Free Traffic Legal Advice

The screenshot just shows thank you, your response was submitted successfully.

So is it just an acknowledgement?

Does it not also show your nomination as the driver?

I did not think that it was important/ relevant to mention that the VRM stated in the above letters are the correct one that corresponds to v5c and insurance and so on.

What does it change in my circumstances? If it an important bit if information.

Sorry but can you clarify please?

Let's assume the correct VRM for your car is RM1 and that that is the VRM the DVLA have on your V5C and it is the number that it is insured number. 

But for whatever reason the VRM on your car at the time you were stopped was actually RW1

Which of the two VRMs is on the offers you have receoved from the police?  T

Thank you for removing the personal details. Remiss of me. Ok so I’ll get this form cancelled and just fill in and submit an SD. Although I’m now outside the 21 days…

I'm still not sure what the purpose of the online form you've completed is and whether it commits you to anything at this point.

If you are now outside 21 days it might not be a good idea to cancel it.  Perhaps you should just sort out the "niceties" later when you come to swear it - as suggested by @NewJudge.

Wait and see what they think

... Am I right to answer that yes I’m guilty of the original offence on the proviso the FTP is set aside?
Thanks for anyone reading this and any further guidance.
Rich

Sorry but I think that is a really arse-about way of looking at this.

Assuming you were dual charged with speeding and failure to identify, you plead "NOT GUILTY" to both offences, but you tell the prosecutor that you would be willing to change your plea in respect of the speeding to "Guilty" if - and only if - they agree to drop the failure to identify charge.  You don't set out by saying "Yes I'm guilty" of anything.  Rather you say "Not guilty but..."

I think I may have made a mistake on the SD online! It asked I if I’m pleading guilty to the original offence. And gives a box to tick and a box for text. I checked the I am guilty box and put some text relating to pleading guilty to the original offence if the subsequent offence was quashed. Is this correct or should I have checked the not guilty box??? Now feeling really stupid and worried I’ve just pled guilty to another offence on top!! Thank you to all who have given their advice so far.

As far as I can recall the only offence you have been convicted of so far is failure to identify the driver, and that is the offence that you are swearing the SD in respect of.  When the online form refers to what you describe as the "original offence", is it talking about the original speeding offence or is it talking about the failure to identify?

I may be mistaken but I suspect that the original offence is the failure to identify - the only offence you have been convicted of - so pleading guilty is quite likely a mistake and defeats the purpose of doing the SD in the first place.

But don't panic!  See what other posters more expert than me say...

NB - weren't you going to clarify with the court if you'd been dual charged or not?  It's being dual charged that gets you the best result here because you need the speeding charge to bargain with

Quote

However, if you only have 6 points for a FTF/MS90 conviction on your licence and you have no other charges pending you are probably ok and only need to sort out the statutory declaration for the FTF conviction

But he needs to know whether or not he was "dual charged" so as yo decide how to proceed when the charge(s) are put to him again.

Yes - of course.  I see what you mean, but... if the court has sent him a SJPN relating only to speeding and he's been convicted of FTF, doesn't that mean that he must have been dual charged?

He already has the details of the speeding SJPN so isn't it only the FTF details that he needs now?  That is what I was trying to convey, perhaps not very well, at the end of my previous post.  I certainly don't want to suggest the OP do anything that might prejudice his chances of getting the best outcome he can at this stage.

Pointless speculation but do you think there must be another SJPN for the FTF that - for whatever reason - the court didn't see fit to pass on to the OP when he enquired about the conviction?  Seems rather odd to me that the court didn't either pass on a SJPN with two charges on it, or - if there were two separate SJPNs - that they didn't pass on both.

If I were the OP I'd want to know what had happened and not be worrying there might be more surprises for me...

Not helpful for dealing with this now, but helpful for the future, does your car have a speed limiter button?  If you set that for the speed limit, you will never be caught again.

Are you sure about that?

If you know enough to set the limiter in the first place, surely it's better to drive within that limit and keep a lookout for changes rather relying on technology that can fail?

Saying "My speed limiter failed" is no defence to a speeding charge

Quote from: belinda on April 19, 2025, 09:09:03 pm

but even though the letter says I might be offered the course - I doubt it given the offences that took place after!

Your driving history is not a factor. It is based upon qualifying Speed and >3yrs between offence dates for which the last course was taken. Remember, it is date of offence, not date you completed the course. Your online licence record should tell you what this is if you cannot remember.

The online licence record doesn't contain details of offence dates for speed awareness courses, does it?

Mine certainly doesn't.