Any advice on contesting a speeding fine? - Page 7

wesley · 26th September 2014, 07:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by milleplod

Good old 'presumption of service'! It is rebuttable though - see here, if you've the time/inclination!...... https://www.crimeline.info/case/kris...c-prosecutions

Pete

means nothing to me but a friend of mine asks me to thank you for the link.

cmdrew · 26th September 2014, 08:22

I remember a few years ago I got a NIP more than 3 weeks after the 'offence'. I wrote back with a photocopy of the envelope which was post marked and proved that the NIP had not been posted in time. Their response was 'we'll we are still going to pursue it but you can take it to court if you like'. Essentially they think of themselves as above the law and dare you to challenge them. I took the speed awareness course rather than fight it as day off work to go to court would cost more than the course.

Of course what they are doing is effectively blackmail. They know they are in the wrong and if it came down to it they probably wouldn't even present the case at court but they know that most people will simply accept it.

What does this say for the state of our legal system when those charged with enforcing the law are themselves not following it? Yes I was speeding so should accept the punishment but sometimes you think that the system is there to make money and no other reason.

KWIL · 26th September 2014, 08:58

I enjoyed the "Crimeline" reference, then I would!

James.uk · 26th September 2014, 17:05

It is the fact that most people just pay up, that causes so many "allegations of an offense" letters to be sent out innit...

...

SirRustalot · 26th September 2014, 23:14

Well, I'm overwhelmed by your passionate responses, and I thank you wholeheartedly! It's a contentious subject.

My view on this is this:

The easy route is to pay up and move on. I gamble that this is what they expect you to do. If I had any doubt about my innocence, I would do just that. However, regardless of how one plays it... against technology, the 'system' or whatever, I strongly feel unjustly prosecuted. In this vein, I'm not willing to simply roll over and play dead. Hence, whether it be time well wasted or just stupidity I will put together a case and contest it because I believe I did nothing wrong or exhibited any sort of intended law-breaking. I hope that they will take me seriously (although I expect not) but my intent is to not exploit an element of doubt on their part as I already know they will swear blind that the system is infallible. Instead, I intend to become such a pain in their backside that they themselves roll over and give up.

I will say this: I took on the full might of the CSA a few years back. I knew I was right, built a case and won hands down. I'm still waiting four years later for a) the contents of my bank account that they emptied - all 9k of it, and, b) court costs and expenses. I'm a pain in their backside... Every. Single. Day. And will be forevermore until they cough up. There's a reason why they don't have a Reception area, because people like me will camp out there until someone listens or writes a cheque.

In short - **** me off and you'll pay...eventually. But you WILL pay.

Some may say I'm a fool, but only a real fool with take authority as truth, rather than truth as authority. A bloke called Gerald Massey once said that and he did pretty alright out of it.

bl52krz · 26th September 2014, 23:21

Quote:

Originally Posted by guru

Really? I thought it was 14 days as well.

http://www.which.co.uk/cars/driving/...s-your-rights/

Thanks for the correction on this.I have always thought that it was 21 days.We all know what thought did? Do you know if it has been altered to 14 days because i do not know other than reading that it was 21 days? Glad i found out.

bl52krz · 26th September 2014, 23:28

The justice system stinks from the top down in some circumstances. You only have to read the papers.

James.uk · 27th September 2014, 15:49

Rusty? (OP) did you get the PM I send a few days ago????
...

raykay · 27th September 2014, 16:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by James.uk

>>>As discussed in earlier posts, you are not entitled to any evidence until a 'not guilty' plea is taken at court.<<<

And as mentioned earlier, the above is a con, and completely untrue. Please stop repeating it.

...

As mentioned earlier:

s.1 (a), The Criminal Procedure and Investigations Act 1996 - 'a person is charged with a summary offence in respect of which a court proceeds to summary trial and in respect of which he pleads not guilty'.

steve811 · 27th September 2014, 16:55

As I have said before Ray, that is only the outright requirement. The whole idea behind disclosure is to assist the process, and it is slanted in the defences favour if the prosecutor fulfils their duties correctly. That includes telling an accused what they are accused of and what information they intend to produce to back it up. But of course you stick to your view of things, and keep trumpeting the same old tired answer.

