Free Traffic Legal Advice

Hello,

I am making an enquiry for a friend and would be grateful for any advice.

Whilst undertaking his employment as a courier, my friend has received 3 speeding notices resulting in 3 single justice procedure notices (S172 camera detected offences) for speeding: travelling at speeds of 58, 60 and 63 in what is usually a 70 mile zone, but which had temporarily reduced to 50 miles due to roadworks.  The speed reduced to 50, then increased to 70, then reduced back to 50 and increased again to 70 between junctions 9 to 11 on the M27.

The speed change signage was not clearly displayed and kept moving, thus my friend did not realise there were new speed restrictions in force.

There is no static camera on this stretch of road and presumably it was a mobile camera that captured the images.
(I don’t know if this is relevant : though there was equipment, no road workers were seen undertaking roadworks).

A 4th speeding offence on the same stretch of road was negated by taking a safety awareness course. The 4 offences occurred within approx 2.5 weeks on the same stretch of road.

My friend is potentially facing 9 points to his driving license, jeopardising his job as a courier and invalidating his specialist courier insurances necessary to undertake the job.

I am unsure if this is relevant: he only received the initial notifications of the speeding offences well after the 14 day timeframe stipulated had expired as the initial notifications went to the van hire company address and subsequently had to be redirected to his home address by the authorities. (He was renting a van for work purposes).

We will be contacting Hampshire and Isle of Wight Constabulary for camera calibration details.

The deadline for reply to the single justice procedure notices is imminent and we would really appreciate any guidance.


Thank you

I am unsure if this is relevant:

No it's not. The first notice (to he Registered Keeper) is the only one required by law and so it is the only one subject to the 14 day limit.

Wes your friend offered fixed penalties for any or all of these offences? It makes no difference to the points situation as three points will be imposed for each offence whether they are dealt with by fixed penalties or in court.

The speed change signage was not clearly displayed and kept moving, thus my friend did not realise there were new speed restrictions in force.

Do you men it was not clearly displayed or do you mean that they kept moving and he did not notice them (or both).

It seems his only possible defence is that the limit was not properly conveyed. We’d need a lot more information before an opinion on that could be given. Along with his SJPNs your friend should have been sent the evidence the police intend to rely on to convict him. Is here anything about the speed limit display among that?

We will be contacting Hampshire and Isle of Wight Constabulary for camera calibration details.

Why? Does your friend disagree with the speeds alleged?

Whilst undertaking his employment as a courier, my friend has received 3 speeding notices resulting in 3 single justice procedure notices (S172 camera detected offences) for speeding...

S172 covers the duty to identify the driver of a vehicle.
Do the SJPNs refer to speeding and/or failure to identify the driver?

1. He was offered 3 points for each offence (and a safety awareness course was taken to negate the 4th speeding offence).

I take it that he declined (or ignored) the fixed penalty offers because he wanted to have a court hearing to defend or mitigate the charges.

2. Both : he did not notice the speed changes and the notices kept moving. (He noticed the movement after he was made aware of the offences as he kept an intentional look out).

So it was not so much that the limits were not conveyed adequately then? It's more the fact that they were not where he had previously seen them and where he expected them to remain.

Not a very strong defence, I would suggest. In fact, no defence at all - drivers are expected to keep a lookout for such things.

He was only made aware of the offences once the redirected notices were received.

Just for information, he should bear in mind that these notices are not “redirected”. The Registered Keeper will receive the first notice and will be asked to provide the driver’s details. The RK may be the hire company, or it may be a lease or finance company who provides the van to the hire company, so there may be two links in the chain before your friend. Each of them has 28 days to respond and when they do, a new notice is sent to the person or organisation they nominate.

Based on what you say, I suggest your friend is going to have to suck this up. Pleading not guilty to these offences will not succeed. His defence basically is “The signs were not where I saw them previously, so I missed them.”

Unfortunately, the exercise is going to cost him a lot more than £100 each (which would have been the cost of each fixed penalty that was offered). He will be fined half a week’s net income for each offence (reduced by a third if he pleads guilty) plus a surcharge of 40% of that fine. He will also pay a contribution to prosecution cost of around £95, though I imagine the prosecutor will ask for just one lot of costs. Three penalty points will be imposed for each offence.

If he pleads not guilty but is convicted, he will obviously lose the discount off he fine and surcharge and the costs will be considerably higher - around £650 and the prosecutor may not be so easily persuaded to ask for only one lot.

He will have three options on his SJPNs:

1. Plead guilty and not appear in court.
2. Plead guilty and have a court appearance.
3. Plead not guilty.

If he chooses (1) he will be sentenced and informed of he outcome by post. If he chooses (2) or (3) he will be sent a date to appear in court.

The only thing I can think that may be worth exploring is persuading the prosecutor to combine one or more of the offences either because they occurred “at the same time” or that they were one continuous offence. But I get the impression from your description that they occurred on separate days (or why else would the location of the limits have moved?). So I suspect that is a non-starter.