Speeding fine help please

Joe_Horner

a.turner wrote: »

Meanwhile you continue to do it on other threads, you're unqualified and uneducated legal advice doesn't help.

Says the man who suggests that a statutory declaration depends on "what the court believes"....

Mercdriver

a.turner wrote: »

Meanwhile you continue to do it on other threads, you're unqualified and uneducated legal advice doesn't help.

Perhaps you would like to declare what your legal qualifications are and carefully consider whether you should be encouraging people to rely on your advice as legal advice.

TooManyPoints

I think the air needs to be cleared.

I know nothing of the credentials of my principle protagonist on this thread or why it has descended into such acrimony. For my part I’ve not encouraged anybody to believe my advice is in any way based on legal qualifications. People who want professional legal advice along with the protections and guarantees that provides usually pay for it rather than seek it for free on the internet. My responses are based on information that is in the public domain coupled with a bit of knowledge of things I happen to know a little about. People can take it or leave it as they wish. It makes no difference to me whatsoever. However, when I see posts that contain clearly incorrect information or dubious advice such as demonstrated on this thread I will do my best to put the matter straight. That, as I understand it, it the point of forums like this. Had the OP taken the advice proffered in post #2 she would be down her local court this morning arranging to pay £335 with the fear of arrest foremost in her already troubled mind. Instead, by working through the matter methodically it has been established that she can almost certainly see that penalty reduced (because of her limited means and the fact she was not able to take part in the court case) or potentially even expunged entirely (depending on the circumstances when they eventually come to light). I have provided her with no misleading information whatsoever.

As a point of interest, the OP has now put her matter on Pepipoo (where legally qualified people regularly respond) and the thread has taken a remarkably similar course to the one on here (leaving aside the misleading or inappropriate advice). Significantly:

- Nobody so far has advised her to pay £335 to avoid arrest. Compare this to:

Best ring the court and discuss a payment plan before they come and arrest you for non-payment

- The query about how she was identified as the driver when she completed no documents has been raised (with equal puzzlement to mine)..

- She has been advised to perform a Statutory Declaration because she was unaware of the proceedings. Compare this to:

The op was aware but ignored the letter on the advice of a friend..

- Nobody has so far told her to prepare to convince the court of anything when she makes her SD.Compare this to:

Good luck convincing a court they only got one letter

and

If they have proof of posting the nip, 172, any reminders, and the sjp pack it'll be down to the op to convince the court they never arrived

.

I do not post deliberately misleading information and I do not become involved in questions where I have no knowledge or nothing to usefully contribute. I'm not a troll and I do not come on here for an argument. If I make mistakes I will hold my hand up when it is pointed out. I do have a reasonable knowledge of Road Traffic Law and the processes that accompany it. People here are welcome to take my advice or that of others. But looking through this thread, I think they need to be cautious when sorting the wheat from the chaff.

a.turner

TooManyPoints wrote: »

I think the air needs to be cleared.

I know nothing of the credentials of my principle protagonist on this thread or why it has descended into such acrimony. For my part I’ve not encouraged anybody to believe my advice is in any way based on legal qualifications. People who want professional legal advice along with the protections and guarantees that provides usually pay for it rather than seek it for free on the internet. My responses are based on information that is in the public domain coupled with a bit of knowledge of things I happen to know a little about. People can take it or leave it as they wish. It makes no difference to me whatsoever. However, when I see posts that contain clearly incorrect information or dubious advice such as demonstrated on this thread I will do my best to put the matter straight. That, as I understand it, it the point of forums like this. Had the OP taken the advice proffered in post #2 she would be down her local court this morning arranging to pay £335 with the fear of arrest foremost in her already troubled mind. Instead, by working through the matter methodically it has been established that she can almost certainly see that penalty reduced (because of her limited means and the fact she was not able to take part in the court case) or potentially even expunged entirely (depending on the circumstances when they eventually come to light). I have provided her with no misleading information whatsoever.

As a point of interest, the OP has now put her matter on Pepipoo (where legally qualified people regularly respond) and the thread has taken a remarkably similar course to the one on here (leaving aside the misleading or inappropriate advice). Significantly:

- Nobody so far has advised her to pay £335 to avoid arrest. Compare this to:

- The query about how she was identified as the driver when she completed no documents has been raised (with equal puzzlement to mine)..

- She has been advised to perform a Statutory Declaration because she was unaware of the proceedings. Compare this to:

- Nobody has so far told her to prepare to convince the court of anything when she makes her SD.Compare this to: and .

I do not post deliberately misleading information and I do not become involved in questions where I have no knowledge or nothing to usefully contribute. I'm not a troll and I do not come on here for an argument. If I make mistakes I will hold my hand up when it is pointed out. I do have a reasonable knowledge of Road Traffic Law and the processes that accompany it. People here are welcome to take my advice or that of others. But looking through this thread, I think they need to be cautious when sorting the wheat from the chaff.

But you do realise if she's stopped by the police and hasn't got £335 she could be arrested?

Mercdriver

a.turner wrote: »

But you do realise if she's stopped by the police and hasn't got £335 she could be arrested?

