Seeking advice on motoring offence

RS2000. wrote: »

Where do you get the £620 prosecution costs from? Pepipoo.

I've not seen anyone charged anywhere near that in a magistrates court.

The prosecution cost scales (minimum £620) are here http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/a_to_c/costs/annex_1_-_scales_of_cost/

The new Criminal Court Charges (min £150) are here https://www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk/about-sentencing/types-of-sentence/other-orders-made-on-sentencing/criminal-courts-charge/

There is also a victim surcharge of 10% of any fine, minimum £20.

Dekota wrote: »

Once again, my position on it is I did use my phone to check the time and everywhere asked by the officer I admitted to it, I disputed the offence of not wearing my seatbelt which I was wearing.

So I should plead guilty to both regardless of the latter being false for the sake of saving time and making the magistrate process easy?

For those wondering why on earth I didn't go through getting issued the FPN was my simple misunderstanding of the officer's phrasing of issuing me with a caution which I presumed was a police caution which would go on my criminal record. That was the basis of me being apprehensive towards the officer.

I intend to plead guilty to the handheld device offence but I will defend myself on the seatbelt offence come what may, on principle that I am not willing to plead guilty to something I haven't done.

A couple of points:
1: if you have asked a solicitor take their advice not from us randoms on a forum.
2: In your first post you said you checked your phone for a client's address. In the above post the time. This smacks of clutching at straws and lying. If that is the case you deserve all that the courts throw at you.

Dekota wrote: »

So I should plead guilty to both regardless of the latter being false for the sake of saving time and making the magistrate process easy?

I will defend myself on the seatbelt offence come what may, on principle that I am not willing to plead guilty to something I haven't done.

You have a lot to learn about the British legal system.

Innocent until proven guilty is a fallacy - in reality it does not exist.

It is quite common to plead guilty to something that you have not done - as it is often expedient to do so.

The costs involved in defence are horrendous especially where you have no witnesses or any independent proof.

Your word against that of an experienced policeman? Hmm?

Speaking from experience - you will be made a complete fool of, and the prosecution will run rings around you.

You have already given us two conflicting reasons for using your phone - so it would be easy for anyone to show, or even suggest, you are not reliable and fully honest.

The time involved both in preparing your case and then in court appearances can well mean another pile of losses due to time off work.

Principles don't come cheap.

Iceweasel wrote: »

How can you be so sure that an arrest warrant wouldn't be issued?

I feel that it's perfectly possible - just as being found guilty in your absence is possible.

How does one work out the odds of one rather than the other?

It's not about odds nor what you feel is possible.

Astronaughtwannabe wrote: »

It's not about odds nor what you feel is possible.

You'll need to explain that then, please.

It all depends on what you want as an outcome.

I think that pleading not guilty is a gamble.

And several outcomes are possible.