Really need advice - partner's speeding tickets

AdrianC

Spicy_McHaggis wrote: »

So you're backpeddling now.

Please, tell me exactly where and how I've "backpeddled"

You don't have to prove anything as the accused only cast reasonable doubt.

Great. Plead not guilty, stand up in court, and say "Oooh, I didn't receive it, honest, so it can't possibly have been sent, so the ticket is void" then, when the prosecution then stands up and says "It went through this run, on this time, this date, and when it comes off the printer it's automatically folded, stuffed and posted, so would have been in the post by this date, no faults were logged on that run, and XX% of that run were responded to within time.", how far do you think that goes towards "reasonable doubt"?

Spicy_McHaggis

AdrianC wrote: »

Please, tell me exactly where and how I've "backpeddled"

You should need it spelling out to you.

AdrianC

Spicy_McHaggis wrote: »

You should need it spelling out to you.

<chuckle> . .

Aretnap

AdrianC wrote: »

If you claim you didn't receive the NIP, and so shouldn't have the speeding ticket? No. Never. Hell will freeze over first.

The High Court says you're wrong.

http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2009/2924.html

Non-delivery or late delivery of the NIP is a valid defence to the substantive speeding offence, quite independently of any s172 charge. Proving late or non-receipt is difficult of course so it is rare for the defence to be used successfully. But it's not impossible - Peter Gidden of the key case intercepted his postman so had an independent witness to the late delivery.

iolanthe07

Spicy_McHaggis wrote: »

You should need it spelling out to you.

Yes, quite. The spelling is 'backpedalling'!