|
Thank you for taking the time to visit my blog.
The aim of the Blog will be to chat in a less formal way about the "ins and outs" of road traffic law.
I will give you my thoughts on various aspects of the law and questions that I get from visitors to the site.
I want to make it absolutely clear - that whilst I may not always give the advice that you want to hear, or agree with your interpretation of the road traffic laws, I value each and every one of your questions. Please keep in touch and spread the word to your friends, colleages and family.
May 2009
Officer's mistake on fixed penalty.
I still get huge numbers of questions from people who say "there's a mistake on the ticket the officer gave me, does this give me good grounds to reject it?"
The only basis upon which you should reject a road traffic offence ticket (for example a speeding / contravening a red traffic light / crossing double white lines etc etc) is if you don't accept the offence alleged.
The ticket is not the officer's evidence. it's simply an offer to get the matter over and done with without the need for a court hearing.
If you reject the fixed penalty ticket you will get summonsed to court and if you don't accept the officer's evidence of your speed (etc), is reliable then she/he will attend and give evidence in person.
He/she will the correct the mistake - if it was a mistake - and as long as the court feel that they have proved the allegation against you beyond reasonable doubt you will get a fine and court costs that are considerably higher than the original fixed penalty ticket.
Please be careful!!
You may be able to show that the inaccuracy on the ticket reflects the officer's slopiness in general and therefore case a doubt, but thats not guaranteed. You may come away with a hefty fine because the court takes the view that you have been pedantic and that you didn't have a legitimate defence.
Email me and ask a question if you are in any doubt.
Driving whilst using a mobile phone.....?
To be guilty of this offence the officer has to prove that you were using your phone whilst driving.
I have had a lot of questions recently where people have asked whether or not it can be classed as driving if they are stationary at traffic lights or if they are stationary in a queue??
I am very firmly of the view that this is driving and that the court will not accept that as a defence.
Driving is defined as a combination of motion and control of a vehicle and whilst you may not be moving at the time you are seen using the phone I think the court will take the view that you are driving if it is a momentary stop and you are about to move off again.
My advice is that if you need to make/take a phone call, pull off the road and switch off the engine. Make it absolutely clear that you are no longer driving and stay that way until the call has finished.
If you have any other questions in relation to mobile phone offences then email me a question..
Fully comprehensive insurance isn't what it used to be!
I speak to lots of client who have got into trouble for driving without insurance on the basis that they believed that their fully comprehensive insurance covered them to drive vehicles owned by another person with their permission.
This is not always the case. Fully comprehensive insurance does not seem to mean what it used to.
A lot of insurance companies do not cover you to drive other peoples vehicles with their permission under fully comprehensive insurance they may also have an age restriction on this part of the policy if it does apply.
Please make sure that you always check the small print on your insurance cover and when you actually take out the insurance in the first place to make sure that it provides you with this type of cover. I have had a lot of clients that have been caught out and it is very difficult to argue that it is a Special Reason if the mistake was yours rather than the insurance company's.
Also watch out for the situation where you buy a new vehicle and don't take out insurance before you drive it away. The moment you hand over the money you are the owner of the vehicle and fully comp insurance only covers you if you are driving a vehicle owned by another person. It's irrelevant that the log book is still in the other persons name and that does not amount to proof of ownership. You will be guilty of a no insurance offence if you do this and you will be at risk of 6-8 points. If you find yourself in this situation and want advice email me.
Police Officers Can Be Nice Sometimes ?
I have had a couple of cases recently where clients have spoken to me about officers pulling them over for offences but then using their discretion not to impose the wrath of the law upon them.
One was in relation to a seatbelt offence where the person I spoke to was stopped for driving without a seatbelt on. He accepted that he did not have the seatbelt on and was simply given a warning on that occasion.
He then drove away failing to put his seatbelt on again and the officer pulled him over. He felt aggrieved that he was stopped for a second time but I had to advise him that if he accepted that he had committed the offence on the second occasion, after receiving the initial warning, he would not have any prospects of success in relation to defending the matter.
The second case was an incident involving a young driver who accepted that he had driven at more than 100mph in a 70mph limit. The officers who stopped him at the scene indicated that they were willing to put 94mph on the ticket so that he could be dealt with by way of the Fixed Penalty system. The young man in question called me to ask whether or not he could contest the matter on the basis that the officers had put unreliable information on the ticket.
In giving him advice I said that he could obviously contest the allegation but this would be based on the premise that he was actually doing a higher speed than that alleged and therefore the officer's evidence was unreliable. I advised my client that this was a dangerous argument to make and did not in effect amount to a defence.
I asked my young client to consider whether or not he felt the officers in question were in fact trying to do him a favour and he agreed that they were. On this basis he indicated that he was going to take the matter on the chin and deal with it by way of a fixed penalty rather than take the matter to Court.
I speak to a lot of people on almost a daily basis who feel aggrieved by the fact that they have been caught. I get a lot of people who send me e-mails simply saying I have been stopped for driving at 39mph in a 30mph limit how can I get off?
As a Solicitor, I always give honest and reliable advice. I will never encourage you to pervert the course of justice or make up a defence.
The starting point always has to be whether or not you accept the allegation in question. It is no good simply feeling aggrieved because you were caught as this will be treated as 'sour grapes'.
You have to have a defence to the allegation if you are going to take the matter to Court. It is perfectly acceptable for you to say that you do not accept that you were doing the speed alleged or that you did not drive in the manner described and then try and cast a doubt on the officers evidence.
If your defence simply relies on the fact that the officer has (according to you) made a mistake, rather than you actually having a defence, then this is a dangerous tactic to adopt. You are entitled to put an officer to proof in relation to the road traffic offence allegation in question but if you are not actually denying the allegation, then you had better make sure that you have got a very good technical defence.
If you want to discuss any of these issues email me.
Amber Traffic Lights!
I have had quite a few questions recently in relation to contravening red traffic lights.
Quite a few people have said that they did not go through on red and in fact, went through on amber. Please bear in mind that it is an offence to go through an amber traffic light unless you can show that it was not safe to stop.
Therefore if you stand up in front of the Magistrates' Court and say that you are not guilty of contravening a red traffic light because you in fact when through on amber, you will still be convicted unless you adduce evidence to show that it was not safe to stop.
Please bear this in mind when you take matters to Court because, once you do, if you then change your plea to guilty you will receive higher Court fines and costs than you would have been made to pay under the Fixed Penalty system. This will have turned out to have been an expensive exercise.
Exceptional hardship arguments - two offences in different courts!
If you accumulate 12 points and all the offences are occurred within a three year period of each other then you will be liable for a totting ban under Section 35 of the Road Traffic Offenders Act.
Please bear in mind that you can only make this argument once in any three year period. We have recently had a number of clients who have been facing two different offences in two different Courts. This was whilst they were already on nine penalty points. We then had to undertake quite a complex procedure in trying to tie the two matters up in one Court. You can only move a case from one Court to another if you have pleaded guilty to the allegation before the Court and the Magistrates thereafter have a power to remit the offence.
The timing is critical. If we do not manage to get the two matters tied up then you risk having to launch your Exceptional Hardship argument in relation to the first offence that comes up before the Court and then when you come up before the Court in relation to the second matter, you have used your one opportunity in raising an Exceptional Hardship argument and you are unable to use those grounds again.
This could mean that all the effort in relation to the first offence goes completely to waste.
If you have a problem like this where you are on nine points and you are warned about two separate offences, then please contact us as a matter of urgency and we can try and combine the two offences in one Court so that you do not lose the opportunity to try to save your licence through an Exceptional Hardship argument.
If you need help with a similar situation then email me.
|
