3. Messages

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - The Slithy Tove

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
1
Speeding and other criminal offences / Re: Use of mobile phone potentially leading to a totting up ban & conflicting legal advice!
« on: February 09, 2026, 09:29:24 am »
Quote from: andy_foster on February 08, 2026, 09:46:59 pm
Were you (the vehicle) moving while using the phone? Personally, I do not consider that using a phone whilst stationary in queuing traffic constitutes driving for the purposes of the mobile phone legislation. Others may disagree.
"Others" would include most courts, would it not? Running that as a defence would be a brave move (in the English, understated use of the word "brave").
Quote from: andy_foster on February 08, 2026, 09:46:59 pm
What were you using the phone for? Ironically, if it was for interactive communication purposes, it could engage Article 10 ECHR - which would require any interference with the right to express and receive ideas and information without interference by public authority, unless such interference is provided for by law and necessary to protect other people's rights (in this case their safety). If the vehicle was stationary throughout, then I would argue that it would be difficult to argue that it was necessary to prohibit such actions to protect others from being hit by a stationary vehicle. Again others may disagree. If the vehicle was moving slowly then that would be an even harder sell.
Trying to use that one would be even more "brave". And likely expensive. Mind you, a successful use of such a defence would probably have all the Farage-ites suddenly not wanting to scrap the Human Rights Act after all.

2
Non-motoring legal advice / Re: Suing a water company
« on: January 27, 2026, 09:39:33 am »
My only thoughts are they they (and the other private water companies) are a total disgrace, and Ofwat is as bad, if not worse, for not properly regulating them. I have the worse of both worlds, with the incompetent SE Water providing my water (fortunately not in the areas affected recently) and my waste water handled by the even more incompetent Thames. The former are putting up the bills by some stupid amount, and Thames by even more (something like 50%). I don't buy their claims of investing in infrastructure, as that's what they've been telling us for years. Where the reality is that they have been jacking up the bills, not investing, but instead borrowing so they can shell out huge dividends and bonuses. If they want to invest, then the shareholders should be made to pay (through rights issues, for example). And if I refuse to pay their unjustified increases? I have no defence, and will be sued.

They are the mafia of the privatised public sector. Don't expect to get anywhere with any lawsuit.

3
Non-motoring legal advice / Re: not paying for fuel
« on: January 12, 2026, 09:51:50 am »
Quote from: lateman on January 12, 2026, 09:35:35 am
... the case will be escalated to the next process and issued to a third party for debt collector which may lead to court proceedings"

but anyway, my question is: do i have 14 days from the date of the letter or when it was served (almost a week later)?
A debt collector has even less ability to do anything than PMF. Don't worry about that particular threat, and you can safely ignore anything a third party debt collector sends you. That's all they can do: send letters with ever more red ink and block capitals.

4
Non-motoring legal advice / Re: not paying for fuel
« on: January 11, 2026, 04:09:16 pm »
I would agree with Andy that the use of the word "penalty" puts Pay My Fuel on very dodgy ground, as do threats of prosecution. And you can't transfer a debt without both parties (Morrisons and Pay My Fuel) contacting the alleged debtor stating this, which they haven't. That means Pay My Fuel can take no legal action for recovery, as it is not their debt to collect. They also have the problem that all they know is the vehicle's registered keeper, who is not necessarily the same person who filled up the car and didn't pay.

Morrisons branch is unlikely to play ball, but maybe a cheque (if you still have a cheque book) to Morrisons HO for the amount plus a small amount to cover their costs "in full and final settlement," giving all relevant details of course.

5
The Flame Pit / Re: Solicitor's Agents and Right of Audience
« on: January 11, 2026, 12:49:23 pm »
The YouTube chap really needs to learn how to be succinct and not waffle on or disappear on tangents. You realise what the job of a decent editor is when you have to suffer through videos like this (similarly podcasts where they take forever to get to the point).

But having rambled on myself :) I was wondering if Stephen Langley himself had to make all those arguments to court around the reasons for having right of audience refused. It's a huge effort for a Defendant, especially if they have no formal legal training themselves and are unfamiliar with the ins and outs of it all.

6
Non-motoring legal advice / Re: not paying for fuel
« on: January 11, 2026, 12:27:21 pm »
Quote from: DWMB2 on January 11, 2026, 11:02:44 am
Can you show us the letter you have received?

The 'penalty' sounds a lot like a payment in return for them not shopping you to the police.
I very much doubt they used the word "penalty". They'll probably claim it's an admin charge for chasing and handling the non-payment.

Morrisons are unlikely to relent if you went to the store and offered to pay: they're probably not set up to take such late payments, and they'll claim it's out of their hands and has been passed on to Pay My Fuel.

7
Speeding and other criminal offences / Re: Late NIP
« on: December 26, 2025, 09:52:36 am »
I would not have thought they would send out a reminder so soon. After all, they have 14 days to get the first NIP out and then there's another 28 days before the response is required. Getting a reminder less than 4 weeks after the event would seem a little premature.

