Safe Speed Forums

Ok, a bit of background first.

My previous car had the registration number cloned. The first I was aware of this was in September 2005 when I received an NIP from Wiltshire for doing 98mph down the M5. I subsequently got this cancelled by sending photographs of my car to Wiltshire police. They were satisfied that the vehicle wasn't mine and cancelled the NIP, flagging the plate on PNC.

I then, at the beginning of December 2005, received a further NIP from Cheshire, 46mph through a 40mph temp limit on the M6. Which was impossible as I was at home all day and the car was sat on the driveway. Again this was cancelled, and again the plate was flagged on PNC.

(I also received a third NIP that wasn't me in February 2006, this arrived out-of-time and was cancelled for this reason.)

Towards the end of January 2006 I received a letter from Kent police saying that "as you have failed to produce documents we must now consider taking further action". Not having ever been given a producer by Kent police I rang the number on the letter and asked what was going on.

I was told by the girl on the phone that a patrol had stopped my car in mid December. The driver had given my details. The patrol had not however recorded the VIN of the car that was stopped.

I explained that I had not been driving the offending vehicle and had not been anywhere near Kent. I then contacted a solicitor.

Following the advice from this solicitor I instructed them as soon as I later received a summons, on the grounds that the person who was stopped had falsely given my details. No driving license had been produced at the roadside, no VIN check was done on the vehicle - which by this time had a PNC "interest" flag on its registration due to the earlier cloning incident.

Fast forward nearly 2 years and a dozen court hearings later. I get a call from the solicitor saying that they've found me guilty, in spite of overwhelming evidence to the contrary.

So now I'm left with having to appeal. Any suggestions?

_________________
Magistrates rule #1: "Never let justice get in the way of a conviction."

Have you got letters regarding the cloned vehicle?

Did the Police give you a password?

If we get this right it's a good Daily Mail story, and could even trigger a national row / questions in the house.

I'm on 01862 893030. Give me a bell anytime on Sunday.

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety

I have letters, no password but Cheshire police gave me information to pass on in the event I got stopped (which I did 3 times in total).

Have just sent you an email with more information, will give you a call sometime tomorrow to discuss further.

_________________
Magistrates rule #1: "Never let justice get in the way of a conviction."

That's absolutely disgusting. How anyone can claim that the system isn't biased against the motorist is beyond me. A driver in Squirrel's position shouldn't have to go to any lengths to prove their innocence, let alone still be found guilty after they have done.

Why are magistrates so biased when they're usually drivers themselves? Are they following orders? If not then what? It's unbelievable, and like Ernest Marsh's case, it could happen to any of us tomorrow. To me it seems to be abuse of the criminal justice system to force people out of their cars. It wouldn't be quite so bad if the same magistrates weren't so soft on the real scrotes time and time again.

Squirrel, I know you've already had to do far more and go through far more stress than you should have had to, but I for one would be grateful if you used this to get the country's drivers some long-overdue justice. That might just make the whole ordeal worthwhile for you.

In the meantime, yet another way in which this once-great country is being brought down to its knees by the bunch of parasites pretending to run it.

_________________
Paul Smith: a legend.

"The freedom provided by the motor vehicle is not universally applauded, however: there are those who resent the loss of state control over individual choice that the car represents. Such people rarely admit their prejudices openly; instead, they make false or exaggerated claims about the adverse effects of road transport in order to justify calls for higher taxation or restrictions on mobility." (Conservative Way Forward: Stop The War Against Drivers)

The solicitor was disgusted as well - apparently the prosecution objected to the inclusion of the letters from Wiltshire and Cheshire police saying that my car had been cloned and the magistrates upheld it.

Fortunately it looks like I can get legal aid for an appeal. Just as well as this has cost me nearly £3,000 in solicitors' fees already.

I'm sure once this goes to Crown Court I can get this overturned, but in the meantime let's see if we can stir things up a bit and at least have some good come from it.

