my98evo2

Hi guys and girls,


I'm from the Australian WRX forums and I just wanted to make a query about traffic infringements over there.

A mate of mine got pinged by the North Wales Police and was sent a "Notice of Intended Prosecution". The only thing is the police misspelt not only his name but the name of the street he lives in.

Now, he's just curious as to whether there are any procedural loopholes he can use/exploit to get out of the fine due to erroneous name listed and erroneous particulars taken down.

The reason I ask is because sometimes here in some Australian states, if the police put down erroneous details on the fine sent to you, you can elect to have it heard at the magistrates' court and the fine can be declared invalid due to the errors contained in it. Moreover, the cops at the hearing can't issue out another fine replacing the invalid one. (I've gotten a few mates off ticket fines here, so I know these types of loopholes still exist in Aus :-P)

Are there any similar techniques/ways/tricks to get out of a speeding ticket up there?

Michelle from RexNet.com.au, who I think was a moderator here before, suggested that I post here to get some advice from those who know/have experience in these sort of matters.

She also said that some people might have a website that some people use for traffic infringement advice as to what they cn or cannot do in the event of getting caught out... Does this sound familiar?

Any assistance would be greatly appreciated. I really need to pass him some advice really soon.

Thanks a lot for your assistance, brothers and sisters.


-Jules
my98evo2

andy97

iTrader: (1)

Hi

errors of name and address, are not a going to stop the NIP from being invalid. These slip errors can and will be easliy explained away by the police/cps.

Visit http://www.pepipoo.com/NewForums2/index.php for all the information on how to fight back.

Andy

OllyK

I believe so - best place to look is http://www.pepipoo.com/

my98evo2

hmmm... interesting site.

thank you for your quick replies.

OllyK

Oh we're nothing if not quick to respond, usually with sarcasm and bile however Welcome BTW

Leslie

I always thought that details on a summons or even a NIP should be accurate in all details or it is invalid.

Its up to them to get it right.

Les

OllyK

That's what I thought, unless your DVLA records are incorrect in which case you can be fined for that as well.

hedgehog

There is a "slip" rule which allows them to make minor slips in the paperwork without having an impact upon the validity of the NIP or the claims that you did a bad thing. They use it as a get out of jail free card and it is based upon a fairly vague definition of what constitutes a "slip." There has been at least one case I know of where the defence was that they were pushing the slip rule too far and I believe the defence won. However, it was, as I recall, a pretty expensive defence team.

With this in mind in most situations incorrect information on the NIP does not offer much potential for a defence. This is an automated persecution system so, clearly, they don't want anything slowing it down as the target for last year was 3 million motorists done and, as yet, we don't know the figure for this year but something tells me it isn't likely to be any less than 3 million. However, 3 million per year is over 8,200 per day so speed is of the essence when it comes to the processing of the victims.

Apparition

Erm...I shouldn't be saying this but, ignore it and it might go away ?
This happened to someone I know, so I know it does work sometimes.

I didn't say any of the above, all you see printed there was done by my pet monkey...he's a little devil when he gets near a computer.......

hedgehog

If the NIP is ignored then the victim leaves themselves open to a prosecution under Section 172 for failing to supply information as to the driver at the time of the "offence." While this will not result in a significantly greater penalty than the speeding charge the endorsment on the license will be an MS90 (as I recall) which the insurance companies are not so keen on. So, ignoring it is not a good idea unless you have a very clear plan of action.

A much better approach would be to nip over to pepipoo, as others have suggested, and to carefully read all the details about the PACE defence. This defence has been in use for about 15 months now and to date there hasn't been a single conviction for any offence. There is still a small element of risk and anyone using the defence must consider this; should there be a case which sets precedent during the time someone is depending upon this defence and if the precedent goes against them then they will have to plead guilty.

Leslie

Yet another target then Hedgehog!

What a way to "run a railway"

Les

hedgehog

Interesting isn't it. The target this year, for motorists persecuted, is probably (It hasn't been possible to get the precise figure this year) in the region of 5 million with a combination of speeding and the new "thought crimes." As this is a target they will do this number of people by one means or another.

Compare this to the fact that I was working with a bloke over the last week who had his car stolen, by joy riders, from outside the building we were working in. It was later found burnt out, as in the case with most cars stolen for joy riding (about 12,000 per year from this particular town) All this happened some months back but last week he got a letter from a solicitor requesting his insurance details. One of the people involved in stealing his car was "hurt" while burning it out and so was going to claim off his insurance. It seems this is perfectly normal and you and I are paying for it.

Where are the targets for the removal of joy riders from society? Not only is there no target but they can claim, from society as a whole, for the bother of having to steal you car. Meanwhile there are targets which demand the criminalisation of one in every seven law abiding motorists in this financial year.

