Garda fixed penalty notice

jarvis

Not sure if it's the right forum but I made a good stab at getting the right forum.

I received a speeding fine in the post on friday 22nd Feb for €80. the letter said I must pay within 28 days of the date on this notice or the fine moves to €120.
well today I went to the post office and they charged me €120 saying that it's late. I didn't argue with the clerk as it's nothing to do with them so I paid the €120 and then I called the Garda fixed penalty office. The lady said the
28th day was yesterday as the 22nd of Feb was counted as day one!!!

I tried to argue that the notice was dated a Friday and I paid exacty 4 weeks later also on a Friday and that constitutes 28 days.

I got nowhere with her but I am just looking for other opinions on it. The extra €40 doesn't really bother me but the mathematics and principle is really annoying me. Is there any point in me appealing it and how would I do that?


I'm not really looking for opinions realting to me not speeding in the first place as I know that I was in the wrong and I'm not looking for opinions on wether or not leaving it to the last minute was wise etc.

Thanks

Paulw

Aside from the fact that you left it until the very final day ..... well, you said you received the notice on the 22nd. So, I'm assuming it was actually issued on the 21st or before? Which would definitely make the cutoff date yesterday.

Your only grounds for appeal, to my knowledge, would have been not to pay the fixed penalty notice and argue your case in court.

seamus

If that's the rule, then that's the rule.

Presumably the clock starts ticking from on the date the fine is issued, so your 28 days expired at 23:59 on 21st March. That is, 22nd Feb was day 1, so 21st March was day 28.

I don't think it would be worth appealing for the sake of €40. I'm sure this arises quite a bit so the 28 days is established practice.

jarvis

It was 28 days from the date on this notice. = 22nd

Nody

Sorry but I agree with them; the day something is issued would be day 1 of the period. Same way if I bought something in a store with 14 days no quibble guarantee on return I'd not expect to be able to say "Well the day I bought it don't count as it should only count from the next day" on the 15th day or in your case on the 29th day.

Week 1: Feb 22nd (Friday) to Feb 28th (Thursday) - 7 days
Week 2: March 1st (Friday) to March 7th (Thursday) - 7 days
Week 3: March 8th (Friday) to March 14th (Thursday) - 7 days
Week 4: March 15th (Friday) to March 21st (Thursday) - 7 days

Paying on 22nd puts you at the start of week 5.

PurplePrincess

Appealing is a waste of time, they'll just send you a standard reply stating the conditions as they appeared on the fixed penalty notice.

galwayjohn89

Surely they should have it on the letter that if you pay by end of 22nd March it be 80 or else it be 120 just to make it easier for everyone

GerardKeating

jarvis wrote: »

Not sure if it's the right forum but I made a good stab at getting the right forum.

I received a speeding fine in the puost on friday 22nd Feb for €80. the letter said I must pay within 28 days of the date on this notice or the fine moves to €120.
well today I went to the post office and they charged me €120 saying that it's late. I didn't argue with the clerk as it's nothing to do with them so I paid the €120 and then I called the Garda fixed penalty office. The lady said the
28th day was yesterday as the 22nd of Feb was counted as day one!!!

I tried to argue that the notice was dated a Friday and I paid exacty 4 weeks later also on a Friday and that constitutes 28 days.

I got nowhere with her but I am just looking for other opinions on it. The extra €40 doesn't really bother me but the mathematics and principle is really annoying me. Is there any point in me appealing it and how would I do that?


I'm not really looking for opinions realting to me not speeding in the first place as I know that I was in the wrong and I'm not looking for opinions on wether or not leaving it to the last minute was wise etc.

Thanks

But today would be the start of the fifth week. Each of your four weeks were seven days long, running from friday to the thursday.

A week that goes from friday to friday would be Eight Days.

jarvis

Thanks for the opinions guys and I know I won't get anywhere with it but I would have though if I got a letter saying I must pay within one day if the date in the letter then I would have until the next day. Using that same thought then the Saturday would be day one.
The letter was issued in a Friday and I paid exactly 4 Fridays later = 4 weeks = 28 days.

If I tile somebody I was going on holiday four weeks from today then I would be going on a Friday!!! Not a Thursday.

dudara

It's pretty much standard that the clock starts counting at the date of issue. So let's say an invoice is issued Friday 1st with terms of 28 days. The clock would stop running on Thursday 28th, with the payment due on Friday 29th.

