Speeding fine for car that is not drivable!

screamer

Recently a family member received a speeding fine for a car that is and has not been driveable for the past 6 months, which is sitting in the local mechanics yard, waiting to be fixed. The car cannot even be started, yet, last week, a speeding fine was received for this car's registration in a location 100 miles from where it is parked up! Rang local gardai and was told it would be extremely difficult to get out of this fine, worst of all is that only the car reg is on the notice, no picture of the car itself..... so what can be done about it?

Ken.

I would go immediately to the yard and make sure both plates are still on the car.

vicwatson

Fight it in court, get an affidavit from the garage owner to state it was in the garage for the last 6 months and couldn't possibly have been on the road.

Any of the garage lads taking the plates for a jaunt!?:rolleyes:

godtabh

Can't you request a picture of the car?

MagicSean

vicwatson wrote: »

Fight it in court, get an affidavit from the garage owner to state it was in the garage for the last 6 months and couldn't possibly have been on the road.

Any of the garage lads taking the plates for a jaunt!?:rolleyes:

This would be my thinking.

Our man in Havana

godtabh wrote: »

Can't you request a picture of the car?

That would be the smart thing to do. They will have a much bigger and better picture. That should clear up the situation.

screamer

Thanks all, plates and car still in garage, the owner is writing a letter to state it's there and has been there all the time. Will tell them to request the picture of the car, and not just the plates. TBH, people often get toll fee notices that are incorrect, so relying on camera evidence is flawed at best, and thinking a bit further ahead, if this really is an error (which we have every reason to believe it is), then surely, it cannot be safe to be sending these fines based on camera only evidence.........

Zambia

The car may be garaged but the plates could have been 'borrowed'.

TGi666

once the garage admits having the car should it not become there problem to prove the car wasnt taken for a 'test drive'?

Our man in Havana

Maybe someone has had a set of plates made with that number on it?

screamer

Well, just to update you all on this, they can't and don't provide pictures of the vehicles, and my friend has to go to court to fight this, so, it seems, if someone decides to stick some fake plates on a car and drive like a lunatic, the registered owner of the car gets done.........

Our man in Havana

What a load of bollocks.

godtabh

screamer wrote: »

Well, just to update you all on this, they can't and don't provide pictures of the vehicles, and my friend has to go to court to fight this, so, it seems, if someone decides to stick some fake plates on a car and drive like a lunatic, the registered owner of the car gets done.........

Are you sure? I thought you had the right to request the complete picture?

Our man in Havana

Go Safe must be doing this themselves. The Gardaí would always supply the full image on request.

screamer

Yep, it is the speed vans, and when the owner went into the garda station about it, the first thing to gard said was that it'd be hard to fight it!
anyways, will let ye know how it goes.

Iwannahurl

screamer wrote: »

Recently a family member received a speeding fine for a car that is and has not been driveable for the past 6 months, which is sitting in the local mechanics yard, waiting to be fixed. The car cannot even be started, yet, last week, a speeding fine was received for this car's registration in a location 100 miles from where it is parked up! Rang local gardai and was told it would be extremely difficult to get out of this fine, worst of all is that only the car reg is on the notice, no picture of the car itself..... so what can be done about it?

I would take that kind of info with a grain of salt.

Our man in Havana

The judge will probably tear them a new arsehole when he finds out that Go safe would not supply evidence of the alleged offence.

Bosco boy

Our man in Havana wrote: »

The judge will probably tear them a new arsehole when he finds out that Go safe would not supply evidence of the alleged offence.

Or one in the op's friend for wasting court time if that's how they see it!

slimjimmc

Bosco boy wrote: »

Or one in the op's friend for wasting court time if that's how they see it!

Not a hope of that.
All the defendant needs is the garage to give sworn testimony that the car was in their care all along and couldn't possibly be anywhere near the scene of the alleged offence. It's then up to the State to prove otherwise.

Bosco boy

slimjimmc wrote: »

Not a hope of that.
All the defendant needs is the garage to give sworn testimony that the car was in their care all along and couldn't possibly be anywhere near the scene of the alleged offence. It's then up to the State to prove otherwise.

Que the photo!

Roman Emperor

screamer wrote: »

Yep, it is the speed vans, and when the owner went into the garda station about it, the first thing to gard said was that it'd be hard to fight it!
anyways, will let ye know how it goes.

I could be wrong but I think they must provide a picture if you request it. Also,I think if the photo is blurred or if there is more than one vehicle in it then it cannot be used as evidence . Anyway how can they say what the reg. number is if they dont have a photo of it ?

BrianD

In fairness, the camera will take a picture of the car and not just the number plate. Otherwise they would never be able to get a conviction - they need to be able to show the car bearing the registration plate at the location.

The garage owner would want to be sure that none of us staff took the vehicle for a spin!

bath handle

slimjimmc wrote: »

Not a hope of that.
All the defendant needs is the garage to give sworn testimony that the car was in their care all along and couldn't possibly be anywhere near the scene of the alleged offence. It's then up to the State to prove otherwise.

