NOT HAPPY
Police are warning drivers to ignore the
advice of a solicitor who has been advising
motorists of ways to avoid speeding penalties.
Ian Giggal has been quoted on a biking website
which advises motorists of loopholes in the law.
It claims that simply not signing police
paperwork could get people off a fine. Derbyshire
Police said that not filling in paperwork will
mean motorists end up in court and may find
themselves facing bigger fines and more points
put on their licence.
Ian Windmill from the Derbyshire Safety Camera
Partnership said, "I'm a little bit
surprised, certainly, and also very disappointed
that a local solicitor would publish information
on their website which is clearly
incorrect."
But, Mr Giggal, who practises in Staveley in
Chesterfield, Derbyshire, claims it is his job as
a solicitor to find ways of avoiding the law and
that he has also used the method successfully.
He said, "You shouldn't speed, however,
having been caught speeding, then as a defence
lawyer, it's my duty to investigate ways of
avoiding the consequences of that." |
|
|
DON'T SIGN
Magistrates' courts could grind to a halt if
thousands of motorists exploit a legal loophole
unwittingly exposed by a Welsh driver. Magistrates had no
choice but to find Phillip Dennis, of Whitford,
Flintshire, not guilty of speeding when his case was
heard. He had omitted to sign the standard form which is
sent to the owner of each vehicle caught by a speed
camera - and Mold magistrates said they couldn't accept
the form as evidence. Police have no power to compel car
owners to sign the form and have been expecting someone
to spot the loophole. The Association of British Drivers,
representing about 2,500 motorists, predicted drivers
would soon get wind of the court case.
"Motorists are always very quick to seek any way to
avoid paying for their speeding ticket, particularly when
they've been caught by cameras because they resent very
much the way the cameras operate," said spokesman
Tony Vickers. "The cameras have very much reduced
public respect for the police and local authorities.
People are only too glad to find a way to beat the
system." He said motorists who receive a speeding
ticket after being caught on camera could opt to have
their case heard in court, rather than pay the fine
without quibble. "If a lot of people take up this
option it will have another side-effect, which will be to
clog up the magistrates' courts with hundreds or
thousands of motorists all trying to avoid paying the
fine. The implications for the legal system are
interesting, to say the least."
Although the ABD did not condone breaking the highway
laws, it said it would place details of the loophole on
its own website for other drivers to read. "I'm sure
a lot of people will try it on and see whether it gets
them anywhere. The prospect of using the loophole could
look especially appealing to people who already had
endorsements on their licences," said Mr Vickers.
"They should bear in mind that if they fail, they
will end up paying the full fine rather than the 50% they
would pay if they put their hand up." When a police
camera takes a photograph of a speeding vehicle, the
vehicle's registered owner is sent a form asking who the
driver was at the time. It is an offence not to complete
the form and name the driver - but the owner does not
have to sign it.
If the form has not been signed, the courts cannot take
any notice of it. Magistrates in Mold were asked to prove
a case of speeding against Phillip Dennis of Gwibnant
Farm, Downing Road, Whitford, near Holywell. But clerk
Paul Conlon pointed out that the form naming the
defendant as the driver was unsigned. The driver had
provided the information required of him but there was no
requirement under that section of the law for the form to
be signed. Magistrates said they were not happy but had
to find the defendant not guilty in his absence. Chairman
John Beard suggested the police should go back to
defendants and ask them to sign the form.
But he was advised that as the law now stood the only
requirement was to stipulate the name of the driver, and
that there was no legal requirement to sign it even if
police did go back and request a signature. Nobody was
available from North Wales Police to comment yesterday.
But one police source said there had been concern that
once the loophole was spotted it could open the flood
gates. He said, "The police generally have been
waiting for someone to appeal against a conviction on
this point but no one has yet. We have basically been
keeping our heads down. Some of my colleagues say we
should just make sure people sign the forms but others
are a bit concerned that to do that is tricking people
into something they do not have to do. The trouble is
when this is highlighted they will all be sending the
forms back unsigned."
RoadPeace, the charity for road-accident victims, said
the loophole showed that cameras and computers were no
substitute for a police presence on the roads. Chairman
Zoë Stow said, "It illustrates that we can't just
deal with these things as a bureaucratic issue and send
forms through the post. It's disappointing that the law
is poorly drafted and nobody seems to care enough to do
it properly." Speed cameras have proliferated in
South and North Wales since the Home Office gave police
permission to use fines to pay for enforcement, rather
than sending the money to the Treasury. Latest figures
show that in 2001 the number of speeding tickets issued
by South Wales Police was 38% higher than in 2000.
Next
>>>
|
|
|