Fined £100, then refunded from hm-courts.svs.gov.!? 0 points on gov license check?

BeenThroughItAll

LegendaryMatt wrote: »

How exciting was that course then? I'd hope at least as exciting as the speed awareness course where they still insist on using outdated breaking distance measurements to explain why travelling at 80mph on a motorway is an accident waiting to happen and is possibly the most 'unsafe' thing you can do in your motor vehicle.

With that attitude to things, I can see why you think it's also OK to run red lights.


*braking*

joed123

DoaM wrote: »

If a speed awareness course was offered, the letter has 3 options:

1. SAC
2. Pay £100 and take the 3 points
3. Other, meaning going to court

Option 2 requires you to pay by post, phone or online, and also to send in your photocard licence as proof of identity. (The address is listed in option 2, as you have to send off the form anyway with proof of payment, and include the licence therein). If you didn't do the latter then you might find the NIP isn't complete and you end up with a court case.

I did option 2 and remmeber paying by phone, but don't remember the letter saying to send my license or them telling me to send it on the phone. I dont have the letter to hand at the mo but i would have thought they would have sent another letter to remind me to send it to them?

Stoke

BeenThroughItAll wrote: »

How much like a course was the experience?

Not much in fact. It was more like a driving test

But nice bit of grammar picking there.

TonyMMM

To comply with the terms of the offer of a fixed penalty you have to pay the fine AND send in your licence.

You haven't done that, so it will revert to court proceedings. If/when you get a court date (or a single justice notice) you can try asking for the case to be dealt with at the fixed penalty rate. This is allowed where you couldn't comply with the offer for administrative reasons ..... in this case it is you own fault so they may/may not agree - but worth a try.

Otherwise the fine will be income related , and there will be costs to pay on top.

Stoke

BeenThroughItAll wrote: »

With that attitude to things, I can see why you think it's also OK to run red lights.


*braking*

I also never said it's okay, but it seems your attitude isn't great either darling. Suppose virtue signalling and stuff.

Mercdriver

joed123 wrote: »

I did option 2 and remmeber paying by phone, but don't remember the letter saying to send my license or them telling me to send it on the phone. I dont have the letter to hand at the mo but i would have thought they would have sent another letter to remind me to send it to them?

Not necessarily. It's well past the 6 month point, so you may have been forgotten about, but don't hold your breath. Information about the charge needs to be submitted to the court by the prosecution body within 6 months of the offence.

As far as insurance is concerned, not every insurer processes these things in the same way. It all depends on what the paperwork tells you to do. Look at the Ts and Cs of your policy and see what it says. Failure to follow it can lead to an absolute headache.

joed123

TonyMMM wrote: »

To comply with the terms of the offer of a fixed penalty you have to pay the fine AND send in your licence.

You haven't done that, so it will revert to court proceedings. If/when you get a court date (or a single justice notice) you can try asking for the case to be dealt with at the fixed penalty rate. This is allowed where you couldn't comply with the offer for administrative reasons ..... in this case it is you own fault so they may/may not agree - but worth a try.

Otherwise the fine will be income related , and there will be costs to pay on top.

how long do court proceedings take? I surely would have been conatcted by now?

TonyMMM

Proceedings have to be started within 6 months of the offence ...it can then take a few weeks for the summons to arrive with you, but it does sound like this may have slipped through the net.

You could ring the ticket office - it is too late for them to start proceedings now, so no harm in asking.

BeenThroughItAll

Stoke wrote: »

I also never said it's okay, but it seems your attitude isn't great either darling. Suppose virtue signalling and stuff.

You know that I wasn't replying to your post with that, right?

It's not all about you, snowflake

BeenThroughItAll

Stoke wrote: »

Not much in fact. It was more like a driving test

But nice bit of grammar picking there.

It's not a grammar error, it's just incorrect use of language. Not incorrect application of a rule, just incorrect.