Guinness
|
| posted on 21/10/09 at 07:13 AM |
|
|
Not guilty motorists to pay court costs
WTF!!
Link To PH Story
"New regulations set to come into force later this month will see motorists forced to cough up court costs - even if they're found not
guilty or acquitted of motoring offences.
The government-inspired change to the current set-up - where drivers get costs refunded if they're innocent - is being implemented to save cash,
in spite of fierce opposition from legal and motoring groups who were nominally 'consulted' before the new policy was drawn up."
No 10 Petition here:- http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/CostsRecovery/
Mike
|
|
|
|
|
MakeEverything
|
| posted on 21/10/09 at 07:19 AM |
|
|
another example of our quality justice system and the people that enforce it.
Im really starting to hate this country.
Kindest Regards,
Richard.
...You can make it foolProof, but youll never make it Idiot Proof!...
|
|
|
adithorp
|
| posted on 21/10/09 at 07:33 AM |
|
|
Already been covered here...
http://www.locostbuilders.co.uk/viewthread.php?tid=123700
My 2p's worth... Although I goes against natural justice, in reality how many people actually are going to be affected by this? Most would
represent them selves and loose.
Those that do win these cases employ expensive lawyers and although guilty as sin, of putting your's mine and everybody elses lives at risk, get
off on a technicality or flimsy excuse. Alex Fergusons "I needed a pee" comes to mind.
..and who pays for it? ...us!
adrian
ps. A bit of playing devils advocate. 
"A witty saying proves nothing" Voltaire
http://jpsc.org.uk/forum/
|
|
|
Humbug
|
| posted on 21/10/09 at 07:46 AM |
|
|
"According to the Ministry of Justice, the age old principle of 'the loser pays' has been costing the government too much
money."
So, instead of doing a better job of investigating cases to decide which ones they prosecute, just want innocent people to pay for their laziness? And
they will be able to say it works because fewer people are likely to challenge fines due to the costs involved.
Incredible!
|
|
|
tonym
|
| posted on 21/10/09 at 07:50 AM |
|
|
Probably more to do with the fact that people will pay up for fixed penalty fines as there will be no point in going to court to protest that they are
not guilty. The courts (government) will win every time.
[Edited on 21/10/09 by tonym]
|
|
|
MakeEverything
|
| posted on 21/10/09 at 08:16 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by adithorp
Already been covered here...
http://www.locostbuilders.co.uk/viewthread.php?tid=123700
My 2p's worth... Although I goes against natural justice, in reality how many people actually are going to be affected by this? Most would
represent them selves and loose.
Those that do win these cases employ expensive lawyers and although guilty as sin, of putting your's mine and everybody elses lives at risk, get
off on a technicality or flimsy excuse. Alex Fergusons "I needed a pee" comes to mind.
..and who pays for it? ...us!
adrian
ps. A bit of playing devils advocate.
I disagree.
I was summoned to court for four offences;
Fail to stop for a constable
Exceeding 30
Driving without due care
Failt to comply with a traffic signal
All of which i had a justified and valid reason, three of which as a result of the coppers actions.
Long story short, got a barrister involved, and fought it at Greenwich. Went to court twice, and the judge threw it out almost straight away.
Why should i pay costs for something i have no control over, just because a copper decides he wants to abuse his position and authority and throw his
weight around? The guy was an asshole, and even his partner refused to provide a statement to coobberate.
Anyway, rant over.
[Edited on 21/10/09 by MakeEverything]
Kindest Regards,
Richard.
...You can make it foolProof, but youll never make it Idiot Proof!...
|
|
|
scootz
|
| posted on 21/10/09 at 08:20 AM |
|
|
Just a joke... a BAD one!
|
|
|
flak monkey
|
| posted on 21/10/09 at 08:55 AM |
|
|
This is getting rediculous.
Lets hope there are lots of legal challenges against the CPS to recover costs when these rules come into force. Same way as you can recover costs if
found innocent in other areas of the law.
Its just a ploy to stop people challenging minor motoring offences.
Sera
http://www.motosera.com
|
|
|
paul the 6th
|
| posted on 21/10/09 at 11:48 AM |
|
|
so if you're seen to do something wrong but you honestly believe you didn't, then you have to go to court to prove it, then when you win
you have to pay for the act of defending yourself?
c*nts
[Edited on 21/10/09 by paul the 6th]
|
NOTE:This user is registered as a LocostBuilders trader and may offer commercial services to other users
|
Ivan
|
| posted on 21/10/09 at 02:38 PM |
|
|
I know this might not apply in UK but in SA they wouldn't get away with it because the Constitution promises equity in the law & if they
wanted to do it, it would have to apply to all court cases not just traffic.
Also, couldn't you make a civil case against the police for costs of their mistake.
|
|
|
Ninehigh
|
| posted on 21/10/09 at 08:53 PM |
|
|
Wouldn't the costs be more than the original fine? Sounds like win-win for the government... You could argue that effectively removes the right
to a fair hearing
|
|
|
alistairolsen
|
| posted on 22/10/09 at 09:26 AM |
|
|
Guilty till proven innocent, and then still guilty?
Brilliant!
That will just result in fewer people challenging our mail order fixed penalties than already do.
My Build Thread
|
|
|
