Read on Twitter
A woman, 78, hadn’t paid her car insurance.
She was prosecuted after not paying a DVLA fixed penalty notice.
£40 fine, £100 costs & a £16 victim surcharge. So far, not very interesting.
But look at the guilty plea & recoil in horror that any magistrate convicted her at all…
She was prosecuted after not paying a DVLA fixed penalty notice.
£40 fine, £100 costs & a £16 victim surcharge. So far, not very interesting.
But look at the guilty plea & recoil in horror that any magistrate convicted her at all…
Her daughter wrote to the court.
Her mum has schizophrenia, dementia, & Alzheimer’s.
She broke her ankle in March, was taken to hospital, and is now in care.
She & her brother are dealing with her affairs: “Both at breaking point”, she said.
And the magistrate still convicted.
Her mum has schizophrenia, dementia, & Alzheimer’s.
She broke her ankle in March, was taken to hospital, and is now in care.
She & her brother are dealing with her affairs: “Both at breaking point”, she said.
And the magistrate still convicted.
The question is, can that magistrate genuinely have looked at the guilty plea before convicting and issuing a fine?
This was in the Single Justice Procedure, so it was behind-closed-doors, cases dealt with at speed, and only one magistrate making the decisions.
This was in the Single Justice Procedure, so it was behind-closed-doors, cases dealt with at speed, and only one magistrate making the decisions.
In DVLA prosecutions, you find lots of older people being prosecuted.
Pensioners can't break the rules just because they're old.
But there's a risk they are having health difficulties, or have died, & they can’t keep up with road rules.
How do the authorities mitigate for this?
Pensioners can't break the rules just because they're old.
But there's a risk they are having health difficulties, or have died, & they can’t keep up with road rules.
How do the authorities mitigate for this?
You also wonder if the older generation are unfairly penalised as systems increasingly go digital.
This is an 81-year-old disabled man’s explanation for not meeting insurance requirements for his specially-adapted car.
He was convicted and given a £300 court bill.
This is an 81-year-old disabled man’s explanation for not meeting insurance requirements for his specially-adapted car.
He was convicted and given a £300 court bill.
It’s interesting the DVLA court papers don’t include the defendant’s age.
Magistrates - getting through routine cases as fast as possible - aren’t immediately given a fact which could call into question the whole case.
I’ve seen defendants prosecuted like this in their mid-90s.
Magistrates - getting through routine cases as fast as possible - aren’t immediately given a fact which could call into question the whole case.
I’ve seen defendants prosecuted like this in their mid-90s.
One more: Pensioner, 84, prosecuted for not paying £93.34 road tax
He became the registered keeper in March '23, thought it was fine sitting off road & insured it in May
He apologised for the honest mistake.
The magistrate fined him £1,876
Where on earth is the justice in that?
He became the registered keeper in March '23, thought it was fine sitting off road & insured it in May
He apologised for the honest mistake.
The magistrate fined him £1,876
Where on earth is the justice in that?
Update:
All these examples came from last week's court list. 2535 DVLA prosecutions, 477 guilty pleas.
The records show that even when a defendant pleads guilty, magistrates can - and do - impose conditional or absolute discharges, or even dismiss the case altogether.
All these examples came from last week's court list. 2535 DVLA prosecutions, 477 guilty pleas.
The records show that even when a defendant pleads guilty, magistrates can - and do - impose conditional or absolute discharges, or even dismiss the case altogether.
What's probably preferable is the DVLA pulling the plug on a prosecution before it gets to a magistrate, once particular issues are known.
That also happens
But in SJP there's no prosecutor present at the point when conviction is contemplated. That last check was removed by MPs.
That also happens
But in SJP there's no prosecutor present at the point when conviction is contemplated. That last check was removed by MPs.
It is, however, also within the powers of magistrates to refer a case out of SJP and into open court, when a prosecutor will be present and any potential problems can be tackled head-on.
That happened 23 times last week, after a guilty had been entered.
That happened 23 times last week, after a guilty had been entered.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
