"practical lawful dissent" fmotl advisory group

[Siegfried Shrink]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=utXI2b93zwA
Part 2.

The Laurel and Hardy of legal comedy carry on with more profundities and they do humbly admit that there are a few things they may have got wrong and they may have more to learn.

The man on the left, who I will call Mr. Right as he keeps saying "Right"
reads from 'A treatise on suits in Chancery' with some difficulty as he stumbles over the title but has a crack at the Latin bits. He tells about a success that sounds like a collection agency giving up because there was no worthwhile money to be collected.
They talk about a 'meet and greet' in Birmingham on the 2nd of September, anyone heard more about this?

[AndyPandy]

What an absolute dickhead, so the next thing will be arrested for driving whilst disqualified and no insurance ( insurance doesn't cover disqualified drivers ). Van taken and crushed, so no job and his partner will probably boot him out!!

How to make a bad situation worst and there they all are encouraging this jerk to throw his life down the drain, scum !

So I should be going to none court today, for 1 speeding ticket 3 points, and failure to produce 3 points 6 points. And £811 for a victim surcharge. 4 miles over the limit on a quiet road, putting no one in danger. There was no victim it's all just for profit. I got to 3rd notice with no reply, so I'm sticking to my guns and not going. I figure they will prosecute me in my absence, but I've acted in honour and will continue to do so. I need my van to work so I will continue to drive. And see what happens when I get pulled over in the future, I also have letter to put West Yorkshire police on notice.
What info do people drive/ carry with them all the time just incase. I have my oath at all times but would a copy of all notices sent be a good idea, evidence for if when I may get pulled?

[notorial dissent]

You're right, thick as a brick and twice as dense. Making it worse is a major level of understatement here. I think he just blew the bottom out of the hole he was digging for himself.

The statement that always gets me in things like this is "I've acted in honour and will continue to do so" when they have done anything but, although I seriously doubt they know what the phrase means.

[ArthurWankspittle]

What an absolute dickhead, so the next thing will be arrested for driving whilst disqualified and no insurance ( insurance doesn't cover disqualified drivers ). Van taken and crushed, so no job and his partner will probably boot him out!!

How to make a bad situation worst and there they all are encouraging this jerk to throw his life down the drain, scum !

So I should be going to none court today, for 1 speeding ticket 3 points, and failure to produce 3 points 6 points. And £811 for a victim surcharge. 4 miles over the limit on a quiet road, putting no one in danger. There was no victim it's all just for profit. I got to 3rd notice with no reply, so I'm sticking to my guns and not going. I figure they will prosecute me in my absence, but I've acted in honour and will continue to do so. I need my van to work so I will continue to drive. And see what happens when I get pulled over in the future, I also have letter to put West Yorkshire police on notice.
What info do people drive/ carry with them all the time just incase. I have my oath at all times but would a copy of all notices sent be a good idea, evidence for if when I may get pulled?

Not got all the details but 6 points isn't going to get him disqualified unless either he has only recently got a licence or already has at least 6 points. Also no one ever gets prosecuted for 4mph over the limit, it is too close to speedo tolerances etc. Am I missing some info here?

[Siegfried Shrink]

There is very little actual roads policing nowadays, and what there is is usually avoidable with prudence as long as your car or van has tax,MOT and insurance so you do not ping the cameras. It could be years before he gets pulled over.
There are plenty of traffic offence tickets issued but almost all from cameras.
His problem is going to be with pig-headedly ignoring the fine, if that is what he does..
From what was said it looks as if he has turned a single fixed penalty notice for whatever the minimum is for petty speeding offences (and could be a driver awareness course and no licence points) into a hugely larger fine already.
I think if these things go to court the fine is based on ability to pay, based on a means test. Ignoring this will get you a fine based on an assumed income that is probably on the high side for this chap.

The lawful rebellion seems to be good news for the Royal Collector of Fines, surely not what they intended?

[Footloose52]

However failing to name the driver attracts 6 points so I wonder if that is in the reckoning as well.

[notorial dissent]

No, I don't think you are missing anything, I rather suspect that our "friend" here is leaving out some of the essential bits as is the usual wont of the "not my fault" crowd.

And in true sovcti/footl fashion has managed to turn a misdemeanor in to a major offense.

[ArthurWankspittle]

However failing to name the driver attracts 6 points so I wonder if that is in the reckoning as well.

He said failure to produce. I'm not even sure we still have "producers" so you may be right and he's got the terminology wrong. (Goes away to look up producers). For those playing from outside the UK, you don't need to carry ID or vehicle documents in the UK. Years back you were given notice to "produce" your documents (licence, insurance, MOT) at a police station within 7 days (IIRC). Of course what used to happen is that the driver never bothered (usually because they didn't have them) but it was a very low priority for the police to chase up and the consequences were minimal, probably a small fine. To stop this, and in particular a lot of driving without insurance, the law changed in 1988 (?) and again later about 2000 and gave the police the right to confiscate or impound a vehicle where the driver hasn't got the appropriate licence and/or it isn't insured.

[Siegfried Shrink]

Also no one ever gets prosecuted for 4mph over the limit, it is too close to speedo tolerances etc. Am I missing some info here?

