• Welcome to the LegalBeagles Consumer and Legal Forum. Please register to get the most out of the forum. Registration is free and only needs a username and email address.
  • LegalBeagles is a free forum, founded in May 2007, providing legal guidance and support to consumers and SME's across a range of legal areas.

    Please do not post your full name, reference numbers or any identifiable details on the forum.

1450 Speeding Fine - wow

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • leaforge
    started a topic 1450 Speeding Fine - wow

    1450 Speeding Fine - wow

    Tags: None

  • mystery1
    replied
    Originally posted by leaforge View Post
    Hello

    Thanks for all the useful comments.

    just to add...
    the court was informed of the drivers name and also informed that he was not in the UK - he is now resident in Italy, Nissan Navara was perfectly road worthy, used during day for collecting building materials etc. The company car is owned by a limited company.

    I have until 8th Oct to pay it.

    Roy

    Telling the court was entirely meaningless. It wasn't the court that sent the s172 notice. It was the court that found you guilty of not providing an adequate response within the statutory timeframe of 28 days from service of the s172 request.

    M1

    Leave a comment:


  • bluebottle
    replied
    Originally posted by enquirer View Post
    Agreed, it's got Colonel Blimp's fingerprints all over it!
    Getting rid of JPs from the justice system is a subject where solicitors and barristers - and some police officers - share common ground. When JPs are appointed, they are told to leave their personal and political beliefs and prejudices outside the court building. The reality is that many don't and you get ridiculous and, sometimes, disproportionate sentences handed out. I have seen Clerks of the Court shake their heads in disbelief or tell them they can't do what they like, loud enough for everyone in the court to hear. Having prosecuted in front of both JPs and District Judges, I have to say that DJs, being legally-trained, give better justice.

    It might pay you to speak to the court's legal team as they would have handled the case papers prior to the date of the hearing and scrutinised them.

    Leave a comment:


  • wales01man
    replied

    Leave a comment:


  • leaforge
    replied

    Leave a comment:


  • ploddertom
    replied

    Leave a comment:


  • wales01man
    replied

    Leave a comment:


  • leaforge
    replied

    Leave a comment:


  • ploddertom
    replied
    Originally posted by mystery1 View Post
    You have sent a letter to the court. The court has taken this as a not guilty plea. It would appear you didn't go to court. The court had no income/expenditure form on which to base the fine when they found you guilty.

    http://www.motoringoffences.com/uplo...lines_2008.pdf

    The guidlines for failure to furnish are for a

    FINE BAND C
    Starting Point: 150% of relevant weekly income
    Range: 125% - 175% of relevant weekly income


    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...road-user.html


    The magistrates obviously didn't believe you gave all the information that was in your power to give.

    M1
    Spot on I would guess.

    Leave a comment:


  • wales01man
    replied

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied

    Leave a comment:


  • mystery1
    replied
    http://www.motoringoffences.com/uplo...lines_2008.pdf

    The guidlines for failure to furnish are for a

    FINE BAND C
    Starting Point: 150% of relevant weekly income
    Range: 125% - 175% of relevant weekly income


    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...road-user.html


    The magistrates obviously didn't believe you gave all the information that was in your power to give.

    M1

    Leave a comment:


  • wales01man
    replied

    Leave a comment:


  • enquirer
    replied
    Originally posted by bluebottle View Post
    It also has the hallmarks of JPs and not a District Judge dealing with the case. The fine, costs and victim surcharge are excessive.
    Agreed, it's got Colonel Blimp's fingerprints all over it!

    Leave a comment:


  • bluebottle
    replied
    R -v- South Western Magsitrates (on the application of Purnell), a judicial review, confirms that where a defendant's means have not been examined, a fine cannot be imposed or enforced.

    It also has the hallmarks of JPs and not a District Judge dealing with the case. The fine, costs and victim surcharge are excessive.

    I agree with what Enquirer says in their post.

    Leave a comment:

View our Terms and Conditions

LegalBeagles Group uses cookies to enhance your browsing experience and to create a secure and effective website. By using this website, you are consenting to such use.To find out more and learn how to manage cookies please read our Cookie and Privacy Policy.

If you would like to opt in, or out, of receiving news and marketing from LegalBeagles Group Ltd you can amend your settings at any time here.


If you would like to cancel your registration please Contact Us. We will delete your user details on request, however, any previously posted user content will remain on the site with your username removed and 'Guest' inserted.

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Court Claim ?

Guides and Letters
Loading...



Search and Compare fixed fee legal services and find a solicitor near you.

Find a Law Firm


Working...
X