Anyone with court experience who can help please...?

[besidemyselfwithfury]

Hello

I will try to keep this short...

DH received a fixed penalty speeding ticket for allegedly going at 40 in a 30 zone. He was adamant he wasn't going 40 and believed the speed camera was incorrect and refused the fixed penalty and went to court.

To cut a long story short, he got a district judge rather than a magistrate, the police pulled in an 'expert' and he was found guilty and fined triple the original £60 fixed penalty and landed with almost £2000 in expenses.

He has asked for time to pay and has basically been told if he wants time to pay his case has to be relisted for the sentencing judge to reconsider the sentence and that his fine was based on an assumed income level and as his actual income is more than the assumed level he will probably get his fine hiked.

DH says the judge asked him for his gross and net pay before he fined him, so this feels corrupt!

Is this right? I feel like I've woken up in a banana republic - surely the fine should be about what the alleged offence is not how much an individual earns. And anyway once it is set how can the threaten to raise it because he has asked for time to pay?

bump...

On what basis did he say the camera was faulty and what independent evidence did he produce to back up his claim?

As he chose to defend rather than admit the offence, of course costs were incurred by the state for which he is liable, and all magistrates cases take into account the defendant's finances.

Was he legally represented?

Hi

He knows he wasn't doing 40 as the he was in an unfamiliar area on a road that appeared to be a 40 zone but had no signs so he had hedged his bets by putting the cruise control on at 35. He challenged the distance they had measured him over and the co ordinates they provided backed up his claim. In court though the 'expert' witness gave his evidence my husband challenged as his distances were not exact he gave an 'in the region of' answer. They also produced evidence that they had not revealed to my husband before the hearing and when my husband raised this the judge said he would deal with it in summing up. He didn't. We have since found out the case should have been adjourned as they are not allowed to surprise you with evidence apparently. My husband had revealed his case to the CPS before the hearing on their request.

He represented himself. The whole experience has smelt bad to us tbh.

But my question was more about whether having been fined - and we chose not to appeal because we can't afford the risk of a bigger fine or more costs - just asking for extra time to pay can expose you to a higher fine. Which is what the letter says.

I am no legal expert, but i have a bit of third hand experience of this...

Right, firstly, they presented an 'expert witness', of what department in the police or otherwise did he represent and what qualifications does he have to be able to be an expert witness (this is just a general question - i am not doubting that he qualifies to be called an expert).

Secondly, this may have helped your case if you had a policeman friend, i'll tell you why basically my Dad who i have the third hand experience of this through, received a speeding ticket through the post too, and challenged it on the same basis - the camera recorded his speed wrong. What my dad then did was go to the scene where he was snapped and measure the distance between the lines on the road as they have to be set, i think he also got hold of the calibration records for that speed camera. It all proved to be wrong and my dad challenged it. The irony of it is, he himself is an expert witness for the police (CIU - collision investigation unit - goes to bad car crashes and assesses the scene, who to blame etc. [nothing can be an accident anymore you see]) Maybe try to get a copy of all the phtots taken of the car alledgedly speeding, go to location measure them up and get someone good at maths to work it out speed vs. time. My dad managed to get his fine overturned, they had to go back to recent people caught speeding and re assess and the road lines were re painted accurately.

Thirdly, setting the cruise control speed at 35mph is i suppose a safe thing to do. Cars ALWAYS read the speed at around 3-4mph higher than you are actually doing - if you have a sat nav then you can see this for yourself as a satnav is more accurate. Speed cameras are also set at 10%+2 to allow for error. So a 30mph speed camera is set to 35 mph and you have to be doing 36mph before you get snapped. So realistically (and i am not condoning it) you can do around 39 on your speedo before getting snapped. You say he was doing 35 on the cruise control - this will have being roughly 32mph.

All magistrates take into account earnings - when i was in court for Drink driving, my finances were taken into account and i was fine very little £100 + costs as i earnt that little, same with the reform course i chose to do £140 i paid as that was what my earnings stretched to.

I think you should take your case to an independent complaints commision, they will be able to analyse everything professionally. You should be able to ask for extra time due to financial hardship - however this has to be proven - you know saying you can't afford a meal out one saturday is totally different to not being able to afford to pay for the Gas bill or food for the table. Asking for extra time cannot make you liable for an extra fine, yet just avoiding paying can, you need to make someone aware of your situation. Bear in mind court fines are classed as PRIORITY debt and should come before such bills such as NON PRIORITY debt which includes things like credits cards, unsecured loans and overdrafts.

I do find the £2000 court costs a little extreme... He should have had it done by a magistrate, not a district judge and court costs shouldn't have really exceeded £100. This is not a professional opinion, just experience, fines are means tested, court costs are not i don't think. I hope this helps and isn't too long