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 - danswa101

Pages: [1]
1
Speeding and other criminal offences / Re: Speeding Offence
« on: June 04, 2025, 12:47:34 pm »
Cool, thank you all.

So we're saying that I should probably just change the plea to guilty to benefit from reduction in fine etc instead of being found guilty at court?

I appreciate your help

2
Speeding and other criminal offences / Re: Speeding Offence
« on: June 04, 2025, 12:46:20 pm »
Hi,

Thanks for letting me know about the personal details. I've updated this on dropbox so it's all blocked out.

I decided to plead not guilty because while yes potentially guilty of speeding, I don't think i'm guilty of speeding at the alleged limit. If I pleaded guilty, that would have meant that I pleaded guilty to the whole offence including the speed they claim?

My issue is that the vehicle was just purchased that day, hence the temporary insurance to drive it home. The vehicle wasn't fitted with a dashcam or any video from my POV as the driver so I haven't got anything to calculate it from my POV, which obviously makes it more challenging to discredit what they're claiming.


3
Speeding and other criminal offences / Speeding Offence
« on: June 04, 2025, 11:36:03 am »
Hi,

A while ago in 2023 I was stopped for two offences - speeding and driving without insurance. The driving without insurance offence was dropped as the insurer made error in their admin and delayed the policy start time. They accepted this and indemnified the policy.

The speeding offence is still on going, I've pleaded not guilty as I don't think I was going the speed alleged. They claim that I was travelling at 90mph in a 50mph zone and provided dashcam as their evidence. In this dashcam or any of the evidence provided, you can't see my vehicle clearly or the VRM. The vehicle was stopped by uniformed officers in an unmarked car. The statement the officer has written, doesn't reflect the evidence they've provided either. I can accept that I was likely going over the 50mph zone as it was a dual carriage way that I thought was a 70mph zone but I don't believe I was going 90mph.

As the officer says in the video, they're playing catch up, so I don't think the speed he's travelling at can be used as the speed I'm going?

I've attached the SJP I received, the video provided by the police and the officers statement. When this finally goes to court (keeps getting adjourned). What's the likely outcome based on the evidence?

https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fo/zoz527l3qls1ig21dglec/AE8VBmBPd3Vk28Fz8Ex320I?rlkey=1w18a4dkm4h6tm4si3mcuogsn&st=89e9aii7&dl=0

4
Sounds like you're looking for a 'Special Reasons' argument, but to do this you would need to plead guilty but mention you want to present a case for Special Reasons. This argument, if accepted by the court can prevent you from receiving points or a fine. However, simply saying I thought I was insured but wasn't probably isn't going to work.

You'll likely need something from the insurance company to say that they made a mistake which meant you wasn't insured or a genuine and convincing reason to why you thought you was (with evidence to support)

As everyone else mentioned, by the sounds of things, you are guilty of the offence so that's probably your best bet.

 

5
Thanks, do you think it'll be worth appealing on that basis? or better to just pay?

I did try to use AI to guide me too and it gave the following points and said to appeal:

The council has not proven that the bay was a residents-only bay, as required for a 12r PCN.

The CEO’s photos do not show the full bay, start/end markings, or demarcation lines separating bay types.

No photo shows the signpost in relation to the vehicle — so it’s unclear whether the sign applied to your bay.

The council’s claim about bay demarcations is not backed up by photographic evidence.

Google Street View images show the road markings in this area were faint, worn out, or absent, supporting your claim of confusion.

Multiple signs nearby (e.g. “Resident permit holders only” and “Pay-by-phone”) could easily cause confusion for a non-resident.

but as we all know AI likes to give you an answer that you want to hear so don't want to go with that alone ;D

6
Hi,

I received a PCN from Westminster Council about a week ago, I did a informal appeal which was rejected now I'm indecisive on what to do.

I found the signage to be really confusing, in the space of 3 metres they had pay and display signs and resident parking. I genuinely thought that I was parked within the pay and display zone and was legally parked. I couldn't see anything that clearly differentiated the space I was parked in to the pay and display ones right behind.

I'm not from London, so unable to go back to the site. I've looked at google maps to see the street view which I've attached and can't see any thing that identifies the differences. The bay lines are very faint on google maps.

I've attached the PCN response, photos the warden took and google street view photos, and one to show where both the signs are. I was parked where the red car was in the photo with the van behind, or where the van was in front of the silver car in the second photo. Do you think I have good grounds for a further appeal or should just pay while it's still in the discount period?

https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fo/xlxldp2rxm0mk3hix80wq/AMARBE8vyadoUDZWG2vT9Kg?rlkey=l1l8i4eebyiwn78jfeyim65qf&st=ml4elus3&dl=0 - PCN, Photos, Council Response etc


Thanks for any advice

[ Guests cannot view attachments ]

Pages: [1]