sjpn for No insurance - will loose licence

[islandgirl]

No - read the guidelines. https://www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk...-revised-2017/

[harimalone]

No - read the guidelines. https://www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk...-revised-2017/

Have read this seems in line with your thinking. Where does the special reasons come into this ? please read the below. Seems like if SR is accepted points can be not put on licence.

https://www.exchangechambers.co.uk/h...nal-hardship/#

[HandyAndy]

so you believe guidelines must be followed and I will be issued points but it’s just the case of disqualification or not. Interesting

Let’s not complicate matters too much. Offences which involve obligatory disqualification (such as drink-driving) are subject to different legislation to those which don’t (such as no insurance).

The legislation for “Special Reasons” for the latter is covered by s44 of the Roadf Traffic Offenders’ Act. Here it is:

44 Orders for endorsement

(1)Where a person is convicted of an offence involving obligatory endorsement, the court must order there to be endorsed on his driving record particulars of the conviction and also—

(a)if the court orders him to be disqualified, particulars of the disqualification, or

(b)if the court does not order him to be disqualified—

(i)particulars of the offence, including the date when it was committed, and

(ii)the penalty points to be attributed to the offence.

(2)Where the court does not order the person convicted to be disqualified, it need not make an order under subsection (1) above if for special reasons it thinks fit not to do so.


I’ve emphasised the part which covers “Special Reasons”.

No matter what mitigation the court finds, it cannot impose fewer than six points. That is the statutory minimum and they cannot go below that unless, as provided by s44(2), they find “Special Reasons” not to comply with s44(1). S44(1) imposes a duty to endorse the driver’s record This is a different process to imposing points (drivers can receive an endorsement but have no points imposed). If they do not order an endorsement (by virtue of s44(2) they cannot impose points.

I've included the legislation because that is the definitive source where the power for Magistrates to find "Special Reasons" originates. Sometimes solicitors' guidance that you find can be confusing. But the situation you are in is really is quite straightforward and need not be over complicated. If the court finds “Special Reasons” then they should not order an endorsement and without an endorsement they cannot impose any points.. The outcome hinges on the success of your SR argument.

The only other aspect for them to consider is the rest of your sentence (which would normally be a fine). You could argue that since they have (hopefully) found SR, that they might see fit to impose an Absolute Discharge. This sentence is often coupled with a successful SR argument. It recognises that, although an offence was committed, the circumstances were such that no penalty should be imposed.

One thing you should bear in mind is that even if your SR is a success you will still have a conviction recorded against you (although it will not be shown on your driving record). If you are subject to a fine you will have to declare that conviction for one year to anybody who asks (insurers, employers, etc.). However, if you are dealt with by way of an Absolute Discharge, you will not have to declare it.

[harimalone]

Let’s not complicate matters too much. Offences which involve obligatory disqualification (such as drink-driving) are subject to different legislation to those which don’t (such as no insurance).

The legislation for “Special Reasons” for the latter is covered by s44 of the Roadf Traffic Offenders’ Act. Here it is:

44 Orders for endorsement

(1)Where a person is convicted of an offence involving obligatory endorsement, the court must order there to be endorsed on his driving record particulars of the conviction and also—

(a)if the court orders him to be disqualified, particulars of the disqualification, or

(b)if the court does not order him to be disqualified—

(i)particulars of the offence, including the date when it was committed, and

(ii)the penalty points to be attributed to the offence.

(2)Where the court does not order the person convicted to be disqualified, it need not make an order under subsection (1) above if for special reasons it thinks fit not to do so.


I’ve emphasised the part which covers “Special Reasons”.

No matter what mitigation the court finds, it cannot impose fewer than six points. That is the statutory minimum and they cannot go below that unless, as provided by s44(2), they find “Special Reasons” not to comply with s44(1). S44(1) imposes a duty to endorse the driver’s record This is a different process to imposing points (drivers can receive an endorsement but have no points imposed). If they do not order an endorsement (by virtue of s44(2) they cannot impose points.

I've included the legislation because that is the definitive source where the power for Magistrates to find "Special Reasons" originates. Sometimes solicitors' guidance that you find can be confusing. But the situation you are in is really is quite straightforward and need not be over complicated. If the court finds “Special Reasons” then they should not order an endorsement and without an endorsement they cannot impose any points.. The outcome hinges on the success of your SR argument.

The only other aspect for them to consider is the rest of your sentence (which would normally be a fine). You could argue that since they have (hopefully) found SR, that they might see fit to impose an Absolute Discharge. This sentence is often coupled with a successful SR argument. It recognises that, although an offence was committed, the circumstances were such that no penalty should be imposed.

One thing you should bear in mind is that even if your SR is a success you will still have a conviction recorded against you (although it will not be shown on your driving record). If you are subject to a fine you will have to declare that conviction for one year to anybody who asks (insurers, employers, etc.). However, if you are dealt with by way of an Absolute Discharge, you will not have to declare it.

This is absolutely clear for me. When running this SR do i have to bring up the legislation and read it out to emphasize what im aiming for?

Everything else is clear for me great help regardless of the outcome - IG do you agree with handyandy ? reason i ask is if im faced with a magistrate who is sticking to "guidelines" similar to IG then im assuming i'd have to bring this up to the legal advisor who can assist me in helping them understand the SR process?

Is this any difference with self defending instead of coming with a lawyer? im my mind they will show abit more respect to someone with a paid lawyer with knowledge of legislation & processes.

