Speeding fine advice please

macman

I find it incredible that only one date was offered in a 3 month window. There are normally multiple venues and dates offered, you don't have to attend the nearest if the dates don't work for you.
I did one about a year ago and there were at least eight venues offered.

Car_54

Retrogamer wrote: »

You either do the course or submit your license for 3 points and pay the £100 fine.

As soon as he realised he wasn't able to do the course, he should have arranged to submit his license for the 3 points and £100 fine.

As he failed to do this (probably assumed the matter would go away as so many do) he got a court summons for failing to comply.

You can either attend in person to make your please. The result will still be a higher fine than the original £100 but you may be able to keep it as 3 points for turning up and making the effort.

Writing in makes it look like you can't be bothered. The summons was due to not complying with the course / original fine so this looks poorly on him and this is why he's received more points and a bigger fine.

With issues like this it's always best to ask for advise before deciding what to do, rather than after.

This still makes no sense.

He would not have been expected to attend court if pleading guilty. The last thing the courts want is for minor speeding offenders to turn up in person - it would bring the criminal justice system to a standstill.

The court probably would not even know about the course, as it's totally irrelevant to the offence.

Six points is way out of line for the speed mentioned: if true, he could well appeal.

Marktheshark

It must have been a very important reason not to turn up on that date, it is going to cost a small fortune in insurance for the next few years.

AdrianC

Scepticism over some of the details aside, can anybody else spot the contradiction here...?

k3l10151 wrote: »

The next he heard was a court date

k3l10151 wrote: »

No, he wasn't asked to go to court.

Car_54

AdrianC wrote: »

Scepticism over some of the details aside, can anybody else spot the contradiction here...?

Not really a contradiction.

A summons for a low-level speeding offence would normally give the option of pleading guilty by letter.

Retrogamer

Car_54 wrote: »

This still makes no sense.

He would not have been expected to attend court if pleading guilty. The last thing the courts want is for minor speeding offenders to turn up in person - it would bring the criminal justice system to a standstill.

The court probably would not even know about the course, as it's totally irrelevant to the offence.

Six points is way out of line for the speed mentioned: if true, he could well appeal.

This is the same advice that's repeated over and over for the same circumstances on the Pepipoo forums where there is a lot more members with courtroom experience. (ex / current traffic police, lawyers etc)
Going to court to plead mitigating circumstances carries a lot more weight than simply writing a letter.

Tobster86

How was he actually done for speeding, and where? As said before, it's below the ACPO guidelines for enforcement so shouldn't have set off automated equipment and shouldn't have been pursued further from 'talivan' (do people still call them that?) footage.

The only sensible explanation at that speed is that he gained the attention of a traffic police officer somehow, who then followed him for an adequately long period of time as he casually sped without checking his mirror.

I think there's a lot more to this than meets the eye.

MEM62

k3l10151 wrote: »

My partner got a speeding ticket (34 in a 30 zone).
It happens :-(

He applied to do a speed awareness course and was accepted. He was only offered 1 date in the 3 month window which he couldn't make so he emailed them to explain, ask for another date and paid for the course.
Courses cannot always arranged at the offender's convenience.

The next he heard was a court date so he contacted them again, they said this was normal procedure when the course hasn't been completed within the 3 months, and to write to the court citing mitigating circumstances. He did this, and has now received a letter from the court with a much higher fine (on top of the £100 he's already paid) plus 6 points. Can this be appealed? He did everything he was told to do.
Everything apart from attend the course or Court.

Thanks.

Perhaps his approach to the whole thing was a little casual and the requirement to attend both the Course and Court were not taken seriously enough. I doubt that there is any avenue of appeal likely to be met with any sympathy so just take the points & fine and learn from the experience.

k3l10151

Wow there are some rude responses on here. I can assure you I'm not holding anything back.

It was a speed camera, he was on an unfamiliar road.

He took the letters to work yesterday with the intention of looking into the appeals process but didn't get a chance, hence me asking here on his behalf.

When he went to book the course there was only one date available. He couldn't attend due to work commitments so he phoned to explain. he was told they couldn't help over the phone, he must email which he did.

Heard nothing until court letter turned up, he rang and was told to send a letter stating mitigating circumstances which again he did. He was not asked to attend court.

I'm not sure what has warrented the scepticism, I've been completely honest. To those who gave advice thank you. My partner is not trying to get away with anything, my op asks if the 6 points and higher fine can be appealed. Obviously with hindsight he'd have taken the 3 points but this seems excessive.

Tobster86

k3l10151 wrote: »

Wow there are some rude responses on here. I can assure you I'm not holding anything back.

You've stated 34mph which is highly unlikely to trigger a speed camera as they are generally set to ACPO guidelines (10% of speed limit + 2mph).

Prosecution is possible from 1mph over and lower-end cases tend to come from police officers in circumstances where (A) the driver has drawn attention to themselves, (B) the driver has then failed to completely slow down when followed by said officer, and (C) failed the subsequent roadside attitude test.

The punishment that the court has levied seems excessive and unusual for the circumstances. The only reasonable explanation for it boils down to perceived attitude of the offender. It may be frustrating at times (I'm largely against automated law enforcement on principle), but you'll get the best result out of the legal system by showing it respect; turning up well dressed to apologise for having broken the law. Anyone can knock a letter together in minutes, and said letter can get lost in the post.

k3l10151 wrote: »

It was a speed camera, he was on an unfamiliar road.

What county/road was this? This is useful and relevant.