Added to a tendency to minimise the offence may be the habit I have noticed of taking the speed limit to be the limit plus 10% so in a 40 limit he would be doing 48 but only count the MPH over 44 as being his infraction. The 10% leeway has no basis in law, if it ever was anything it was a rule of thumb for traffic officers who in my experience saved their attentions for more notable infractions.

Punctilious observation of speed limits is not a British trait. Unless the traffic is so congested that faster is impossible, anyone doing 30 MPH in a 30 limit tends to have a long queue of traffic behind them and an empty road ahead.
============================================================
The chap mentions failure to produce, not failure to identify driver. This implies a traffic police stop, and not having his licence with him. He would be issued a notice to produce the licence at a police station within a week.
For a trivial infringement dealing with actual police people, a polite apology and a promise to be good in future has a very good chance of getting no more than a warning. This approach would be anathema to the bold rebels.

[Comrade Sharik]

So I should be going to none court today, for 1 speeding ticket 3 points, and failure to produce 3 points 6 points. And £811 for a victim surcharge.

This looks like nonsense. I may be wrong, but £811 can't be a victim surcharge - too high. It must be the fine and surcharge. But my understanding is that if the matter is dealt with under a Single Justice Procedure Notice, the fine is not determined until a guilty plea and statement of means are received. If the matter goes to court because of a not guilty plea on an SJPN, or otherwise, the penalties won't be determined until after conviction.

[hucknallred]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HWARE4PGrXQ
(Aug.30th)
Some fairly recent would be guru pleadings from Dave and a mate, Serge.
Round about the middle (24.00) they start offering a 'course' for a 'discounted price'.

It is like watching frogs trying to do algebra.

Entertaining as this is, is it in the right thread? I thought David G was a Sovrun Paralegul & not a PLDer.

[ArthurWankspittle]

The 10% leeway has no basis in law, if it ever was anything it was a rule of thumb for traffic officers who in my experience saved their attentions for more notable infractions.

It supposedly goes back to mechanical speedos and tolerances. As magistrates courts don't set precedences in law someone somewhere in the distant past probably got a good lawyer to get him off a speeding charge about a hundred years ago. But as you say, you would look a pedantic jobsworth prosecuting someone for 44 in a 40 when you could clock lots of people doing >47.

The chap mentions failure to produce, not failure to identify driver. This implies a traffic police stop, and not having his licence with him. He would be issued a notice to produce the licence at a police station within a week.

Surely the police just check online with DVLA?

[Siegfried Shrink]

You are probably right about the DVLA, my life of crime rather petered out quite a few years ago and apart from a stop for speeding which got me a warning not to get caught again, I have had no real experience for many years.
In this house it is the saintly but occasionally careless Mrs. Shrink who has accumulated three tickets for driving in bus lanes who is the arch criminal.

[Siegfried Shrink]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HWARE4PGrXQ
(Aug.30th)
Some fairly recent would be guru pleadings from Dave and a mate, Serge.
Round about the middle (24.00) they start offering a 'course' for a 'discounted price'.

It is like watching frogs trying to do algebra.

Entertaining as this is, is it in the right thread? I thought David G was a Sovrun Paralegul & not a PLDer.

Possibly this post and the other one referring to them could be moved to the more appropriate thread. Sometime I have a probel keeping up with who is who.

[aesmith]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=utXI2b93zwA
Part 2.

Category Gaming. Shouldn't it be Comedy?

[aesmith]

What an absolute dickhead, so the next thing will be arrested for driving whilst disqualified and no insurance ( insurance doesn't cover disqualified drivers ). Van taken and crushed, so no job and his partner will probably boot him out!!

He posted stuff earlier, on 28th August he posted a letter confirming he'd been convicted of speeding (37mph in 30 limit) and of failing to provide driver details. https://m.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=1 ... _tn__=EH-R

On a different post on the same day he showed the letter relating to the current proceedings. Although the letter says the Magistrate has referred the case for a full hearing, I don't see how this can relate to the two charges above, as that previous letter says he'd been convicted. https://m.facebook.com/groups/388605611 ... ction_list

On that basis I assume this hearing, noted as "to attend re disqualification", is to decide whether or not to disqualify under the totting up process. It's his chance to try and plead Exceptional Hardship as a basis to reduce or avoid disqualification.

He keeps mentioning 4mph, but clearly the excess was 7mph. Even if he means excess over the normal threshold, enforcement starts at 35 in a 30 limit, so that's not 4 either.

[aesmith]

Looks like his car is currently insured, but MOT expired August 2016, and it's untaxed since 1st July 2017. Unless it's in trade or something it looks like a high risk of getting pulled irrespective of disqualification.

[longdog]

He keeps mentioning 4mph, but clearly the excess was 7mph. Even if he means excess over the normal threshold, enforcement starts at 35 in a 30 limit, so that's not 4 either.

He's working on 30mph plus the '10% you are allowed' equals 33mph plus '4mph over' gives 37mph.

[aesmith]

He's working on 30mph plus the '10% you are allowed' equals 33mph plus '4mph over' gives 37mph.

Well that was my point. Aside from the fact that you're not "allowed" 10%, the threshold for enforcement is actually 10% + 2mph. So that would be 3 not 4 mph. I think he just can't do his sums.

[JimUk1]

As far as I am aware, it's only 10%, and that is at the discretion of he police. I've nevered heard of 10% plus and additional limit.