Free Traffic Legal Advice

You can only respond as Andy suggests by making sure you provide all the information you have about the person to whom you sold the vehicle. The police will almost certainly prosecute you. Your defence will be that you were not the person keeping the vehicle and that you have provided all the information which is in your power to give which may lead to identification of the driver.

Yes they would receive information from the DVLA the date of disposal and who the current registered keeper is if the DVLA have issued a V5C.

I don't think the police will bother with any of that.

Did you drive at all on that day past the site of the alleged offence? If so, at what time?

Do I just take the L and pay the fine (£660 !!) or do I dispute this?

Certainly not! You must dispute it.

You have it in writing that if you plead guilty to one charge and not guilty to the other, the one to which you have pleaded not guilty will be withdrawn.

If you responded as you say you did, even ignoring “the offences being laid in the alternative”, you should not have been convicted without facing a trial, for which you would have to attend in person.

Did you keep a copy of your response?

You need to contact the court to find out why you have been convicted of the offence to which you pleaded not guilty, when you had the firm understanding that it would be discontinued.

There are two aspects to this.

First of all, you were convicted by a court under proceedings of which you were not aware. The normal way to deal with this is to make a “Statutory Declaration” to that effect. The conviction and all the penalties that went with it are expunged and the charge(s) will be put to you again.

In your circumstances, provided you were the driver at the time of the speeding allegation, you can ask the prosecutor to drop the “Fail to Provide Details” (FtP) charge if you plead guilty to speeding. This is usually accepted and - provided your speed was not particularly excessive - you will finish up with a much less serious conviction (with a lower impact on any future insurance premiums), fewer points and a lower fine.

The other issue is the level of the fine. Firs of all, the speeding charge is a dead duck as they have no proof that you were driving. The FtP offence attracts a fine of 1.5 times your net weekly income. Since the court had no details of your income, they would have used a default figure of £440pw. As well as that you will be charged a “victim surcharge” of 40% and prosecution costs. So you would have been fined £660, a surcharge of £264 and £90 costs which equals £1,014.

If you want to go through that process it is unlikely that you will be able to do so without attending court. But it’s worth a try.

If you simply want to challenge the level of the fine, the normal way to do that is to ask to to have your case reopened under s142 of the Magistrates’ Court Act. That section is designed principally to allow mistakes to to be rectified. But if the court had no details of your income, they would have proceeded perfectly properly in imposing a £660 fine, so I doubt a request to reopen would be successful. In any case, it would only be beneficial to you if your weekly income is less than £440. If it is more, you could find the fine increased.

I cannot progress through the process you have provided a link to because I do not have a valid URN, so I don’t know how it works. But I would imagine, depending on your responses, it will guide you to one or other of the two processes I described.

If you’re not bothered about the conviction, the points and a “totting up” disqualification (as well as the impact all that will have on any future insurance premiums) then there’s really no point in doing much at all.

It doesn't really matter what you did or didn't do. You have an SJPN and you must deal with it.

Respond by pleading guilty and in the "Mitigation" section explain that you were offered a fixed penalty but an administrative error meant it could not be taken up. Go on to ask the court if  they would kindly consider sentencing you at the fixed penalty equivalent. They have guidance which suggests they can consider this in your circumstances.

Yes I did note the odd typo or two.

But I had to admire him for the way he addressed “points of law” raised by someone who was clearly crackers, as if they were raised by an eminent KC.

if I state the above is it likely I will have to attend court? Or can this be dealt with outside of a court room?

Before the pandemic it was always necessary to attend court to do this "deal" because it needs the agreement of the police prosecutor. During the pandemic courts made every effort to have as few  people as possible attend and they began doing this deal under the "Single Justice" procedure without the defendant's attendance. Some courts have carried this procedure on whilst others have reverted to a personal attendance being necessary.

You’ll just have to see what response you get.

I have nothing but admiration for the patience and diligence shown by the judge!