Another resounding PLD success.
Daro received an NIP in relation to a speeding matter.
Cheshire CTO issued speeding fine under my name (unknown name Manager of the CTO on behalf of Cheshire CE Constable) I have challenged Ticket office and CE Constable as well. Both informed that I DO NOT CONSENT FOR ANY PROCEEDINGS.
Oh dear, I think you might know where this one's headed.
Both asked is speeding a crime ( no harm-no crime).
I'm afraid Daro you don't get to define what is and isn't an offence. Anyway, they weren't accusing you of speeding, they were simply asking you who the driver was at the time an alleged speeding matter took place.
Asked for proof of contract obligation me to any form of cooperation with them. Twat from CTO send me letter twice saying that they will use all Police powers to get what they want.
That's what they generally do with 'twats' who want to go head to head with them.
I have asked them is UK policed by consent? Or policed by harassment?
Never got reply. I have also asked them not to share my personal data with any third party and if they will I will charge them a flat fee for that.
The result?
Six non-negotiable points & a hefty 'flat fee' of their own, a wallet-lightening £826 together with a list of the dire consequences if he fails to cough up.
Way to go Daro. The usual idiots chip in with inane advice. First good ole Liz OTF Nolson;
Send to we buy any debt We have a standard discharge notice re Chicago styles and dog Latin that works rather nicely
Liz has had a 100% success rate with that approach, having failed 100% of the time.
Daro is heartened;
i haven't committed any crime, They haven't got any evidence that I was a driver (I wasn't anyway, I was traveler only
![Smile :-)](./images/smilies/icon_smile.gif)
) I refused to cooperate , not giving consent to any proceedings. haven't been given answers to my questions...... I have proved that Cheshire Constabulary is a private business. They don't give a s........ They do what they like. They believe they are inviolable.....
He seems to have overlooked why he's been fined and gained a pointy licence.
Gary Williams tries to inject some proper reasoned advice;
well the options are limited.
Appeal is possible but without any specific route to attack their case it is very unlikely to succeed and will just incur more costs. Appeal against sentence again is possible but the points are fixed. Might get a lower fine amount if you can make a good exceptional hardship case.
At this stage you case is still with the court which is good. You can speak to them direct. The next step is either deductions from earnings or bailiffs. These options are bad as more costs and less room to negotiate. I would speak to the fines officer at the court. Discuss payment and what you can offer.
If it's £10 a week they won't entertain it at this stage but something sensible might well be accepted. Then your case is put on hold as you pay. 3 years later points drop off and life goes on. I don't know your circumstances but if you said you could pay £35 a week then it would be cleared in 6 months and the court would probably be happy. Or smash out a shit load of overtime and pay it off.
Criminal fines (from the criminal courts not whether we think it's a genuine crime or not) are a pain and people often mix them up with civil debts but they need to be dealt with very differently!
Well that's Daro sorted. Welllll, no actually. That's not for him.
Thanks, but It is not the solution for me. That would be pointless exercise for me at first place refusing to cooperate to now appeal....and put my self under theirs jurisdiction...
He doesn't believe the fine is genuine. Gary again;
Well if you don't believe it's genuine either call the court or pop in to confirm. Then you'll know for sure
Stuart OTF Wragg has travelled this path before;
you should be so lucky I got £880 TWICE for ignoring them!!!...still ignoring them & they will never get a penny!
Oh dear. I wonder how the Footles wriggle out of the inevitable ban from accumulated points?
Sheena knows better however;
sorry mate I've been down this road myself a won the battle, you simply asked them to jump through hoops( ask them to provide lots of individual evidence plus the name and number of the officer making allegations ) give them 14 Days to reply. Otherwise you consider claim closed.
Oh right. She follows up;
I received two of these a couple of months ago , I simply stated that they needed to confirm their ALLEGATIONS, I required them to supply full colour pictures complete with Time,Date & Speed, I also require the name and number of the Officer making the Allegations, plus I required a dated calibration certificate and gave them 14 Days to reply, when they replied they did not give me the name and number of the officer and they had gone beyond the 14 days so I informed them they had failed in their obligations and therefore I considered the case closed,.
Stuart sort of agrees;
Brilliant response Sheena & it worked for you...of course others have tried different methods like deny being a driver as opposed to a traveller although I haven't heard of any successes on this one...I have tried a similar approach like yours some time ago but never had quite the result you had but I did get a result eventually & had a judge overturn the original penalty.
The driver vs traveller thing has never succeeded, anywhere. They all know it too; we've even got Stuart and the rest of the Wraggs conceding that "I haven't heard of any successes on this one" and half a minute spent on YT confirms that the sound of the 'traveller's' car window going through immediately follows their denial of reality.
Anyway, back to the predictable responses. Lawrence has this whole thing beat;
If they have anything to state in correspondences with you, and you only deal with matters of consequence by letter, ensure any letters are signed correctly by a human being with a wet signature by a pen by hand over a signature block that clearly states the name and designation of the person writing the letter; the true hand written signature and signature block (of your responding letter) is a good example of how you expect the responding letter to be signed like when you receive it and you always insist a paper trail is maintained.
Well if that doesn't work he should be heading for the nearest Town Hall steps to bear his arse to the elements. More bilge from Karen;
yep seems daft but all unsigned letters sent from corporate criminals acting on behalf of dead corporate business entities send out letters on behalf of the dead corporate business entity because they want to contract with unsuspecting/ignorant people known as clients customers account holders etc etc. all legal labels all legalese terminology word jargon trickery and deception used to entrap extort and exploit inherent freedoms time 'money' and energy from people who consent to being a legal person. all legalese terminology is specific to legal construct. whereby customers clients etc etc are all legal constructs terminology that is and has been created by those who re present the legal system for the purposes of commerce. there has never been a man or woman son or daughter born named customer or account holder by their mother and father at birth. these words therefore have only ever existed on paper for the purposes of unlawful legal contract. customer client etc etc have never and can never exist in reality. so yes perhaps Lawrence could have written - I do not consent or comply with coercion and neither do i consent or comply with your wilful intent to contract with me unlawfully i.e anonymous pp signed so on and so forth. However what Lawrence has written clearly states the awareness of legal fraud moreover Lawrence has taken the time to help whereas you Norton?
On and on the debate rages. Pete weighs in with what must surely be the game changer, a sure-fire winner!
Ask for the police officers training details, most of them are not trained in the ussage of speed cameras.
Alas, Daro sadly responds;
it was average speed camera on M6
Oh bollocks!
They really are a joy these folk.