There is a subtle difference between how business days/terms work and what we think in conventional terms (i.e. your holiday example above).

thesimpsons

I would have thought that if notice was issued at say noon on Friday then noon on Saturday would be 1 day, therefore at 11.59 on the friday 1st March would be 7 days. I'd never have thought that the day of issue was day 1. if would be far better though if the penalty notice stated pay by xx date - absolutely no confusing that way.

sandin

Tell your employer that from tomorrow you will commence work at 9am minday and will continue to work til 5pm the following Monday and they only need to pay you for s standard week.

wilson10

I received a notice dated 1st March, put it on the long finger, was very busy last week, end of month rush to get the work invoiced out and thought of it during the week but put it off till Friday.

I went to the Post Office on Friday 29th which I would see as 28 days from the date of the notice, which is exactly what they specify.

Good Friday, the f***ing Post Office closed, as I discovered was every other Post Office, so I never got to have the argument over what constituted 28 days from the date of the notice but I would argue strongly that the 29th is 28 days and not 29 days from the 1st.

But of course I know I'd be wasting my time because logic doesn't come into it.

Cabaal

wilson10 wrote: »

I received a notice dated 1st March, put it on the long finger, was very busy last week, end of month rush to get the work invoiced out and thought of it during the week but put it off till Friday.

I went to the Post Office on Friday 29th which I would see as 28 days from the date of the notice, which is exactly what they specify.

Good Friday, the f***ing Post Office closed, as I discovered was every other Post Office, so I never got to have the argument over what constituted 28 days from the date of the notice but I would argue strongly that the 29th is 28 days and not 29 days from the 1st.

But of course I know I'd be wasting my time because logic doesn't come into it.

But 29th would be 29 days,
The 1st counts as day one, it was your decision not to take into account Post Offices being closed on the 28th.

If the 28th was a Sunday it would still be your fault.

wilson10

Cabaal wrote: »

But 29th would be 29 days,
The 1st counts as day one, it was your decision not to take into account Post Offices being closed on the 28th.

If the 28th was a Sunday it would still be your fault.

Oh I take full responsibility for leaving it to the last minute and not knowing that the Post Office would be closed on Good Friday in holy Catholic Ireland even though it's not a bank holiday (I had to work), but I still take issue with the 28 days.

It states 28 days from the date of this notice, now 1+28 was 29 when I was at school.

dudara

The invoice takes effect from the day it is issued. Hence, using your example, the 1st would be Day 1, making the 28th Day 28.

It BeeMee

jarvis wrote: »

I received a speeding fine in the post on friday 22nd Feb for €80. the letter said I must pay within 28 days of the date on this notice or the fine moves to €120.
well today I went to the post office and they charged me €120 saying that it's late. I didn't argue with the clerk as it's nothing to do with them so I paid the €120 and then I called the Garda fixed penalty office. The lady said the
28th day was yesterday as the 22nd of Feb was counted as day one!!!

wilson10 wrote: »

It states 28 days from the date of this notice, now 1+28 was 29 when I was at school.

Unfortunately I happen to have one of these to hand . The exact wording is:

In respect of the offence alleged in this notice -
(a) you may, during the period of 28 days, beginning on the date of this notice, pay a fixed charge of €80


Pretty clear cut tbh

wilson10

dudara wrote: »

The invoice takes effect from the day it is issued. Hence, using your example, the 1st would be Day 1, making the 28th Day 28.

Using my example the first day would be when 1 day has expired.

If someone said to me I'll talk to you in a day I would expect to hear from them tomorrow not in 5 minutes.

I think we'll agree to disagree, the powers that be aren't going to change their interpretation anyway, that's for sure.

I'm happy in the knowledge that I have logic on my side.

wilson10

It BeeMee wrote: »

Unfortunately I happen to have one of these to hand . The exact wording is:

In respect of the offence alleged in this notice -
(a) you may, during the period of 28 days, beginning on the date of this notice, pay a fixed charge of €80


Pretty clear cut tbh

Beginning on the date of this notice, hence tomorrow would constitute the passage of 1 day

I rest my case

Nody

wilson10 wrote: »

Beginning on the date of this notice, hence tomorrow would constitute the passage of 1 day

I rest my case

Actually you just got proven wrong; the wording clearly states that the date of notification is day 1 as that is the beginning of the notice and that's also something the Garda agrees with.

