeks 'relevant' income.
That would be subject to 33% discount for a guilty plea, but also a 40% 'victim' surcharge and prosecution costs of c£90.
You should also be aware that the resulting MS90 endorsement code is frowned upon by insurers, and you will see hefty increases in your premiums for the next few years.
-
Please don't try to agree with things that I never said.
-
Hi Andy,
Thank you so much for your very detailed and helpful response.
I used DPD because I was approaching the 28-day deadline to respond to the request for driver information and I mistakenly believed a courier service like DPD would be faster and more reliable than standard Royal Mail to ensure timely delivery.
I only tracked the package after receiving the SJPN last week. The DPD tracking shows a photograph of where it was delivered, the name of the person who received it, and a note stating it was "delivered to neighbour."
You asked if I was surprised not to receive anything before the SJPN. In all honesty, yes, I should have checked why I hadn't received confirmation or further correspondence, but I didn't. This is my first-ever offence and my first time dealing with any kind of penalty or legal matter, so I've been quite naive about the process. I completely agree that I should have been more diligent.
Based on your analysis, it seems the core question for a 'not guilty' plea would be whether my failure to check the DPD tracking and send a follow-up response, even after the deadline, was not reasonably practicable. Given that I only discovered the non-delivery after the SJPN arrived, I'm concerned about successfully arguing this defence
To be clear, the SJPN only lists the failure to provide driver information (s. 172 offence). The speeding offence is NOT listed.
My biggest fear is that if I plead not guilty and attempt to argue the s. 172 defence, the court will then become aware that at the time of the original speeding offence, I was driving illegally (I had been in the UK for over 12 months, and my Indian licence was no longer valid for driving here). Would arguing the s. 172 offence risk having the illegal driving come back to bite me with a separate charge, even though only the s. 172 is currently on the SJPN?
If pleading guilty is the easiest option to contain the damage and avoid raising the issue of my licence status, I'm inclined to do that. Approximately how much would the fine be for a guilty plea for the s. 172 offence
Thank you for your valuable input
-
As regards the s. 172 offence
Subject to the statutory defences (reasonable practicability), the offence is committed if the required information is not provided within the 28 days.
Unless there is a contrary intention in the relevant legislation (s. 172 RTA 1988), s. 7 Interpretation Act 1978 provides that the requirement is satisfied when the information is delivered to the addressee's last known address, not when it is sent. There is no reason to believe that there was a contrary intention in s. 172, as it contains a defence that would prevent failure of delivery constituting a strict liability offence.
So, on the face of it, the elements of the offence are made out, and unless you have a defence, you are guilty.
That said, your tale leaves two obvious questions unanswered - why use DPD for the response, and more importantly what exactly do you mean when you say that it was delivered to a neighbour?
If your answers to the above do not change the position, the next thing to look at is the availability of any defences.
If it was not reasonably practicable to provide the information, and if you can persuade the court of this on the balance of probabilities, then you have a defence - which means even though the information was not provided (delivered), you are not guilty.
The question would appear to be what does and does not constitute reasonable practicability. Mostly, this would be for the court to decide on whatever facts they find.
At one end of the spectrum, if you properly posted the response and had no way of knowing that it had not been delivered, and no reason to believe that it had not been delivered, then sending multiple copies of the response just in case the first got lost would be beyond what is considered reasonable.
At the other end, if you posted the response, received a reminder saying that no response had been received, and then buried your head in the sand on the basis that you had satisfied your responsibilities by sending it and it's not your fault if they didn't receive it (which would be mostly incorrect), then unless you attended the same lodge as the judge, no court would find that responding to the reminder would have been beyond reasonable practicability or reasonable diligence - for the purposes of this statutory defence, there seems to be a fair amount of overlap between the concepts.
Obviously, you could have checked the tracking sooner. There are a lot of things that you could potentially have done, many of which would fall far beyond what could reasonably be expected. The question is whether or not that would apply to checking the tracking, and the answer is likely to lie largely in whether there was any perceived need to do so beyond idle curiosity.
Were you surprised not to receive anything before the SJPN after sending off the information?
As regards doing 'the deal'.
First question is whether the speeding charge is listed on the SJPN. Unless you have been charged with the speeding offence, you can't do a deal to plead guilty to an offence you haven't been charged with.
Not having a UK licence should not stop you from being able to do the deal - a 'ghost licence' would be set up for the points to go on.
-
Hi
I have received a Single Justice procedure Notice (SJPN) for not providing the requested drivers information.
I have rent a vehicle from Turo on June 2025. And I was driving the car, I was an approved driver on Turo. But I only have an Indian License and not a UK drivers License. I've been made aware now that I cannot legally drive in UK after more than 12 months I've been in UK. And in this case I've been more than 12 months at the time of offence.
I received a letter to provide the drivers information for speeding, for which I have completed the form and sent it via DPD. I've received the SJPN last week stating that I have failed to provide the information requested. And upon checking, DPD has delivered the post to a neighbour.
I'm not sure what should I do. Shall I plea guilty? And approximately how much would be the fine for this. Please advise.
Or should I not plea guilty? I've read about 'the deal' in this forum. But would it work for me as I don't have a UK drivers license.
Any help on this will much appreciated. Thank you so much.