New_scooby_04

iTrader: (4)

[QUOTE=hedgehog]
All this happened some months back but last week he got a letter from a solicitor requesting his insurance details. One of the people involved in stealing his car was "hurt" while burning it out and so was going to claim off his financial QUOTE]

OMG you cannot be serious. Surely the fact that he sustained the injury during the commision of a criminal offence would render this claim null and void from the outset and would it also attest to his guilt (assuming he hadn't already been prosecuted).

Unbelieveable.

I wonder if you could sue for damage to a baseball bat that occurred as a result of you wrapping the thing around someone head who was trying to break into your house/steal your car...interesting!

"Well, your honour, it had sentimental value!"

NS04

hedgehog

What I posted above was fact. The following is a pure guess on my part...

I'm guessing that since stealing this particular car the person involved has been arrested by police and charged with theft. In the process he has asked for this offence to be taken into account and so, now that he has admitted it, there is nothing to stop him claiming for his "injury." For all I know he may be claiming for several hundred of these "injuries" one for each of the cars he has stolen recently.

I don't know if this is really the case but it is not uncommon for joy riders to ask for several hundreds of offences to be taken into account when they are caught. It will probably result in a doubling of their community service to 2 months.

The joy riders in this particular area have recently produced a DVD of their "exploits" which you can buy. Can you believe this? Yet the police rarely catch them and when they are caught the courts refuse to punish them in any meaningful manner.

Harry_Boy

Utterly ridiculous - yet you & I are paying for this complete travesty.

my98evo2

Thanks! Always good to feel welcome! ;-)

Bring on the bile and sarcasm... :-P

All interesting input, thanks everyone.


The name on the NIP was _______ Zane; when it was supposed to be ______ "Lane". Furthermore, the street name was listed as Aprwy _____ instead of "Aprey" _______. The "w" error in the street name I can understand due to its proximity to the letter "e" in the keyboard but the "Z" is on the opposite side of the keyboard to the "L"! Now I know some cops there type with two fingers... :-P

Tehnical discrepancies, not substantial ones, I know but I would have thought when it comes to police documents, one should have at least been on the ball. There could at least be a few hundred Michael Zanes living in London at the time. :-P

If that happened here in Sydney, I would have said to the police prosecutor, "Well, you produce me a ______ Zane from Aprwy _____ and I'll plead him guilty. My client here, _____ "Lane" of "Aprey" ____, will plead not guilty to these charges..."

I get the latitude offered to little administrative errors like these, but somehow I think it should be a loophole in there...


One circus court trick I pulled off involved a traffic constable who booked a mate of mine to be "speeding" when the cop "gauged" my mate's speed without a radar or laser device whilst driving away in the opposite direction... My mate elected to take it to court and asked me to help him out. In the course of the hearing...

Me to Cop on the dock: "So you're of the opinion you can accurately gauge who's speeding while travelling in the opposite direction from you without the use of a speed detection device, for the purposes of issuing out a speeding infringement correct?"

Cop: "More or less, yes. I know when some one is over the posted limit." (i might add here he was a younger cop, so I guess he was full of beans and bravado)

Me: *Picked up a little tennis ball I brought in (for illustration's purposes only) and underarm hurled it to him* "Catch this!" (Which he did... pity that)

Me: "Now... for argument's sake, if the speed limit for that ball was 10 kilometres per hour, can you tell me if that was 5 or 7 kilometres per hour over the limit, constable? Mind you, you are stationary at the time and can "more or less" gauge projectile speed better than whilst travelling in the opposite direction in a moving vehicle."

Cop: *Looked at me in disgust*


LOL, the magistrate dropped the case when I motioned for a dismissal.

My mate got to keep my tennis ball for a memento... and all I got out of it was a $50 bottle of Shiraz. The mongrel. :-P


Thanks again, everyone.

Little Miss WRX

I hope you got the info you needed and welcome to the other side.

I deffo would not recommend leaving it and do respond quickly as I got slammed with an MS90. I was going to argue that I had actually declared a driver on the form but it wasn't going to be worth the effort, so graciously accepted the points and fine.

my98evo2

Hey, I did! Thanks heaps!!! That "pepipoo" site is fantastic! I wish we had some equivalent here in Sydney!

Little Miss WRX

No worries, glad to help.

It would be good for Sydney to have a similar site. <wanders off to search the net.....>

my98evo2

i think a while ago, there was a "protect the right" or "uphold the right" police forum... i got that off the vic wrx forum and pissed myself laughing at some of the complaints cops had :-P

can't quite remember what the actual website is now...