Kent want me to attend on the 14th December for sentencing. I live in the Cotswolds. There is no way I can get there without driving - and if I drive there and get banned there's no way I can get back. I've asked the solicitor to represent me at this hearing on humanitarian grounds as I physically cannot get to Kent.

Shame I couldn't have afforded Nick Freeman on this one.

Paul - will give you a call later on to discuss.

_________________
Magistrates rule #1: "Never let justice get in the way of a conviction."

Squirrel, surley DVLA will change your number plate for free. You should not have to put up with that rubbish. If you sold the car on the new owner would also get greif.

http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Motoring/Ve ... G_10020050

_________________
Speed limit sign radio interview. TV Snap Unhappy
“It has never been the rule in this country – I hope it never will be - that suspected criminal offences must automatically be the subject of prosecution” He added that there should be a prosecution: “wherever it appears that the offence or the circumstances of its commission is or are of such a character that a prosecution in respect thereof is required in the public interest”
This approach has been endorsed by Attorney General ever since 1951. CPS Code

I've since changed the car, the old one got written off! Long story, the moral of which is never drive after an argument with your ex-girlfriend. Car, meet hedge. Hedge, meet car.

Had it not been written off I'd have had a new number plate allocated.

_________________
Magistrates rule #1: "Never let justice get in the way of a conviction."

This is why they are called the Clown Prosecution Service.

What the clowns refuse to understand is that every time they pull a stunt like this, they weaken ALL of justice.

Unbelievable!

_________________
www.thatsnews.org.uk / www.thatsnews.blogspot.com / http://thatsmotoring.blogspot.com/

I've rapidly come to the conclusion (see signature!) that when it comes to magistrates and motoring offences you're guilty until proven guilty.

Deal hard drugs, mug an old lady, rape someone, molest a kid... and as long as you don't commit any traffic offences when you're leaving the scene of the crime you'll get away with it.

_________________
Magistrates rule #1: "Never let justice get in the way of a conviction."

Further update on this - the sentencing hearing was put off until the 8th Jan (last week).

Took a friend with me to drive back in case I couldn't. Turns out that the CPS had objected to the inclusion of the letters from Cheshire and Wiltshire police on the grounds that they were "hearsay evidence". However they'd also admitted hearsay evidence from the prosecution as to the identity of the driver (someone who was stopped claiming to be me).

One of those letters (from Wiltshire) was dated 2 months before the alleged incident and stated that the reg would be PNC flagged. The other was dated a couple of days after but referred to an NIP issued nearly 3 weeks before, stating that the reg would be PNC flagged. So there would have been a PNC flag on the registration number of my vehicle at the time the clone was stopped. And yet (I now have all the paperwork from the solicitor) one of the PCs that stopped the vehicle claims to have carried out a PNC check while the other spoke to the driver.

Got 6 points and £1500 fine (£500 fine plus £1000 costs) suspended pending outcome of appeal. Appeal lodged immediately.

Will keep you informed of course.

_________________
Magistrates rule #1: "Never let justice get in the way of a conviction."

Was the policeman who stopped the cloned vehicle not asked to identify you?

Unfortunately I cannot say I am surprised after my own experience.

_________________
Time to take responsibility for our actions.. and don't be afraid of speaking out!

This is, without doubt, an utter disgrace.

Hearsay evidence my arse!

_________________
www.thatsnews.org.uk / www.thatsnews.blogspot.com / http://thatsmotoring.blogspot.com/

Ernest - no, according to his statements he said "due to the number of motorists stopped and the time elapsed since this incident I would be unable to identify the driver on sight".

Thatsnews - my thoughts exactly. Appeal date is next month (about 3-4 weeks time). Unfortunately I'm without legal representation at present, any legal types in Kent want to lend a hand?

I may be able to get legal aid for the appeal due to the unusual circumstances, ie I'm basically a victim of identity theft. If I do end up having to represent myself at Crown Court... any suggestions?

