Author Topic: Incorrect road name on NIP and different date on SJP - Summons to court  (Read 1117 times)

0 Members and 0 Guests are viewing this topic.

moonshine23

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 9
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Yes I responded online to the SJP. I pleaded not guilty and have been summoned to court. I am seeking advise on how to conduct myself.

Irksome

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 37
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Are you sure you want to plead not guilty?

I think your defence to the S172 charge is weak, and it would take a fair wind for you to be found not guilty.  You were not really equivocal in your response and did not nominate anyone else which is your responsibility as the RK (although not apparently the keeper at the time).

A contested trial is going to cost you around double in terms of costs and a larger fine etc.

NewJudge

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 529
  • Karma: +24/-0
    • View Profile
Have you given any thought to how you might counter the evidence when the police present a photo of your car which they've used to identify it? I believe you've seen that photograph and you've said it "...looks like a similar shape to my vehicle but it isn't distinctly obvious."

I don't think you've mentioned it (apologies if you have) but is the location anywhere that you know and somewhere your car might have been driven?

 

moonshine23

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 9
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Of course I want to plead not guilty - I cannot possibly fathom taking responsibility for an incident especially when I've done nothing wrong!

The NIP was responded too, the police themselves when I called to report the possibility of a cloned plate had said that its possible because I couldn't nominate someone that the response went down as not received. But they were understanding that I couldn't identify a driver as I know my car was in my control so how could they expect me to?

The area is on the other side of town that I do not visit. So there is no way I was there..
« Last Edit: July 29, 2024, 08:16:16 am by moonshine23 »

NewJudge

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 529
  • Karma: +24/-0
    • View Profile
Yes I responded to the SJP and have been summoned to court. I'm looking for advice how to present snd structure my case
So the questions I raided in my earlier post (#17) remains. The first of those two is particularly important.

The Rookie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 529
  • Karma: +11/-1
  • Gender: Male
  • Location: Warwickshire
    • View Profile
Of course I want to plead not guilty - I cannot possibly fathom taking responsibility for an incident especially when I've done nothing wrong!
You aren't being charged with anything related to 'an incident' though, you are being charged with failing to ID the driver (or at least respond in a way that is satisfactory) and while you may not visit that part of town it's irrelevant as it's not 'your car' and perhaps your daughter or another driver does.

Arguably you are guilty of the S172 offence as you could and should have just named your daughter as the keeper. or in other words you did do 'something wrong'.

I really think you'll struggle to defend this successfully as you mishandled that original request IMO.  You will need your daughter and any other potential driver as witnesses (having served compliant witness statements in advance) as you were in effect replying to the S172 request by proxy on the information provided by your daughter (who had no legal obligation on her to tell YOU the truth don't forget).
There are motorists who have been scammed and those who are yet to be scammed!

The Rookie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 529
  • Karma: +11/-1
  • Gender: Male
  • Location: Warwickshire
    • View Profile
To go through the information you provided a line at a time
I am disputing this as the vehicle XXX was most definitely not in this area, let alone being driven at this time.
This could have been worded more constructively.

The vehicle was infact parked at XXX at the time of the alleged offence. This address is the home of my daughter the main driver of this vehicle.
Again, a bit confrontational, it also says your daughter is the main driver, but should have said keeper, I can't see that you provided any details of 'my daughter', also you haven't named all plausibly possible drivers, unless your daughter lives alone and no-one else routinely has access?

The vehicle was driven the first time on this date when my daughter left the
house in the afternoon to attend her 8 week postnatal check at the GP at 13:48. am including a screenshot of the following as evidence:

My daughters Google Maps Location Timeline history on history. The first journey is recorded as leaving her house at 13:48 showing her travel
When it later moved is largely irrelevant and your daughters timeline doesn't prove no-one else was driving at the relevant time. (you called her 'main driver' not 'only usual driver').

- A screenshot from the video Eufy doorbell. This doorbell only captures and records moments where movement is detected rather than continuous recording. The first recording on XXX shows her leaving the property to enter the vehicle in the afternoon. The vehicle is parked the driveway. There are no recordings earlier than 01:34PM as movement was detected.

-Photo of front and rear as the car was at the time of the alleged offence (parked on driveway)
The camera 'evidence' is irrelevant as only 'you' (your daughter in reality I presume) can verbally attest that there was no earlier photo, so it doesn't add any credibility to your version of events that it wasn't moved earlier unless it shows a timeline of movement detected?.

-Photo of front and rear as the car was at the time of the alleged offence (parked on driveway)
Unless they don't tally with the photos of the car detected I'm not sure what help that is - perhaps share the Police and your photos and see if anyone can spot anything.  The description is also 'strange' stating it was as it was at the time of the offence (implying something has no changed?) also where you photographed it is meaningless.

I am not certain whether there are any continuous recording Council CCTV cameras at my daughter's location with a view of her driveway. I would request Police to investigate this
Your job, not theirs, they don't need to do anything of the sort, you could have requested the council look at footage under a SAR.
« Last Edit: July 29, 2024, 11:23:21 am by The Rookie »
There are motorists who have been scammed and those who are yet to be scammed!

NewJudge

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 529
  • Karma: +24/-0
    • View Profile
The area is on the other side of town that I do not visit. So there is no way I was there..
The issue isn't about where you usually visit or do not visit. You told us your daughter is the person keeping the vehicle and is the main driver.

There seems to be lots of conflation between between you, "we" and your daughter. You are the one charged with this offence. And my question in post #17 remains. The police are very likely to produce a photograph of (what they say is) your (or perhaps your daughter's) car at the time and place alleged. How will you deal with that? Simply saying it wasn't is unlikely to cut the mustard.

666

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 332
  • Karma: +11/-8
    • View Profile
The area is on the other side of town that I do not visit. So there is no way I was there..
The issue isn't about where you usually visit or do not visit. You told us your daughter is the person keeping the vehicle and is the main driver.

There seems to be lots of conflation between between you, "we" and your daughter. You are the one charged with this offence. And my question in post #17 remains. The police are very likely to produce a photograph of (what they say is) your (or perhaps your daughter's) car at the time and place alleged. How will you deal with that? Simply saying it wasn't is unlikely to cut the mustard.
Will that ever happen?

There is no evidence that the OP was driving, and he can't "do the deal". So the speeding charge should be dropped and only the FTF charge proceed to trial.

Southpaw82

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 734
  • Karma: +11/-2
    • View Profile
The area is on the other side of town that I do not visit. So there is no way I was there..
The issue isn't about where you usually visit or do not visit. You told us your daughter is the person keeping the vehicle and is the main driver.

There seems to be lots of conflation between between you, "we" and your daughter. You are the one charged with this offence. And my question in post #17 remains. The police are very likely to produce a photograph of (what they say is) your (or perhaps your daughter's) car at the time and place alleged. How will you deal with that? Simply saying it wasn't is unlikely to cut the mustard.
Will that ever happen?

There is no evidence that the OP was driving, and he can't "do the deal". So the speeding charge should be dropped and only the FTF charge proceed to trial.

A photograph would be very useful if the substance of the defence is “not my car”.
Like Like x 1 View List

The Rookie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 529
  • Karma: +11/-1
  • Gender: Male
  • Location: Warwickshire
    • View Profile
A photograph would be very useful if the substance of the defence is “not my car”.
Or potentially damning!
There are motorists who have been scammed and those who are yet to be scammed!