Speeding Fine Appeal Forms

darich

thescouselander wrote: »

I think you need to get down of your high horse for a few minutes. There have been hundreds if not thouusands of cases where people have been wrongly accused of speeding through errors made by the police. It could happen to you one day even if you weren't speeding.

I was far from on a high horse but given that people were putting forward their opinions (as was asked) and then being called names, I felt it was unnecessary.

I also realise that there have been countless people caught for speeding when they haven't been but the OP isn't claiming that. The OP is claiming "I was speeding, got caught and now don't want to pay the penalty".
If and when I am caught speeding then I'll pay my penalty like a man but ask yourself this..........a speeding motorist asks for your help to get off with the offence and you lend a hand. A few hours/daysw/weeks later he's out doing the same thing again but this time, his speed causes the death of your son/daughter/wife/husband/close relative.
How do you feel about helping the speeder out now given that his last offence would have banned him if you hadn't helped?

This site is a money saving site- not a dodge the law site.

I am fully aware some people are caught incorrectly but as the OP has admitted this 3 points could cost him his licence, it indicates someone who has a disregard for speed limits and someone who would be better off not driving - for everyone's sake.

bargepole

sanchocapaldi wrote: »

Hi All, I see advertised many websites offering the forms used to appeal speeding fines. Does anyone have these forms, as this could save everyone around £40 on top of the costs for the actual fines and of course the points on the license.

To reply to the OP's question, it's obvious he doesn't understand how the process works.

First off, he hasn't got a "fine", it's a Conditional Offer of a Fixed Penalty, usually £60 + 3 points, for those who wish to admit the offence and avoid Court proceedings.

You can only get a fine if the case is heard in a Magistrates' Court and you are found guilty, then if you wish to appeal, you can get a form from the Court, and a new trial will be heard in front of a proper Judge in a Crown Court - this route is not for the faint hearted.

Those websites advertising "we get you off any speeding ticket" simply send you template letters based on misinformation about the driver's identity, and are not worth wasting your money on.

Much better to go to Pepipoo and get the proper up to date information about all the legal issues affecting motoring offences, then you can make a judgement about whether it's worth defending or not. I joined it 4 years ago, and have successfully defended 3 alleged offences of my own, plus another 17 on behalf of others.

As for the morality of trying to "get off" when you know you were speeding, the authorities use underhand and disproportionate tactics, and try to bend the law, to extort money from drivers - as one CPS barrister admitted to me, "it's all a game". So if you can play the game better than them and beat the system, all's fair in love and law.

heshlokitty

I just got a letter through

37mph in a 30. The only thing is, I'm 99% sure that I wasn't going anywhere near that speed.

But I guess the computer says I did, so I must be wrong :rolleyes:

bargepole

heshlokitty wrote: »

But I guess the computer says I did, so I must be wrong

That's exactly the sort of attitude the money-making machine loves, people who roll over and pay up.

Why not, before sending off the form, write to the camera unit to ask for photographs "to help with driver identification". When you get them, scan them and post in a thread on pepipoo.com, they'll tell you if there is anything dodgy about the alleged speed, and how to fight your case if there is.

researcher

Last year I used the link on this thread to find more info from pepipoo, this was after we (oh and myself) had received a fine for speeding. We had been away on holiday and by the time we received the 'nip' we genuinely had no idea which of us was behind the wheel.

We followed the advice given and eventually the case was dismissed. It was, however, long-winded, time consuming and hardly worth the hassle. TBH it would have been easier if one of us had decided to lie and say 'I was driving', just to settle the matter and except the points.

However, once again, the information I find on this site has been really helpful. Thanks. :T

piggeh

The current system is unfair - you could have been doing a speed under the limit, or it could have been someone else. But, rather than the police having to prove it was you & what the speed was, the magistrates generally take their word for it. You only have to look at pepipoo for several examples and very very few examples of the mag throwing the case out. To even succeed where you have a strong case you have to drag it out to the crown court and spend hundreds of hours of your own time compiling evidence, writing letters etc. It doesn't matter if you were over the limit or not, it only matters what they THINK you were doing.

The whole letter thing here is now out of date after the European courts decided it was lawful for the police to force you to give evidence and that you do NOT have a right to remain silent (which is nice). However, if you are on the verge of a ban, you should fight the points regardless, as you can generally put the points off for a year or more by which point other points may have came back off. I decided to fight mine so have first hand experience of what the magistrates are like, but was surprised it took a year for the points to be added.

No doubt someone will now say that's out of order, "you should take the points if you were speeding" etc - If they used a fair system and didnt place cameras in obvious moneymaking hotspots then maybe that would carry more substance.

anewman

piggeh wrote: »

No doubt someone will now say that's out of order, "you should take the points if you were speeding" etc - If they used a fair system and didnt place cameras in obvious moneymaking hotspots then maybe that would carry more substance.

Yawn. There are often signs with red circles with a number in the middle. This number indicates the maximum speed you should be travelling at in mph. Going above that is breaking the law, money making camera area or not.

piggeh

And how about those that were NOT breaking the speed limit but get done anyway due to badly calibrated equipment? Or those that weren't driving but find they are forced to take 6 points because they cant identify the driver? That's what I mean by 'unfair'. You have to spend over a year of working your own case only for a magistrate to side with the police regardless most of the time, and then you have to appeal before any such plea seems to be taken seriously.

The locations of these cameras have a lot to be desired - for example why put a speed camera at the bottom of a twisty hill - anyone speeding dangerously would have already paid the penalty before the camera acts as any deterrant. I would have no objection to them if they were sensible about it and about the policies that govern their use & enforcement.

Wig

piggeh wrote: »

The whole letter thing here is now out of date after the European courts decided it was lawful for the police to force you to give evidence and that you do NOT have a right to remain silent (which is nice).

I have yet to see anyone categorically prove what the ECHR case said, i.e. the written judgement. It was Idris Francis and some other bloke, and I believe they were challenging the requirement for a signature on the returned NIP.

I don't think they were challenging if the police have the authority to ask for information without following PACE procedures.

bargepole

Wig wrote: »

I have yet to see anyone categorically prove what the ECHR case said, i.e. the written judgement. It was Idris Francis and some other bloke, and I believe they were challenging the requirement for a signature on the returned NIP.

I don't think they were challenging if the police have the authority to ask for information without following PACE procedures.

The full transcript of the ECtHR judgement is on the Pepipoo site. The case was all about the right not to self-incriminate, ie S172 of the RTA which means the driver has to admit to being the driver, under pain of criminal penalty. Unfortunately, the European Court went against lots of settled human rights case law, and sided with the money-grabbing UK government, so the PACE thing is now dead.

The signature is a separate issue; the information requested must be in writing, and must be signed; however you can use a letter instead of their form (it makes more work for them and p1sses them off) - this has been decided in the Court of Appeal (Jones v DPP)