Taxi Driver Online :: View topic - 'Speeding' drivers should pay

'Speeding' drivers should pay up even if they go to court and win, say ministers

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1083763/Speeding-drivers-pay-court-win-say-ministers.html

Drivers who challenge speeding fines should be made to pay their legal bills even if they win their case, ministers said yesterday.

The proposal would see successful defendants lose their century-old right to claim back their costs.

A change in the law would affect many of the 1.7million drivers a year who take their cases to court.

Ministers are proposing that defendants lose their century-old right to claim back their legal costs
It costs around £1,500 to fight charges of speeding, illegal parking and other motoring offences.

Motoring groups and lawyers said the proposal was a breach of fundamental legal principles.

Edmund King, president of the AA, said: 'This is against the common law and against the common man. If you prove your innocence you shouldn't have to pay for it.'

Ian Kelcey, head of the Law Society's criminal law committee, called the scheme a disgrace.

He added: 'This means that an awful lot of people will not be able to get a fair trial. They will not be able to get a proper defence.'

The proposal comes in a consultation paper published by Jack Straw's Ministry of Justice. It says those before magistrates on minor charges should defend themselves.

Lord Bach, a junior minister, likened those who use lawyers in lower courts to parents who pay for private education.

He said: 'Just as an individual who chooses to put their child through private education does not reclaim this cost from the education system, nor should public funding recompense those who choose to pay privately for a lawyer when a publicly-funded alternative is available.'

The consultation paper is among a series aimed at cutting court costs and trimming the £2billion-a-year legal aid budget.

Currently a driver who wishes to challenge a minor motoring charge in a magistrates court is denied legal aid unless they are on a very modest income.
But they can hire a lawyer and claim back the cost if cleared.

Ministers want to withdraw this right, arguing that defendants do not need lawyers and can turn to court clerks for advice.

Under the proposals, Crown Court defendants will still be entitled defence lawyers on legal aid. But if they hire their own, more expensive, lawyers ministers say they should not be able to claim the full cost back if they win.

The Government is seeking to shrink the £60million Central Funds budget, which reimburses successful defendants. It is thought that ending costs payments for innocent drivers will save £5million.

The ministry's consultation paper said: 'In these straightforward cases, defence representation is not a requirement for an individual.

'Magistrates courts are traditionally set up to deal with litigants in person and have qualified legal advisers who can and do assist litigants in person.'

Mr King said the changes would not hurt the wealthy but those on middle incomes.

He added: 'You should be innocent until you are proven guilty, and if you prove your innocence you should not have to pay for it.'

Jeanette Miller, of Geoffrey Miller, a leading motoring law firm, said: 'To do away with costs in these cases appears to go against the interests of justice.

'People will not be able to afford lawyers, particularly specialist lawyers who know what they are doing. Are we going to see people denied the right to a lawyer at all in the future?'

Author:	captain cab [ Wed Nov 26, 2008 9:01 pm ]
Post subject:	'Speeding' drivers should pay
'Speeding' drivers should pay up even if they go to court and win, say ministers http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1083763/Speeding-drivers-pay-court-win-say-ministers.html Drivers who challenge speeding fines should be made to pay their legal bills even if they win their case, ministers said yesterday. The proposal would see successful defendants lose their century-old right to claim back their costs. A change in the law would affect many of the 1.7million drivers a year who take their cases to court. Ministers are proposing that defendants lose their century-old right to claim back their legal costs It costs around £1,500 to fight charges of speeding, illegal parking and other motoring offences. Motoring groups and lawyers said the proposal was a breach of fundamental legal principles. Edmund King, president of the AA, said: 'This is against the common law and against the common man. If you prove your innocence you shouldn't have to pay for it.' Ian Kelcey, head of the Law Society's criminal law committee, called the scheme a disgrace. He added: 'This means that an awful lot of people will not be able to get a fair trial. They will not be able to get a proper defence.' The proposal comes in a consultation paper published by Jack Straw's Ministry of Justice. It says those before magistrates on minor charges should defend themselves. Lord Bach, a junior minister, likened those who use lawyers in lower courts to parents who pay for private education. He said: 'Just as an individual who chooses to put their child through private education does not reclaim this cost from the education system, nor should public funding recompense those who choose to pay privately for a lawyer when a publicly-funded alternative is available.' The consultation paper is among a series aimed at cutting court costs and trimming the £2billion-a-year legal aid budget. Currently a driver who wishes to challenge a minor motoring charge in a magistrates court is denied legal aid unless they are on a very modest income. But they can hire a lawyer and claim back the cost if cleared. Ministers want to withdraw this right, arguing that defendants do not need lawyers and can turn to court clerks for advice. Under the proposals, Crown Court defendants will still be entitled defence lawyers on legal aid. But if they hire their own, more expensive, lawyers ministers say they should not be able to claim the full cost back if they win. The Government is seeking to shrink the £60million Central Funds budget, which reimburses successful defendants. It is thought that ending costs payments for innocent drivers will save £5million. The ministry's consultation paper said: 'In these straightforward cases, defence representation is not a requirement for an individual. 'Magistrates courts are traditionally set up to deal with litigants in person and have qualified legal advisers who can and do assist litigants in person.' Mr King said the changes would not hurt the wealthy but those on middle incomes. He added: 'You should be innocent until you are proven guilty, and if you prove your innocence you should not have to pay for it.' Jeanette Miller, of Geoffrey Miller, a leading motoring law firm, said: 'To do away with costs in these cases appears to go against the interests of justice. 'People will not be able to afford lawyers, particularly specialist lawyers who know what they are doing. Are we going to see people denied the right to a lawyer at all in the future?'