[islandgirl]

The SR process is entirely at the discretion of the magistrates. The legislation says we can, not we must - it is "if we think fit". Do not insult mags by trying to tell them how to decide SR! Our legal advisor will ensure we do the correct thing. You can bring a lawyer if you wish but we listen equally to litigants in person.

[HandyAndy]

This is absolutely clear for me. When running this SR do i have to bring up the legislation and read it out to emphasize what im aiming for?

No, definitely not. All you need mention is that you are making an SR argument. The Magistrates will know what that means and, as IG says, if they need any explanation, their Legal Advisor will provide it. As well as that, as IG recognises, you do not want to appear to patronise the Bench.

The full title usually given to SR is "Special Reasons not to endorse or disqualify". I only provided the legislation for information as there seemed to be some confusion brewing. Although, like most legislation, it is little "wordy", it's provision is quite straightforward - if the court finds Special Reasons then no endorsement should be imposed. The guidelines IG provided only apply if the court does not find SR. If SR are found then all bets are off and the normal guidelines do not apply.

Of course, as IG says, finding SR is entirely at the discretion of the court. But you must make it clear from the outset that you are submitting an SR argument. The Magistrates will not find SR of their own volition.

Is this any difference with self defending instead of coming with a lawyer?

Yes, about £1,000 as a minimum!

Seriously, Magistrates are used to seeing defendants representing themselves for minor traffic matters. Neither the services of the duty solicitor nor Legal Aid is available for them. Courts usually give unrepresented defendants a little slack when it comes to court procedure and as I said, the court's Legal Advisor has a duty to guide them through the protocol.

[harimalone]

thanks to both IG & Andy, things are now clear what is coming in the next week. Are children allowed in court? if me and my partner are required to be in are we able to have kids sitting at the back with partner? if they are quiet? I can't find much info online.

[HandyAndy]

Are children allowed in court? if me and my partner are required to be in are we able to have kids sitting at the back with partner? if they are quiet? I can't find much info online.

Not if they re under 14.

If your partner is to give evidence in court, she will not be allowed to enter the courtroom until she is called to giver her evidence. She will be allowed to observe from the public gallery after she has given her evidence and been "released" by the court.

[harimalone]

Not if they re under 14.

If your partner is to give evidence in court, she will not be allowed to enter the courtroom until she is called to giver her evidence. She will be allowed to observe from the public gallery after she has given her evidence and been "released" by the court.

Thanks again, so partner will have to sit in public gallery until she is called to give evidence. If she does get called in do I get to watch or I also have to leave?

generally for cases like this is there a few people in the public watching ? what do I refer to the magistrates as ? maybe IG can help does she prefer "worships' or "sir/ma'aam"

[islandgirl]

Your partner will not be allowed in court until after she has given evidence. She will have to wait in a witness room. After giving evidence she may remain, Generally there are no members of the public attending although they have the right to. Sir or Madam or Your Worships in the plural usually - listen to what everyone else says to them and follow the example

[DE DOGS]

This brings to mind, about 60odd years ago, I phoned an insurance broker, gave him all reg and details, and specifically posed the question? am I covered whilst I drive to your premises, answer, you are covered,I was stopped by a policeman on the way, I explained that I was on the way to pay, those days' seven-day produce, I arrived at the broker's, I said "I have just been stopped by the police" reply, you are not covered until you make payment,I explained to the Court, (Brentwood) resulting from three months ban from driving.

[islandgirl]

This brings to mind, about 60odd years ago, I phoned an insurance broker, gave him all reg and details, and specifically posed the question? am I covered whilst I drive to your premises, answer, you are covered,I was stopped by a policeman on the way, I explained that I was on the way to pay, those days' seven-day produce, I arrived at the broker's, I said "I have just been stopped by the police" reply, you are not covered until you make payment,I explained to the Court, (Brentwood) resulting from three months ban from driving.

An interesting and sobering story which just goes to show, as I have said, that it is all at the discretion of the magistrates...

[HandyAndy]

If she does get called in do I get to watch or I also have to leave?

As the defendant you remain in court throughout. This is especially important in your case because, apart from your entitlement to be present for all the proceedings against you (whether you are represented or not) as an unrepresented defendant you may wish to question any witnesses from either side.

The main reason that witnesses are not allowed into the courtroom before they have given their evidence is to avoid the possibility that the evidence they give might be "tainted" by that which they have heard other witnesses provide.

One of the features of evidence which the court considers is the consistency of the versions of events provided by different witnesses. If you have three witnesses all saying much the same thing, it might be seen as reliable (though too much consistency might indicate collusion). If they all provide different versions it may not be seen as so reliable.

This is not quite so important in your case, but it's a principle that is applied in all trials.

[harimalone]

One thing i may have missed maybe andy or IG can help. As of now i have emailed the court my partners witness statement and asked them to notify the prosecutor that partner is available for live evidence. Only reply i got was "this has been added to your court file" how do i know if they want her to give evidence?

Secondly regarding other evidence such as bank statements/proof of emergency situation with doctors notes etc have i missed a trick here by not emailing the court this evidence 2 weeks in advance? or is it fine if i bring 5 copies on the day?

Appreciate the help doesn't go unnoticed

[HandyAndy]

You've provided it to the court and since you don't have a contact for the prosecution I think that's the best you can be expected to do.

The issue really is that your hearing isn't a trial. It's a guilty plea with a Special Reasons argument. I would just go with what you have on the day. The worst that can happen would be for the prosecution to ask for an adjournment to consider the evidence you will use for your argument. In all honesty, if they do, the court should give them short shrift (and maybe a ten minute break to consider it) as it isn't really complex.