Just been pulled.

[Biker Biggles]

Originally Posted by timwilky

Not guilty

Apparently the magistrates have recommended to the police that my sons ex employer should be investigated.

Result. But to be honest, I would have thought when he submitted his written defense to the initial summons that the CPS would have read it and decided not to proceed.

5 months of hell for the poor sod. He now has a proper job where a clean licence is a necessity.

Might be worth a complaint to the CPS with the MP copied in.On the one hand its a huge wast of public money,and when they carp on about "strict liability" its one for the MP to question.How can it be right to be "strictly"guilty even if you cant know you are doing anything wrong?

[Viney]

Originally Posted by Owenski

ahhh like the parking fine fiasco? ie your fine is £70 but pay within 14days and it will be half so folk pay it early as opposed to appealing Dirty!

I appeal EVERY parking ticket even if i know i was in the wrong. You can still legally pay the reduced fee. DO NOT wait until the 28 days before you appeal. So far i have lost 3 parking tickets and won 7! Some of which here honest mistakes. Even got off parking on a double red route annnywayyyy

Go luck for your Son Tim. Hope he gets it sorted, by 6 points for no insurance is a nasty code and will hammer his insurance.

[timwilky]

Read the above post Ian. not guilty. the systems works

[jambo]

Glad to hear this result Tim, must have been pretty stressful for him having this hanging over his head. It's not generally reasonable to demand to see the paperwork for your company's insurance, certainly not something I'd have insisted on so glad he got someone sensible ruling over the case.

Jambo

[Bluepete]

The CPS will only have a case worker dealing with "Minor Road Traffic Offences" (as they're known) prior to the day in front of the beak. Their job is to make sure all the papers etc are in place.
On the day, the file will be handed to a minion CPS drone who's working their way up the ladder. They'll usually have had no knowledge of the job prior to that day.
In this case, it's clear the bench made the correct decision, but it's for them to decide if Tims lad had insurance or the reasonable expectation he was insured as per conversations with his boss. It's not something the CPS can decide on.

Well done to your lad Tim for sticking to his guns. I really approve when people stand up for what's right.

Pete

[yorkie_chris]

Do they not decide on "reasonable chance of conviction"/"public interest" sort of thing or is this not applicable for motoring offences?

[Bluepete]

In this sort of case, where insurance is the issue, the defendant has to persuade the bench that they had a reasonable assumption they were insured. It's a defence that only the courts can hear, and sometimes, people tell lies "oh, my husband/wife sorts the insurance out when they know damn well they werent covered)
So no, the CPS cannot bin it prior to a hearing.

Pete

[Red Herring]

Nice result Tim, hopefully he'll put it down to experience and be the wiser for it next time.

Originally Posted by Spank86

They probably get so many cases across their desk they only scan them before going to court.

Correct, CPS often haven't even looked at it before the morning of the court hearing.

Prosecutor shouldn't run the case unless he thinks there is at least a 50% chance of a conviction, but how can you make that assessment if your walking into a court room and haven't yet read about why you are there!

Well done to your son for taking it to court and good result!


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk