joz8968

iTrader: (13)

Hot on the heels of the Child Benefit cap injustice, now this!...

Taken from the driveprotect.co.uk website:-


Last month the Law in the UK changed in regards to people being able to claim back their costs if they are acquitted of Motoring charges.

From October (last month) if you WIN your case:

1- You can now only claim back your costs at legal aid rates.

2- Only the accused can now claim their costs, and not a third party insurer, such as DriveProtect.

So what does this mean to you?

Well, from now on, no claim can be made other than for contractual costs between the accused and his/her solicitors (that means no recovery on behalf of third party insurers such as DP.)

…And the amount you can claim back is now limited to legal aid rates of:

- £26.30 per hour for travel and waiting;
- £62.50 per hour for hearings;
- £55 per hour for preparation and attendance

As you can imagine, Lawyers are pretty p***ed off with the new rules
In my opinion, the Government is legislating to let the police and CPS waste thousands of pounds on pursuing Motorists, but allowing them to screw the innocent — i.e. people who win in Court!

If you are NOT a DP Member and you use Lawyers then this will effect you significantly.

Here’s how:

Say that you use a Traffic Lawyer as below to defend you against a Motoring offence, and that their rate is £220/hour, which is quite a common rate:

- 1 hour initial consultation = £220
- 4 hours case preparation = £880
- 2 hours traveling time = £440
- Expert witness = £300
- 2 hours in Court = £440

- Total paid by you = £2280

This is a pretty typical cost for Speeding Defence from a decent Traffic Lawyer.

So you’ve paid £2280. Here’s what you can now claim back [at Legal Aid rates] if you win:

- 1 hour initial consultation = £55
- 4 hours case preparation = £220
- 2 hours traveling time = £52.60
- Expert witness = £0
- 2 hours in Court = £125

- Total you can claim back (if you WIN!) = £452.60

- Total LOSS to you (again, if you *WIN*) = £1827.40

Whatever you think about Lawyers charge out rates (believe me, I am not exactly a fan of them myself! - Adam Blair), this is surely a complete injustice.

If you *win* your case - in other words you are proven in Court to be INNOCENT - then using a typical example like above, you would still be nearly £2000 out of pocket!

Saxo Boy

...and it surprises you that the justice system is designed to hit the middle-classes the hardest? Dig deeper friend; you will learn that the entire system is designed to hammer the middle-class to retain the illusion of control.

joz8968

iTrader: (13)

100%.

Lisawrx

iTrader: (1)

Surely this would hit working classes even harder. I'm not 100% sure of the cut off for when you can't get help via legal aid, but I don't think it's very high. I know when I got in touch with CAB a while back, I needed some advice and I wasn't eligible for any free as I earned too much and I'm only on just over £200 a week.

There seems to be this opinion of some people that only the middle classes are being squeezed.

jonc

Ok Joz, what's the punchline, usually there's a punchline to your threads.....

joz8968

iTrader: (13)

lol

Er, none that I can think of... Just this >>>

joz8968

iTrader: (13)

Thanks to the mods for deleting the duplicate thread!

Lisawrx

iTrader: (1)

You're welcome

JDM_Stig

iTrader: (3)

don`t speed, drive at 5 mph under the limit everywhere to be safe

joz8968

iTrader: (13)

Can't argue with that........... If only life was that 'Utopian'.

Terminator X

iTrader: (7)

Interesting, didn't realize it was/had changed.

Not many people take stuff to court of course so probably small impact on most of us however as the Law says we're guilty of motoring offences until we prove ourself innocent it is another kick in the teeth for the motorist and presumably designed to put people off yet again from contesting the standard £60 fine tickets. No doubt the £60 fines will increase at some point soon as 99.99% of us certainly can't afford to contest it in court any more ... easy money kerching!

TX.

joz8968

iTrader: (13)

*nods*

No doubt about it.


Yup, I've heard that the basic FP will be increased to £90 sometime soon!(?)

Saxo Boy

I used the term middle-classes quite lightly. What I actually mean is, people with jobs that work hard to provide themselves and their families with things to use and enjoy" (i.e. cars and such like).

Saxo Boy

I would have no major problem with it if that was the case. I've never been given a fixed penalty notice <touch wood> but it's not the £60 fine that worries me. It's the removal of driving liberties through banning drivers that is the concern.

Even if I knew I was in the right I'd probably not contest anything in relation to driving as the conviction rate is unbelievably high (you are pretty much guilty regardless of what you prove). However, that would change if it was going to mean the difference between being allowed to legally drive or not!

Lisawrx

iTrader: (1)

Ah, fair play. My apologies for getting the wrong end of the stick.

Leslie

Surely lawyers have always overcharged in spades anyway!

Les

joz8968

iTrader: (13)

Indeed.

But the point is, you win your case = proved innocent... But you don't get all your legal expenses back. And by some margin!

That's not justice.

matty01

We all pay for the criminals who abuse the system, same as plead innocent and found guilty = more jail time , otherwise every ****** would always plead innocent clogging the system costing a fortune and making genuinely innocent people look more guilty (ie ..yeah yet ANOTHER innocent plea...) in this case it would likely be people exploiting expensive lawyers to get off on a technicality/loophole...

matty01

Or in the case of benifits its the benifit cheats/swindlers and exploiters (ie have loads of kids =get big house and loads of benifits )who ruin the system, who ruin it for the honest people ,blame the feckless scum not the government who cant afford to tax us enough ('cos we complain) to pay for the feckless leaches...