At least all the responses have been submitted in a timely manner, so those obligations have been met. If eligible, you are likely to be offered a speed awareness course. The question then is, do you want the path of least resistance (the course, especially as you don't seem to deny speeding), or contest the timeliness of the NIP, which will be hassle and could end up being expensive?

8
Speeding and other criminal offences / Re: 51mph in a 30
« on: December 21, 2025, 08:06:55 am »
Going to court is probably a waste of everyone's time. Sentencing is pretty formulaic, so unless there's any other aggravating circumstances (like you trying to excuse your own behaviour when replying :) then the sentence is likely to be as previously described.

A regular speeding offence is a non-recordable offence, so won't show up on a criminal records check, and does not need to be declared on ESTA (read what it says, it's asking about crimes of deception/dishonesty)

9
Speeding and other criminal offences / Re: NIP received 21 days late
« on: December 17, 2025, 08:47:47 am »
While we all expect the Authorities to abide by the rules and that a late NIP should fail to get a successful prosecution, you also need to be pragmatic. 80 in a 70 is easily within scope of an awareness course, so apart from the cost and time to attend, there are no points on the licence. The alternative is a severe uphill battle in getting a court to accept the late NIP and the cost in losing that battle.

Your choice.

Don't forget the NIP must still be replied to within 28 days, whichever path you choose to follow. And (according to the dates on the NIP), most of those 28 days have already elapsed. Don't miss that.

10
News / Press Articles / Thousands of drivers wrongly fined for speeding since 2021
« on: December 16, 2025, 08:07:15 am »
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c70rk80p9eqo

While any incorrect prosecutions will be reversed, fines and points remedied, what if there are people who totted up as a result of this, and the consequential losses from that?

"Meanwhile, police forces have stopped issuing fines from variable cameras until they have confidence in their accuracy." Free for all on many of England's motorways? Who wants to risk it?

11
Speeding and other criminal offences / Re: Speeding in a rental van - no NIP yet??
« on: December 10, 2025, 04:08:09 pm »
May be wishful thinking that it's "lost in the system". The rental company has a strong disincentive to not having robust processes in place in the form of hefty fines if prosecuted for Failing to Furnish. You could call them to check. The road to "Hoping it'll go away" is littered with casualties.

12
The Flame Pit / Re: Advice on collision with Virgin Media/O2 van in private car park
« on: November 28, 2025, 05:56:54 pm »
All the stuff about visitor permits and reporting to management is a load of petty guff and entirely irrelevant as far as a collision is concerned.

Why submit (and pay for) a V888 form where you could simply contact the company whose name is plastered all over the van? I'm sure they will be interested if one of their vehicles was in a collision, especially if the driver never reported it. Don't go in all confrontational and hurling accusations about the driver. Just start by reporting that one of their vans has collided with your car, and the driver would not provide details, hence you contacting them. Only once that channel is established should you start any complaint about behaviour.

And, as mentioned, just let your insurer deal with it.

If your car was parked at the time, then liability is pretty obvious, especially if you have video. It should come back as a no fault claim, and you can claim any excess you incur from the other party.

13
The Flame Pit / Re: Police evidence is my defence and they still insist to prosecute. Process is the punishment?
« on: November 20, 2025, 04:37:19 pm »
Quote from: BillyH.... on November 20, 2025, 02:52:46 pm
→ Your counter: “The same type-approved device recorded 150 metres in 7 seconds on its own photos. That is 48 mph. The device cannot be correct about distance and time but wrong about speed. The evidence is internally inconsistent and unreliable — exclude it under s.78 PACE.”
“The distance check was only at 150 m, but the device is accurate to 1000 m.”
→ Your counter: Doesn’t matter. The device itself measured 150 m in 7 s on the day. That’s the evidence.
BZZZZZ. Wrong! No it isn't. Thank you for playing.

As Southpaw suggested, there appears to be a misunderstanding around how speed cameras work. Your average speed over 150m is irrelevant. The laser detection measures your speed (almost) instantaneously. It would appear that at some point you were clocked doing 58mph regardless of your speed a few seconds before or after.

14
The Flame Pit / Re: Expecting a ban on Totting Up - How to find a good solicitor?
« on: November 19, 2025, 02:00:07 pm »
Could you be eligible for a speed awareness course for the speeding?

15
Speeding and other criminal offences / Re: Zipcar did not inform me of NIP and now I'm being brought to Court
« on: November 08, 2025, 09:24:44 pm »
Quote from: LondonDriver1125 on November 08, 2025, 07:36:00 pm
Quote
The next thing you will probably get is a Single Justice Procedure Notice (SJPN), if you were to respond to this with a guilty plea, you will almost certainly be sentenced (Band A) without the need to attend court.

I see. That makes sense. I think this is the best scenario I can hope for.
You can do better than that. As Andy has pointed out, the guidelines say that you ought to be sentenced at the Fixed Penalty rate (£100 + 3 points) and not all the surcharges and extras. When you get your SJP, your response needs to request this and mention those guidelines.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10