_________________
Magistrates rule #1: "Never let justice get in the way of a conviction."

What a dreadful experience you have had. One would think unbelievable but sadly not. You indicated the appeal would be round about now so any more news?

Appeal was Friday at Maidstone crown court - a 500 mile round trip.

I arrived at the court to find to my horror that due to a significant cock-up on the part of my solicitors I was unrepresented. I requested an adjournment which was denied.

So I was stuck representing myself at Crown Court.

I did manage to introduce the letters from Wiltshire and Cheshire police which tipped the balance in my favour. The two officers who stopped the offending vehicle were called as witnesses. When I cross-examined them I put the question to both of them as to whether or not the vehicle was PNC checked at the time of the stop. Neither of them could remember.

I also asked the question as to whether either of them saw the driver's license or any other form of identification. The answer to this was no, from both officers.

I then asked both officers in turn whether they were aware that there was a PNC marker on the registration plate. Both of them replied that no, they weren't.

I then took the stand and ran through the saga of my car's registration number being cloned, stating that the first I knew of this incident was when I received a letter from Kent police saying "you've failed to produce documents".

The prosecutor then put it to me that I was in fact the driver, an allegation which I of course denied as it was untrue.

The bench then retired for 10-15 minutes. The judge commented that he personally didn't believe that I wasn't the driver (again untrue) but that his beliefs were not sufficient to uphold a conviction and therefore "with some regret" he would uphold my appeal.

Unfortunately I was not awarded costs, so I'm now left significantly out of pocket.

However I've been advised independently that I can in fact bring a civil action against Kent police, alleging that the two officers that stopped the speeding vehicle were in fact negligent in their duties by failing to carry out a PNC check at the roadside, and recover damages from them to cover my legal costs.

_________________
Magistrates rule #1: "Never let justice get in the way of a conviction."

Frightful news. What do you intend to do?

_________________
If you think everyone else around you is driving badly, perhaps it's time to examine your own driving.

no costs is a complete and utter disgrace. But are the chances of winning them back through further legal action high enough to warrant more aggro and grief?

Interesting. Why would the judge believe that you were the driver based on the evidence you present above? Is there anything you are not telling us?

Are judges allowed to express their personal opinion in court? I thought they were there to decide what is lawful and what is not. Their opinion is only worth the same as yours or mine and hence the criticism of the Government by judges is routinely ignored.

_________________
Malcolm W.
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not represent the views of Safespeed.

Don't think so. Apparently it was "highly suspicious" that I contacted a solicitor straight away rather than trying to deal with the matter myself as I had done for the two NIPs from the cloned vehicle. As I explained to the bench on Friday I am not a member of the legal profession, and here I'm prepared to state that while I was comfortable dealing with scamera pratnerships I didn't fancy having to take on the full wrath of the legal system in order to prove my innocence.

As far as civil action against the police goes it seems to be an open and shut case. The two officers that stopped the car failed to carry out a PNC check (I've been pulled for speeding twice and both times the car was PNC checked). By doing this they not only allowed an identity thief to escape unpunished they also put me through 2 years of stress.

Now I need to fight to get my costs back... I'm almost £3,000 out of pocket, which I can ill-afford right now. (Although I could afford to lose my license even less.)

_________________
Magistrates rule #1: "Never let justice get in the way of a conviction."

Squirrel,

Join the club mate...I'm currently doing battle with the City of London police for an incident that occurred almost 15 years ago.

The long & short of it is (like yourself), the police failed to take steps to identify who they had in custody, they have admitted to as such both in person & on a secret video recording (made by myself) that they failed to "do their homework"...yet apparently the onus is still on me to prove what I was doing almost 15 years ago

The "best" advice (and I use that term loosely) that has come from the City of London police (namely Matt Rees, collar number B541) is that I find a no win, no fee brief and pursue it that way as they will never back down even though they openly admit to having no evidence against me

_________________
What makes you think I'm drunk officer, have I got a fat bird with me?