How JustAnswer Works:
  • Ask an Expert
    Experts are full of valuable knowledge and are ready to help with any question. Credentials confirmed by a Fortune 500 verification firm.
  • Get a Professional Answer
    Via email, text message, or notification as you wait on our site.
    Ask follow up questions if you need to.
  • 100% Satisfaction Guarantee
    Rate the answer you receive.
Ask Jo C. Your Own Question
Jo C.
Jo C., Barrister
Category: Law
Satisfied Customers: 70200
Experience:  Over 5 years in practice
12826847
Type Your Law Question Here...
Jo C. is online now

I am due to appear in Court tomorrow to answer an allegation

Resolved Question:

I am due to appear in Court tomorrow to answer an allegation that I failed to provide information relating to the driver of my motor car which went through a staionary speed camera. I did not fill in the Section 172 Notice. I was the driver of the motor car at the time of speeding and I have heard that instead of proceeding with plea and sentence on the 172 matter, the Prosecution/Court can proceed instead to let me plead to the original offence of speeding. The differnce will be that for the 172 I will get 6points endorsed whereas the speeding will only be three. Is there some kind of precedent in case law that I can quote to support this? If so would you be kind enough to let me know the name of the case etc.
Many thanks
Submitted: 3 years ago.
Category: Law
Expert:  Jo C. replied 3 years ago.
Hi.

Thank you for your question. My name is XXXXX XXXXX I will try to help with this.

Sorry if I'm missing the point but case law to support what?
Customer: replied 3 years ago.

to try to pursuade the Prosecutor to take a plea to the lesser offence. With penalty points I shall escape the 'totting up regulations but with 6 I will fall foul of them and could be disqualified as I will hit in excess of 12 points

Expert:  Jo C. replied 3 years ago.
Thanks.

That isn't an issue of case law. That is really just a discretion on behalf of CPS.

In fact, there is nothing that says that they have to accept a plea to speeding instead of faling to provide. Which charges they bring are entitely for CPS. Case law does not feter them on the point as it could not do.

I wouldn't make the point about totting though. If you get the wrong prosecutor they will charge you with failing to identify on the basis that accepting a plea to speeding will avoid the clear intention of Parliament.

Just offer a plea to speeding. They may well accept it. I used to prosecute traffic courts all the time and its rare that they pursue failing to identify when speeding is available. Although telling them that you want to avoid totting will be a red rag to a bull.

Can I clarify anything for you?

Jo
Jo C. and 3 other Law Specialists are ready to help you