Author Topic: SJPN to be received  (Read 1854 times)

0 Members and 0 Guests are viewing this topic.

The Rookie

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 364
  • Karma: +5/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • Location: Warwickshire
    • View Profile
Re: SJPN to be received
« Reply #45 on: July 09, 2024, 08:28:05 am »
For the sake of sanity, check your COFP against the stipulations in section 75 Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988 (and have a read of Part III in general).
Here https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/53/section/75

Please use the Modify button to edit a post so you don't needlessly repeat post.
« Last Edit: July 09, 2024, 10:43:53 am by The Rookie »
There are motorists who have been scammed and those who are yet to be scammed!
Agree Agree x 1 View List

Sandy217

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 34
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: SJPN to be received
« Reply #46 on: July 09, 2024, 12:40:15 pm »
Thank you, I will have a look at this, once home this evening.




Sandy217

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 34
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: SJPN to be received
« Reply #47 on: July 09, 2024, 09:29:05 pm »
I have not long arrived home from work - extremely long day.

The second COPF is the same as the 1st COFP (though the date on the letter is different).

I am just starting on a chronology of events.

Police informed me today (amongst giving me reasons as to why I have received a SJPN) - they will send a request to the court requesting the original fine (which I already paid using the reference for the 2nd COFP) and points on my licence.

NewJudge

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 210
  • Karma: +9/-0
    • View Profile
Re: SJPN to be received
« Reply #48 on: July 09, 2024, 10:36:47 pm »
Quote
Police informed me today (amongst giving me reasons as to why I have received a SJPN) - they will send a request to the court requesting the original fine (which I already paid using the reference for the 2nd COFP) and points on my licence.

What reasons did they give for issuing a SJPN? As far as I can see the only reason to do so is because they realised your offence "times out" on 1st July.

If you have a COFP dated 10h June you had until yesterday to accept it. I believe it was unlawful for the police to issue a written charge on 27th June.   

It strikes me that the police have made a ****-up here. They cancelled the original COFP and that should have simply resulted in an SJPN being issued. It seems the only way they could allow you to pay a FP (and it's unclear why they should want to give you that opportunity) was to issue a second COFP. You are now stuck with a SJPN which you have to get resolved one way or another. It's very kind of the police o contact the court on your behalf. But you must still deal with the SJPN.
Agree Agree x 1 View List

Sandy217

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 34
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: SJPN to be received
« Reply #49 on: July 09, 2024, 11:17:42 pm »
It was issued because I did not provide my licence details within 7 days (as opposed to 28 days as per the second COFP) I was never informed it was 7 days!

"You were given 7 days to complete this due to the statutory time limit approaching..."

I believe they allowed me the opportunity to pay because I did submit my licence details on time (1st COFP)- they just failed to process it.

They should be cancelling the Notice not informing the Court to provide me with points!

Yes, I plan to respond with my chronology and quote the legislation provided to me earlier re: proceedings not being initiated against me during the 28 days period to both the Met Police and the Court.

If I still do not receive a favourable outcome i..e SJPN revoked, I will then respond to the SJPN and I think submit a not guilty plea (with my chronology attached).

Thanks so much for taking the time to read my posts and respond.

Sandy217

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 34
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: SJPN to be received
« Reply #50 on: July 11, 2024, 01:15:36 pm »
Quote
Police informed me today (amongst giving me reasons as to why I have received a SJPN) - they will send a request to the court requesting the original fine (which I already paid using the reference for the 2nd COFP) and points on my licence.

What reasons did they give for issuing a SJPN? As far as I can see the only reason to do so is because they realised your offence "times out" on 1st July.

If you have a COFP dated 10h June you had until yesterday to accept it. I believe it was unlawful for the police to issue a written charge on 27th June. 

It strikes me that the police have made a ****-up here. They cancelled the original COFP and that should have simply resulted in an SJPN being issued. It seems the only way they could allow you to pay a FP (and it's unclear why they should want to give you that opportunity) was to issue a second COFP. You are now stuck with a SJPN which you have to get resolved one way or another. It's very kind of the police o contact the court on your behalf. But you must still deal with the SJPN.