26th September 2014, 23:14	#65
SirRustalot Gets stuck in Box of ales and some cheap sunglasses Join Date: May 2010 Location: Edinburgh Posts: 670 Thanks: 323 Thanked 174 Times in 92 Posts	Well, I'm overwhelmed by your passionate responses, and I thank you wholeheartedly! It's a contentious subject. My view on this is this: The easy route is to pay up and move on. I gamble that this is what they expect you to do. If I had any doubt about my innocence, I would do just that. However, regardless of how one plays it... against technology, the 'system' or whatever, I strongly feel unjustly prosecuted. In this vein, I'm not willing to simply roll over and play dead. Hence, whether it be time well wasted or just stupidity I will put together a case and contest it because I believe I did nothing wrong or exhibited any sort of intended law-breaking. I hope that they will take me seriously (although I expect not) but my intent is to not exploit an element of doubt on their part as I already know they will swear blind that the system is infallible. Instead, I intend to become such a pain in their backside that they themselves roll over and give up. I will say this: I took on the full might of the CSA a few years back. I knew I was right, built a case and won hands down. I'm still waiting four years later for a) the contents of my bank account that they emptied - all 9k of it, and, b) court costs and expenses. I'm a pain in their backside... Every. Single. Day. And will be forevermore until they cough up. There's a reason why they don't have a Reception area, because people like me will camp out there until someone listens or writes a cheque. In short - **** me off and you'll pay...eventually. But you WILL pay. Some may say I'm a fool, but only a real fool with take authority as truth, rather than truth as authority. A bloke called Gerald Massey once said that and he did pretty alright out of it. __________________ Chocolate digestives - now there's a biscuit you can trust.

26th September 2014, 23:28	#67
bl52krz This is my second home Rover 75 cdt club + Rover 2.5 KV6 Conni SE Join Date: May 2008 Location: Birmingham Posts: 11,433 Thanks: 6,587 Thanked 2,262 Times in 1,729 Posts	The justice system stinks from the top down in some circumstances. You only have to read the papers. __________________ Great Barr, Birmingham.

26th September 2014, 08:22	#62
cmdrew Regular poster None of my own but now looking after 2 Join Date: Aug 2012 Location: Gunness Posts: 96 Thanks: 11 Thanked 10 Times in 7 Posts	I remember a few years ago I got a NIP more than 3 weeks after the 'offence'. I wrote back with a photocopy of the envelope which was post marked and proved that the NIP had not been posted in time. Their response was 'we'll we are still going to pursue it but you can take it to court if you like'. Essentially they think of themselves as above the law and dare you to challenge them. I took the speed awareness course rather than fight it as day off work to go to court would cost more than the course. Of course what they are doing is effectively blackmail. They know they are in the wrong and if it came down to it they probably wouldn't even present the case at court but they know that most people will simply accept it. What does this say for the state of our legal system when those charged with enforcing the law are themselves not following it? Yes I was speeding so should accept the punishment but sometimes you think that the system is there to make money and no other reason.

26th September 2014, 08:58	#63
KWIL Precise Rover 75 Tourer 2.5KV6 Connoisseur SE Join Date: Mar 2013 Location: Fleet Posts: 2,964 Thanks: 630 Thanked 617 Times in 480 Posts	I enjoyed the "Crimeline" reference, then I would!

26th September 2014, 17:05	#64
James.uk Passed Away 2002 Pale Blue. Rover 75 CDTi Connoisseur auto. 170K miles Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Near the M67. Posts: 14,509 Thanks: 199 Thanked 585 Times in 397 Posts	It is the fact that most people just pay up, that causes so many "allegations of an offense" letters to be sent out innit... ...

27th September 2014, 15:49	#68
James.uk Passed Away 2002 Pale Blue. Rover 75 CDTi Connoisseur auto. 170K miles Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Near the M67. Posts: 14,509 Thanks: 199 Thanked 585 Times in 397 Posts	Rusty? (OP) did you get the PM I send a few days ago???? ...

27th September 2014, 16:55	#70
steve811 Banned Rover 75 Tourer CDT Connoisseur SE Join Date: Dec 2010 Location: Newport Posts: 1,906 Thanks: 107 Thanked 299 Times in 206 Posts	As I have said before Ray, that is only the outright requirement. The whole idea behind disclosure is to assist the process, and it is slanted in the defences favour if the prosecutor fulfils their duties correctly. That includes telling an accused what they are accused of and what information they intend to produce to back it up. But of course you stick to your view of things, and keep trumpeting the same old tired answer.