court

right.

I'm in court next Monday, and I still haven't sorted out a brief.

But, do I really need one? I'm fairly unlikely to be looking at a ban,
and the number of points handed out doesn't seem to affect my
insurance (I mean, as in 3-9 points = the same ~30% loading on my
insurance).

So is it worth it? As in, is the cost of a brief (2-300 quid) worth
it? I.e. would having one result in a 2-300 quid less of a fine?

 

As it's up north they may make life more difficult because you sound
like a foreigner.

Get someone who can talk northern.

 

How many points on your licence ATM?

 

*waves*

dont forget I'm there too.

--
Adie - capable of leading darsy astray.
(replace spam with nickname to reply)

Triumph T595 (For Sale) / GSF600 bandit
MRO#11 BOTAFOF#7 BOTAFOT#130 DIAABTCOD#17 MIB#24 YTC#16 BOB#15 ex-UKRMMA#22

 

and have you decided what to do yet?

Nothing like leaving things to the last minute.

 

none. Never had any.

In fact, I've never even had a fixed-penalty speeding fine on the
bike; had one about 10 years ago in the car, but that was in NI,
before they introduced points there.

 

Won't both cases be seen seperately?

 

not sure - all the paperwork has been done together.

Which is a bastard, as clearly it was Adie who was riding like the
****, and I was just meekly following...

 

I imagine you might struggle to get one for next Monday anyway. And,
as you say, if you don't think you're going to get a ban, then it's
prolly not worth it.

 

that's what I'm thinking.

I spoke to the nearest thing we have to a lawyer on here (Kiran) and
he reckoned that apart from the maybe getting you a lighter sentence,
it's better to have someone used to being cross-examined etc. However,
I really don't expect to "go to pieces" under questioning...

Does anyone know an official website where it lists the maximum
penalties for various traffic offences?

 

This has been done before you know.
A bad tempered Magistrate on an off day could quite easily ban you for Due
Care? and Plod on the day could take it into his head to blacken you like
Cajun Chicken.

Having a solicitor represent you is a mixed bag, half of them are useless in
court and these cases often get handed to juniors anyway. Needs to be
someone with references IYSWIM.
OTOH having a Barrister/QC represent you is highly regarded by the Beaks. It
is a sign that you take the offence seriously and have a modicum of respect
for the court and the judicial system in general. Beaks are generally
respectful and careful in turn with Barristers (professional etiquette),
particularly in the Provinces.
This seems a bit late to be finding expert representation though.

In these matters I could be classed experienced<>expert

 

Ah, the old "I was trying to catch up with her to tell her to slow
down." defence.

 

a what?

well, that's a Simpsons thing, but I don't get the reference.

 

heh.

 

yeah, I know, but not quite in the same situation.

They can't ban me for just the Due Care, as I've found that attracts a
maximum of 9 points. However, they /could/ give me 3-6 for speeding
and then obviously 6-9 for the Due Care would land me a ban. It'd be
pretty harsh though, given there was no RTA involved. And I'll be
"really sorry".

I don't think the Plod are going to turn up, unless I object to their
written statements being used. Well, that's what some of the
documentation implies unless I've read it wrongly.

Yes, but this is in fucking Macclesfield - I've no idea of how to find
out if anyone's useless or not.

I understand all that. But I'm not sure in this case if they'd be
worth the money.

 

Witness Protection Program.

It's a Simpsons' thing.

 

Er well, perhaps Scotland and England are different or there has been a
change. I've had a JP try to ban me for 45 in a 30 on a clean licence
because Plod said it was an accident blackspot and I was an anti social
motorcyclist type who might try to reap his young Grandson. It had to go to
Appeal.
The situation there was the points were pretty much mandated but the Beak
could have your licence anytime he decided it was appropriate.

I presume from that you have entered guilty pleas on all charges? might
change the terrain somewhat. I've never tried that!

 

"A man who represents himself in court has a fool for a client"

 

no, I've pled guilty to the speeding[1], but not to the Due Care.

[1] there's not much point in pleading not guilty when they've got me
on video averaging 86mph[2] on the motorway.
[2] tut tut!

 

well, of course.