Can I ask how you would deal with the SJPN if it was you?

thank you

NewJudge

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 210
  • Karma: +9/-0
    • View Profile
Re: SJPN to be received
« Reply #51 on: July 11, 2024, 03:09:07 pm »
What have you done in response o this latest Conditional Offer? Have you paid the £100 penalty and submitted your driving licence details?

The Rookie

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 364
  • Karma: +5/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • Location: Warwickshire
    • View Profile
Re: SJPN to be received
« Reply #52 on: July 11, 2024, 03:10:55 pm »
I would be 'defending it' on the basis that 1/ They messed up with the first CoFP by not accepting it and have now started proceedings during the suspended enforcement period.

This is not strictly a defence (to the legal definition) but arguing that the magistrates court has no jurisdiction to try your case because of this, however pragmatically you submit a not guilty plea and in your reasons state that the court has no jurisdiction to try the case because the Police started the proceedings during the suspended enforcement period.  The court will then hold a 'hearing' which will look and feel like a trail but is purely to decide whether it can hear the case or not, if it decides it can you could then change your plea.

In the reasons box I am just suggesting using the second police failing but when you have to put your case at the hearing you should raise both failings.

You WILL need to understand this or you will struggle to put your case across as well as you can do, although the legal advisor should be neutral and assist you with explaining the technicalities to the bench some advisors are less neutral than others.
There are motorists who have been scammed and those who are yet to be scammed!
Love Love x 1 View List

ManxTom

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 76
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: SJPN to be received
« Reply #53 on: July 11, 2024, 05:12:47 pm »
@Sandy217  -  in your OP you said that:

"...I returned the letter the next day. I believe it was within 28 days (possibly sent on 27th day as I was intending to appeal / obtaining evidence re signage not sufficient).

I received the form I completed with my licence details from hmcts to say it has been returned to me as it was not within the prescribed time and will receive a summons in due course
..."

But then on 11 June you post an update:

"... Contacted the police who confirmed receipt of driving licence details

I will be receiving a new conditional offer which will allow me to return to the fixed penalty stage.
Will also make payment of £100 as previous amount was refunded
..."

Are you saying that the police contradicted what they had previously told you and that in fact they admitted that they had received your details in time re the first COFP?

If so I don't understand why they couldn't just have said pay us the £100 again that we mistakenly refunded to you.  Issuing a second COFP seems daft and a recipe for confusion.

Have you any record of this exchange with the police?  Was it by email?  Did you record a converstaion?
Agree Agree x 1 View List

Southpaw82

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 440
  • Karma: +8/-0
    • View Profile
Re: SJPN to be received
« Reply #54 on: July 11, 2024, 05:17:01 pm »
I would be 'defending it' on the basis that 1/ They messed up with the first CoFP by not accepting it and have now started proceedings during the suspended enforcement period.

This is not strictly a defence (to the legal definition) but arguing that the magistrates court has no jurisdiction to try your case because of this, however pragmatically you submit a not guilty plea and in your reasons state that the court has no jurisdiction to try the case because the Police started the proceedings during the suspended enforcement period.  The court will then hold a 'hearing' which will look and feel like a trail but is purely to decide whether it can hear the case or not, if it decides it can you could then change your plea.

In the reasons box I am just suggesting using the second police failing but when you have to put your case at the hearing you should raise both failings.

You WILL need to understand this or you will struggle to put your case across as well as you can do, although the legal advisor should be neutral and assist you with explaining the technicalities to the bench some advisors are less neutral than others.

Is that correct, that it goes to the jurisdiction of the court to try the offence? That would normally be the case where the prosecution was commenced outside of a relevant time limit, e.g. s 127 of the Magistrates’ Courts Act 1980.

Rather, I think that here the argument is that the prosecution could not lawfully be commenced because of the restriction in the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988 - an issue the court has jurisdiction to try.
Love Love x 1 View List

NewJudge

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 210
  • Karma: +9/-0
    • View Profile
Re: SJPN to be received
« Reply #55 on: July 11, 2024, 05:33:54 pm »
Issuing a second COFP seems daft and a recipe for confusion.
That's exactly what I believe. I can only think that, since he first COFP was apparently cancelled, there was no mechanism for them the OP to pay the £100 penalty other than issuing a second offer.