How much is going to be paid in witness expenses for the owner or manager to turn up in court to give evidence?

slimjimmc

bath handle wrote: »

How much is going to be paid in witness expenses for the owner or manager to turn up in court to give evidence?

The price of a bit of lunch and a pint? Who knows, that's between the parties involved.
It could be a lot cheaper than a fine and 4 penalty points, what effect would that have on your insurance cost and your licence.

Wasn't it already said he's giving a written statement so an appearance may not be necessary.

bath handle

A written statement will only be accepted if th e prosecution agree. That is most unlikely. I have seen doctors cert being refused.

jaybeeveedub

there's an interesting one....

who prosecutes on behalf of the private companies...??

will GoSafe act as common informer?

Our man in Havana

There is a nominated Garda (super) that prosecutes on their behalf.

jaybeeveedub

I see....

Isn't it then up to the DC Judge as to whether affadavit evidence is admissible in a summary hearing... Given the flexibility in the DC (family member being allowed appear on behalf etc) I would have thought they'd be happy enough with that....

flutered

screamer wrote: »

Yep, it is the speed vans, and when the owner went into the garda station about it, the first thing to gard said was that it'd be hard to fight it!
anyways, will let ye know how it goes.

it is no wonder some people call them mules and keystones.

bath handle

jaybeeveedub wrote: »

I see....

Isn't it then up to the DC Judge as to whether affadavit evidence is admissible in a summary hearing... Given the flexibility in the DC (family member being allowed appear on behalf etc) I would have thought they'd be happy enough with that....

The District Court rules specify that evidence is to be given orally. The other side can demand that the deponent of an affidavit can be cross examined. On a matter like that there is very little chance of a DJ accepting hearsay.

Kosseegan

"ROAD TRAFFIC ACT, 2002
21.—(1) The onus of establishing prima facie proof of a constituent of an offence committed after the commencement of this section (including the speed at which a person, whether the accused or another person, was driving) under section 47, 52, 53, 55, 91, 92, 93 or 94 of the Principal Act or section 35 of the Act of 1994 may be discharged by tendering evidence from which that constituent can be inferred of measurements or other indications which were given by electronic or other apparatus (including a camera) and are contained in a record produced by that apparatus, and it shall not be necessary to prove that the electronic or other apparatus was accurate or in good working order.
(2) In proceedings for an offence referred to in subsection (1)—
(a) a document—
(i) purporting to be, or to be a copy of, a record referred in that subsection and to be signed by a member of the Garda Síochána, and
(ii) on which is endorsed a statement to the effect that it is, or is a copy of, the record aforesaid,
shall be prima facie evidence in those proceedings of the indications or measurements contained in the record, and it shall not be necessary to prove the signature on the document or that the signatory was a member of the Garda Síochána, and
(b) a copy of the document aforesaid shall be furnished to the accused person before the commencement of the trial of the offence.
(3) The electronic or other apparatus referred to in subsection (1) shall—
(a) be capable of producing a photograph or other record of the measurements or other indications referred to in that subsection, and
(b) be of a type that has been approved by—
(i) the Commissioner or another member of the Garda Síochána not below the rank of Chief Superintendent authorised in that behalf by the Commissioner, or
(ii) the chief executive officer of the National Roads Authority or another officer of that Authority duly authorised in that behalf by the first-mentioned officer,
and it shall not be necessary to prove that the apparatus is of a type so approved.
(4) In proceedings for an offence referred to in subsection (1), if proof of the offence involves proof of the speed at which a person (whether the accused or another person) was driving, the uncorroborated evidence of one witness stating his opinion as to that speed shall not be accepted as proof of that speed"

The machine must produce a photograph, according to this section and it must be offered to the Defendant before trial.

jaybeeveedub

The District Court rules specify that evidence is to be given orally. The other side can demand that the deponent of an affidavit can be cross examined. On a matter like that there is very little chance of a DJ accepting hearsay.


But you can tender documentary evidence to support your oral testimony....

at least I have, whether that was out of the ordinary I don't know.....

jaybeeveedub

Kosseegan wrote: »

"ROAD TRAFFIC ACT, 2002
21.—(1)

.

doesn't seem to specify of what the photo needs to be to qualify.....

can't see anything within the act either....

PCPhoto

If you are in Dublin I might be able to arrange publicity when you goto court so others can be aware the system is flawed .

BrianD

It is foolish to go down the publicity route if you are not going to offer a defence. Civil servants no longer care about adverse publicity, they're almost immune to it.

You still have to be proven guilty and I don't think that any judge will accept a close up of a number plate as evidence of guilt.

If you have affidavits and evidence to the contrary then GoSafe will have to produce the complete image of your car.

You had better make damn sure that no member of the garage staff or an associate of his took your car for a spin otherwise you'll face the wrath of the court.