Did you miss my post? You constantly post as if you know everything. Are you a lawyer? Do you have any legal qualifications?

I am not a lawyer, but speak with knowledge gained from reading widely. You are appearing to be authoritative which can be dangerous to other posters that follow your advice if your arguments are not based on solid knowledge or qualifications.

TooManyPoints

But you do realise if she's stopped by the police and hasn't got £335 she could be arrested?

You really ought to stop this (and I hope the OP has not looked in).

At present the OP has a letter giving her notification of her fine and costs. She is a little over one month late in making her payment. A "collection order" was made at the time the fines were imposed. (Look that up if you're unsure what it is or what it means). What happens next varies from area to area (and I have no knowledge of how Lancashire operates). In most areas the matter is firstly dealt with by the "fines office" who will make a further attempt to contact her to secure payment. In the areas I know about this step is usually taken about six to eight weeks after the deadline for payment. If that is unsuccessful, the matter is passed to bailiffs to secure payment. Only if that is also unsuccessful does the matter return to court and only then can the possibility of arrest be considered. The court has to decide how to proceed and if the defendant does not attend the hearing they might (remember the word "might") issue a warrant of arrest to secure the defendant's attendance. The notion that if she should be stopped by the police at this point then she is liable to turn her pockets out and be arrested if there is not £335 in them is so laughable if it were not so seriously misleading.

I have provided this reassuring information principally for the OP rather than you. Quite frankly, what you have said here is enough to scare anyone not familiar with such matters (as she clearly isn't) witless. You need to stop it.

a.turner

TooManyPoints wrote: »

You really ought to stop this (and I hope the OP has not looked in).

At present the OP has a letter giving her notification of her fine and costs. She is a little over one month late in making her payment. A "collection order" was made at the time the fines were imposed. (Look that up if you're unsure what it is or what it means). What happens next varies from area to area (and I have no knowledge of how Lancashire operates). In most areas the matter is firstly dealt with by the "fines office" who will make a further attempt to contact her to secure payment. In the areas I know about this step is usually taken about six to eight weeks after the deadline for payment. If that is unsuccessful, the matter is passed to bailiffs to secure payment. Only if that is also unsuccessful does the matter return to court and only then can the possibility of arrest be considered. The court has to decide how to proceed and if the defendant does not attend the hearing they might (remember the word "might") issue a warrant of arrest to secure the defendant's attendance. The notion that if she should be stopped by the police at this point then she is liable to turn her pockets out and be arrested if there is not £335 in them is so laughable if it were not so seriously misleading.

I have provided this reassuring information principally for the OP rather than you. Quite frankly, what you have said here is enough to scare anyone not familiar with such matters (as she clearly isn't) witless. You need to stop it.

Every area is difference in a lot of places courts have their own warrant officers. Given you don't know at what stage this is at are you saying theirs no chance she'll be arrested if there's a fines warrant and she's stopped by the police?

Not to mention a warrant for failing to appear at court for the speeding offence.

a.turner

And given the fact the OP has until 17th April 2019 to pay said fine what's going to happen now?

Pay or risk a warrant for control of goods, a warrant for arrest and return to court they were warned.

TooManyPoints

You really don't give up do you!?

Given you don't know at what stage this is at are you saying theirs no chance she'll be arrested if there's a fines warrant and she's stopped by the police?

I do know what stage it's at. She has a letter informing her of her fines and they were due to be paid by 17th April.

...are you saying theirs no chance she'll be arrested if there's a fines warrant and she's stopped by the police?

No. I'm saying there is no chance of a warrant for her arrest having been issued in such a short time. If you know of anywhere where warrants for arrest for non-payment of a single fine are issued within six weeks of the fine being due do let me know.

Not to mention a warrant for failing to appear at court for the speeding offence.

Warrants are not issued for failing to appear on a speeding charge. In all likelihood the matter was initially heard under the Single Justice procedure (which she cannot attend anyway). If it went from there to a full court it was obviously proved in her absence and the fine imposed. There is simply no need to issue a warrant for her arrest as she would not have appeared on summons, would not have been subject to bail and had no obligation to attend whatsoever.

And given the fact the OP has until 17th April 2019 to pay said fine what's going to happen now?

I've told you what's likely to happen if she does nothing. However, once she has done the Statutory Declaration (which you suggested she was not entitled to do) and it reaches the convicting court her conviction will be nullified and all action will be off.

I'd like to think we can leave this now but please don't keep putting the fear of God into the OP. There is absolutely no prospect of her getting arrested for this matter at this stage. It's a speeding fine and she will hopefully take the advice of performing an SD and the normal court process in that event will take its course. Hopefully she'll conclude the matter on Pepipoo, where she's less likely to encounter such alarmist prophesies.

Quentin

TooManyPoints wrote: »

You really don't give up do you!?…….

Give us all a break and put those people you argue with all the time on your ignore list!

Getting boring and no help to the OP to have to wade through your posts claiming to be the authority

Everyone is told on every page of the forum to understand that anyone can post here!

It's up to the reader to use caution over any posts that suggest advice