Joe Hart

Follow this template to draft a reply. You have to consent to this fine.

http://freemanireland.ning.com/forum/topics/received-a-summons-today?commentId=3214356%3AComment%3A44742

Pablo Sanchez

Joe Hart wrote: »

Follow this template to draft a reply. You have to consent to this fine.

http://freemanireland.ning.com/forum/topics/received-a-summons-today?commentId=3214356%3AComment%3A44742

Has that ever worked for anyone?

the groutch

not even going to bother clicking that link because I know it's all that "Freeman" BS again.

Cabaal

Joe Hart wrote: »

Follow this template to draft a reply. You have to consent to this fine.

http://freemanireland.ning.com/forum/topics/received-a-summons-today?commentId=3214356%3AComment%3A44742

Did you even bother to read the rest of whats on that page?

The idiot was jailed for trying to get out of it. http://freemanireland.ning.com/forum/topics/billy-b-locked-up-for-1

The judge also told him he was crazy
http://www.leinsterleader.ie/news/local/man-questions-district-court-but-is-jailed-1-1940175

He had no insurance, no license and was speeding as such he was a risk to everyone else on the road. I for one am glad he was treated the way he was..he deserved it!

It BeeMee

wilson10 wrote: »

Beginning on the date of this notice, hence tomorrow would constitute the passage of 1 day

I rest my case

No. Effectively the clock started ticking at 00:00.01 last night/this morning; day 1 ends at midnight tonight.

wilson10 wrote: »

Using my example the first day would be when 1 day has expired.

If someone said to me I'll talk to you in a day I would expect to hear from them tomorrow not in 5 minutes.

If you were talking to someone just after midnight and they say "I'll talk to you tomorrow", when will you expect to hear from them?

wilson10

I'm not playin with yous any more.

Skid X

wilson10 wrote: »

I'm not playin with yous any more.

Did you enjoy Liveline?

http://www.rte.ie/radio/utils/radioplayer/rteradioweb.html#!detail=&rii=0%3A20182907%3A0%3A%3A&type=doPlayThis

Joe Hart

Cabaal wrote: »

Did you even bother to read the rest of whats on that page?

The idiot was jailed for trying to get out of it. http://freemanireland.ning.com/forum/topics/billy-b-locked-up-for-1

The judge also told him he was crazy
http://www.leinsterleader.ie/news/local/man-questions-district-court-but-is-jailed-1-1940175

He had no insurance, no license and was speeding as such he was a risk to everyone else on the road. I for one am glad he was treated the way he was..he deserved it!

He made a few basic mistakes by consenting to the judges authority by answering him. He had the judge on the rack for a good while.

keithclancy

Joe Hart wrote: »

He made a few basic mistakes by consenting to the judges authority by answering him. He had the judge on the rack for a good while.

Sounds like having a fight with Bruce Lee and giving him a good talking to while he's kicking you around the place.

Cabaal

Joe Hart wrote: »

He made a few basic mistakes by consenting to the judges authority by answering him. He had the judge on the rack for a good while.

Yeah, because ignoring the judge completely would have meant he would have avoided jail, ban and fines
:rolleyes:

whippet

Joe Hart wrote: »

He made a few basic mistakes by consenting to the judges authority by answering him. He had the judge on the rack for a good while.

this freeman nonsense is exactly that. The concept of having to consent to fine is utter stupidity. I also hear they say that the 'travel' as oppose to drive in their own belief that they can't be subjected to Road Traffic Acts ..... so by their interpretation they could be driving their car along the footpath over children but can't be held to account as they were 'travelling' and not driving.

Plain and simple it is rubbish, can you point to a single example of where a court has accepted their idiotic beliefs?

Also, I have seen these lads boasting that their 'Freeman Laws' have stopped evictions; again rubbish; the sheriff walked aways due to the gangs. A sheriff has a home to go to at the end of the day and isn't too interested in getting in a physical altercation with the type of people who use intimidation to circumvent the law.

runawaybishop

Pablo Sanchez wrote: »

Has that ever worked for anyone?

No, there is not a single case of any freeman argument standing up in court afaik.