I'm not at all clear what the OP has done in response to that offer. If he has paid the penalty and submitted his licence he can suggest to the court that the matter should not be heard because s76(2) of the RTOA says so. If he has not paid the penalty and/or submitted his licence the proceedings should not have been brought until 28 days after the offer was made (Section 76(4)). In either event a SJPN should not have been raised and in the case of the latter, when the 28 days had elapsed it was too late to take proceedings anyway.

The police seem to believe they can issue a COFP for administrative expediency and not be bound by the legislation which governs its issue.

Agree Agree x 1 View List

andy_foster

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 493
  • Karma: +8/-4
  • Location: Reading
    • View Profile
Re: SJPN to be received
« Reply #56 on: July 11, 2024, 07:03:17 pm »
The law likes to sort issues into pigeon holes, often with the use of a large sledgehammer to overcome the natural resistance to the particular hole.

I have been in the audience when the High Court hearing a JR against refusal to state a case reconvened itself as a Divisional Court (without flinching) to determine the substantive issue.

Either way, the prosecution is (on the face of it at least) unlawful, but the court would need to satisfy itself of the fact before deciding that it cannot continue to try the information. I have it in mind that technically it is an abuse of process - which used to require an application for stay to be lodged at least 14 days before the trial date, but no longer does, but the bottom line is that the issue needs to be communicated to the court and the other party in good time, and the court needs to determine whether it would be lawful to continue the proceedings.
I am responsible for the accuracy of the information I post, not your ability to comprehend it.
Agree Agree x 1 Winner Winner x 1 View List

Sandy217

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 34
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: SJPN to be received
« Reply #57 on: July 11, 2024, 09:38:27 pm »
What have you done in response o this latest Conditional Offer? Have you paid the £100 penalty and submitted your driving licence details?

I paid the £100.... but I did not submit the driving licence details (as I did not think they would issue proceedings during the 28 day period.. / within 6 months of the offence as I was informed the 1st COFP was cancelled)

Sandy217

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 34
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: SJPN to be received
« Reply #58 on: July 11, 2024, 09:40:38 pm »
I would be 'defending it' on the basis that 1/ They messed up with the first CoFP by not accepting it and have now started proceedings during the suspended enforcement period.

This is not strictly a defence (to the legal definition) but arguing that the magistrates court has no jurisdiction to try your case because of this, however pragmatically you submit a not guilty plea and in your reasons state that the court has no jurisdiction to try the case because the Police started the proceedings during the suspended enforcement period.  The court will then hold a 'hearing' which will look and feel like a trail but is purely to decide whether it can hear the case or not, if it decides it can you could then change your plea.

In the reasons box I am just suggesting using the second police failing but when you have to put your case at the hearing you should raise both failings.

You WILL need to understand this or you will struggle to put your case across as well as you can do, although the legal advisor should be neutral and assist you with explaining the technicalities to the bench some advisors are less neutral than others.

Yes, I understand this, thank you for the response

Sandy217

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 34
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: SJPN to be received
« Reply #59 on: July 11, 2024, 09:43:51 pm »
@Sandy217  -  in your OP you said that:

"...I returned the letter the next day. I believe it was within 28 days (possibly sent on 27th day as I was intending to appeal / obtaining evidence re signage not sufficient).

I received the form I completed with my licence details from hmcts to say it has been returned to me as it was not within the prescribed time and will receive a summons in due course
..."

But then on 11 June you post an update:

"... Contacted the police who confirmed receipt of driving licence details

I will be receiving a new conditional offer which will allow me to return to the fixed penalty stage.
Will also make payment of £100 as previous amount was refunded
..."

Are you saying that the police contradicted what they had previously told you and that in fact they admitted that they had received your details in time re the first COFP?

If so I don't understand why they couldn't just have said pay us the £100 again that we mistakenly refunded to you.  Issuing a second COFP seems daft and a recipe for confusion.

Have you any record of this exchange with the police?  Was it by email?  Did you record a converstaion?

Yes, the police contradicted what they said.

There is an internal email to the prosecutions manager heading 'complaint case - urgent' which was forwarded to me, in error. The contents of the email discuss me paying £100.00 payment.
No, not by email. I wanted to record the conversation, but thought it was wise not to do so, without their knowledge...