HELP court summons received

[yorkie_chris]

Originally Posted by fizzwheel

That may explain it. They'll just assume you ignored the NIP if that was the case.

Like I said go get some legal advice.

I'd be wary of thinking they'll reduce your fine / sentance to a driving education course, especially with points already on your license.

Go get the legal advice, it may pay for itself in the long run by avoiding a mahoosive fine or a ban.

+1 on the legal beagles.


Now this might be me talking balls as I'm no brief... but if he had been sent a NIP to determine who was driving (doesn't sound like he was), and did not respond to this (obviously he did not)... then would he not be being charged with failure to disclose the driver or whatever it's called rather than the DWDC offence?

[yorkie_chris]

Originally Posted by SVMAT

After going round in circles for a while i was told in order to get evidence i would have to write a letter requesting it to the police who would the forward it to the cps who will decide whether i get disclosure or not :S. The woman on the phone made it sound as if they basically did not have to disclose the evidence to me.

A lot of these things are "policies" which the monkeys on the phone might be told regardless of the legalities of the situation.

[Paul the 6th]

been quietly watching this thread with my fingers crossed for you mate, but it sounds like a solicitor specialising in motoring law is needed now - they'll be able to advise you on whether or not evidence can be disclosed etc...

If I was to turn up at court without first seeing the evidence, I'd have to explain to the judge that I've no idea why I've been summonsed and that the relevant bodies have decided not to show their evidence to me, so please bear with me if I seem a little confused about the whole reason as to why I'm now stood before a judge.

out of curiosity, what and when did you get your 3 points already for?
are the police trying to prosecute you twice for the same offence?

Originally Posted by yorkie_chris

+1 on the legal beagles.


Now this might be me talking balls as I'm no brief... but if he had been sent a NIP to determine who was driving (doesn't sound like he was), and did not respond to this (obviously he did not)... then would he not be being charged with failure to disclose the driver or whatever it's called rather than the DWDC offence?

I would have thought he would have been charged with that AS WELL as the original offence he was being NIP'd for.

Originally Posted by collis

out of curiosity, what and when did you get your 3 points already for?
are the police trying to prosecute you twice for the same offence?

He already said it was for contravention of the double white line system, and a S3 is different from that.

Originally Posted by SVMAT

After going round in circles for a while i was told in order to get evidence i would have to write a letter requesting it to the police who would the forward it to the cps who will decide whether i get disclosure or not :S. The woman on the phone made it sound as if they basically did not have to disclose the evidence to me.

Police - Investigate the crime and build a case containing evidence to present to the CPS.

The CPS - Crown Prosecution Service, a government department responsible for prosecuting criminal cases that have been passed to them by the police.

(All prosecution is "criminal" and motoring offences are a crime, which do result in a record of crime, they just don't result in a "criminal record" in the common sense of the expression, which means the Criminal Records Bureau and the Police National Computer databases don't flag up records against you)

The Magistrates Court - The lowest level of court, presided over by Magistrates, usually a voluntary member of the public (read society do-good'er and general sticky beak if you wish), who is advised by a professional legal advisor.


The woman on the phone obviously doesn't have a clue. Of course they have to disclose evidence held against you, or how can you now what you are accused of, enter a plea in court, of prepare a defence?

Don't write to the police on the advise of this daft woman on the phone, now is the time to involve your solicitor, and tell him the difficulty you have had in obtaining the evidence.

I still cannot understand how they can summon you to court for DWDC, if you still have not told them who was driving at the time of the alleged incident.

Just a thought but if someone else had been sent an NIP and responded claiming the OP was the driver at the time, would that explain why he got a summons without an NIP or should he still have recieved one (NIP)?

Originally Posted by -Ralph-

Police - Investigate the crime and build a case containing evidence to present to the CPS.

The CPS - Crown Prosecution Service, a government department responsible for prosecuting criminal cases that have been passed to them by the police.

(All prosecution is "criminal" and motoring offences are a crime, which do result in a record of crime, they just don't result in a "criminal record" in the common sense of the expression, which means the Criminal Records Bureau and the Police National Computer databases don't flag up records against you) Must be majorly different down there because according to Scottish Crime Recording Standards, very few motoring offences are classed as "crime". The few being things like S178 (twoc'ing basically) and disq driving. And motoring offence do show on PNC under a persons name file if they have been convicted at court, not if it is a FPN though.

The Magistrates Court - The lowest level of court, presided over by Magistrates, usually a voluntary member of the public (read society do-good'er and general sticky beak if you wish), who is advised by a professional legal advisor.

Why would you have to write to the police? They now have nothing to do with it, other than a responsibility to ensure they have investigated fully and pass any new evidence to the CPS, and the CPS will probably call a police officer as a witness in court.

The woman on the phone obviously doesn't have a clue. Of course they have to disclose evidence held against you, or how can you now what you are accused of, enter a plea in court, of prepare a defence.

Don't write to the police on the advise of this daft woman on the phone, now is the time to involve your solicitor, and tell him the difficulty you have had in obtaining the evidence.

I still cannot understand how they can summon you to court for DWDC, if you still have not told them who was driving at the time of the alleged incident.

100% agree with Ralph that you need to be getting in touch with a solicitor NOW.

[fizzwheel]

Now heres a thought.

Liz got pulled for speeding on the M5 a while ago. I very nearly did, but thats another story... the officer that stopped her cautioned her at the side of the road for driving without due car and attention and speeding. so no need for an NIP.

A couple of weeks before the 6 months deadline from when the offense was committed, the pack came through with the summons in it and a court date, included with the summons were two written statements from both the police officers that were in the car that were the evidence being presented by the prosecution.

So makes me wander if theres actually any evidence to disclose and thats why the OP doesnt have anything to go on and the lady he spoke to on the phone was vague or not forthcoming with what he asked for.

I would agree with ralph, get your solicitor involved now ! Theres no harm in doing so and you will protect yourself in the long run.

Originally Posted by benji106

Just a thought but if someone else had been sent an NIP and responded claiming the OP was the driver at the time, would that explain why he got a summons without an NIP or should he still have recieved one (NIP)?

No, they would then need to notify the OP that they intended to prosecute. "Notice of Intended Prosecution", they cannot proceed with a prosecution until they have done this (though they may have done this and he didn't get it).

Even if somebody else had named him as being in charge of the vehicle at the time of the offence, that still doesn't prove he was driving. He could have given somebody else the keys, they still need to send him s173 ask him who was driving.