Plead guilty by post (new date scheduled for me to attend court anyway).

[jadr]

A few months ago, it would seem I had an incident in a car park. The police contacted me in March and confirmed if I was using the car at the time in question, and I was. They advised that I had been accused of hitting another vehicle in the car park. At the time in question, I had briefly been concerned that I had been close to the other vehicle, but the sensor in my car hadn't gone off and when I checked my vehicle (not theirs) there was no damage whatsoever not even a scratch, so i genuinely thought no more of it. I mentioned this to the police at the time of the interview, at which point they charged me, though there were no witnesses beyond an anonymous sticker left on the accusers vehicle, with the registration number for my car and the colour of the vehicle on it. The person who alleged they had been struck by me advised that a back light was damaged and they had required a repair, but we unable to advise how much this had cost?

When the form came in allowing me to plead guilty, I did so. Explaining in mitigation, that at time I had satisfied myself I was being paranoid, and genuinely didn't think I had the vehicle, but I had clearly been negligent in not checking the other car to ascertain the same. I also mentioned an inaccuracy in the police report as they had incorrectly advised I had checked the other person's vehicle not just my own and I wanted that amended for the record. When I phoned in to check my result or sentencing with the procurator fiscal they advised that a new date had been set for me to discuss it in court, due possibly to my mitigation contradicting my guilty plea, they also told me it's nothing to worry about? Is this normal I'm very worried, and I do accept that, given the fact I'd saw fit to check my own vehicle. I should have checked the other vehicle also. Checking my own vehicle isn't enough (the police had actually said that to me when I'd advised I'd checked my vehicle, which made the report saying I'd checked the other person car -and not my own- a little strange). I'm a new driver with no points on my licence (yet). Am I being called in because I am about to be banned. I had hoped that my guilty plea would have resulted in point/ban and a fine, but I thought it might draw a line under the matter. Can anyone advise what I should do next?

[HandyAndy]

Am I being called in because I am about to be banned.

Are you sure you have this right? Scottish courts are not bound by the sentencing guidelines for England & Wales (which are the only ones I have knowledge of) but I believe they follow them quite closely. If that is so, there is absolutely no way you would face a ban for an incident such as the one you describe.

I also do not understand where your checking the other car for damage comes in. If you drive carelessly (and colliding with a stationary car certainly meets that definition) whether or not you check for damage is irrelevant. The offence has already been committed and checking for damage (or not) does not alter that.

As well as that, before you entered your plea, you should have been provided with the evidence the police intend to rely on to convict you (again, assuming Scottish courts work in the same way as those in E&W). Were you provided with that evidence?

Are you sure you have only been convicted of careless driving?

[jadr]

I've been accused of failing to stop and provide details, but I didn't think I'd made contact with the other vehicle. It's road traffic act 1988 section 2,3 & 4 that I've been charged for.

The evidence sheet advised that a note had been left on the car in question with my car reg number and colour (not by me by some random unknown 3rd party). The owner of the car then took a picture of some damage to their back light and contacted her insurance, sending them the pictures. There's no CCTV and the driver of the other vehicle was unable to advise how much her repairs cost with the insurance. The police officers have then written that I said "I didn't realise I had made contact with the other vehicle and I even went out and checked her car and I didn't see any damage". That's actually a misquote as I said I had checked my vehicle, not theirs. That is literally all the evidence they have used to charge me. I still feel uncertain I hit the other car, but given the fact they needed the repairs done and I felt I had been close to a vehicle, and the weird note left by a 3rd party, I assumed I must have been wrong about missing the vehicle and must have made contact, hence the guilty plea.

[jadr]

I'm really worried about it, and I don't know what I should do next.

[HandyAndy]

It's my mistake. I assumed (wrongly) you'd been convicted of careless driving.

That said, I still don't see how you would face a ban for this offence. As well as that, it's shame you pleaded guilty. From what you say, there is no evidence (that you were provided with) that you were involved in a collision. All there is is that somebody has left your car's registration number on your windscreen. They could have left mine. It needed a statement from a witness saying they saw your car collide with the other. But since you all but admitted the offence in interview, that seems to sew it up. Were you offered the services of a solicitor during that interview?

I'm still confused as to why you have been asked to attend court:

....they advised that a new date had been set for me to discuss it in court, due possibly to my mitigation contradicting my guilty plea,...

but...

Am I being called in because I am about to be banned.

Have you actually been convicted yet? If not, the former is far more likely. There is a defence to the charge if you had no reason o believe that any damage had been caused. Contrary o what the police old you, there is no requirement to inspect both cars (though of course it is much easier o use that defence if you had).

[jadr]

I haven't been convicted, so far I've just been charged. I thought the police were chatting to ascertain what might have happened. They only advised about a solicitor after I was charges. At which point I advised that I genuinely hadn't thought I made contact with another vehicle. At which time they said "well there was damage to it". They made me feel that I had done something wrong by not checking the other vehicle. That's the whole basis of my guilty plea. I went from not thinking I had done anything wrong, to doubting myself and thinking I had a legal responsibility to check the other vehicle, any time I felt I had even been close to another car.