Author:	bloodnock [ Wed Nov 26, 2008 9:22 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: 'Speeding' drivers should pay
captain cab wrote: 'Speeding' drivers should pay up even if they go to court and win, say ministers http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1083763/Speeding-drivers-pay-court-win-say-ministers.html Drivers who challenge speeding fines should be made to pay their legal bills even if they win their case, ministers said yesterday. The proposal would see successful defendants lose their century-old right to claim back their costs. A change in the law would affect many of the 1.7million drivers a year who take their cases to court. Ministers are proposing that defendants lose their century-old right to claim back their legal costs It costs around £1,500 to fight charges of speeding, illegal parking and other motoring offences. Motoring groups and lawyers said the proposal was a breach of fundamental legal principles. Edmund King, president of the AA, said: 'This is against the common law and against the common man. If you prove your innocence you shouldn't have to pay for it.' Ian Kelcey, head of the Law Society's criminal law committee, called the scheme a disgrace. He added: 'This means that an awful lot of people will not be able to get a fair trial. They will not be able to get a proper defence.' The proposal comes in a consultation paper published by Jack Straw's Ministry of Justice. It says those before magistrates on minor charges should defend themselves. Lord Bach, a junior minister, likened those who use lawyers in lower courts to parents who pay for private education. He said: 'Just as an individual who chooses to put their child through private education does not reclaim this cost from the education system, nor should public funding recompense those who choose to pay privately for a lawyer when a publicly-funded alternative is available.' The consultation paper is among a series aimed at cutting court costs and trimming the £2billion-a-year legal aid budget. Currently a driver who wishes to challenge a minor motoring charge in a magistrates court is denied legal aid unless they are on a very modest income. But they can hire a lawyer and claim back the cost if cleared. Ministers want to withdraw this right, arguing that defendants do not need lawyers and can turn to court clerks for advice. Under the proposals, Crown Court defendants will still be entitled defence lawyers on legal aid. But if they hire their own, more expensive, lawyers ministers say they should not be able to claim the full cost back if they win. The Government is seeking to shrink the £60million Central Funds budget, which reimburses successful defendants. It is thought that ending costs payments for innocent drivers will save £5million. The ministry's consultation paper said: 'In these straightforward cases, defence representation is not a requirement for an individual. 'Magistrates courts are traditionally set up to deal with litigants in person and have qualified legal advisers who can and do assist litigants in person.' Mr King said the changes would not hurt the wealthy but those on middle incomes. He added: 'You should be innocent until you are proven guilty, and if you prove your innocence you should not have to pay for it.' Jeanette Miller, of Geoffrey Miller, a leading motoring law firm, said: 'To do away with costs in these cases appears to go against the interests of justice. 'People will not be able to afford lawyers, particularly specialist lawyers who know what they are doing. Are we going to see people denied the right to a lawyer at all in the future?' This opens the door to Bent and Disgruntled PC Plods abusing the justice system knowing that they cannot fail to lose because the public cannot afford to win. If this comes into law I personally will start the Next Peoples revolution....Me and 60 Million other Joe Brits are getting P*ssed off with the heavy handed way of this government, arent they supposed to be the Voice of the People??????

Author:	captain cab [ Wed Nov 26, 2008 9:26 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: 'Speeding' drivers should pay
Quote: Lord Bach, a junior minister, likened those who use lawyers in lower courts to parents who pay for private education. He said: 'Just as an individual who chooses to put their child through private education does not reclaim this cost from the education system, nor should public funding recompense those who choose to pay privately for a lawyer when a publicly-funded alternative is available.' They work for you dot com should describe this guy as a complete tw*t; How Lord Bach voted on key issues since 2001: Voted very strongly for introducing ID cards. Voted strongly for the hunting ban. Voted very strongly for equal gay rights. Voted very strongly against laws to stop climate change. http://www.theyworkforyou.com/peer/lord_bach CC

Author:	gusmac [ Wed Nov 26, 2008 11:14 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: 'Speeding' drivers should pay
captain cab wrote: Jeanette Miller, of Geoffrey Miller, a leading motoring law firm, said: 'To do away with costs in these cases appears to go against the interests of justice. What has justice got to do with it?

Author:	skippy41 [ Wed Nov 26, 2008 11:40 pm ]
Post subject:
If they want to cut costs dont bring the minor cases in the first place, FFS I think most minor speeding tickets are £60 now plus points but if a person challenges it and it goes to court the fine goes up to about £100 plus points. Is there a site where there is a break down of where most tickets are issued I think most will come from cameras and most will be for 2 or 3 miles over that speed limit and I would say more than 50% of those caught will have been in rural areas where the most likely thing your going to hit is an animal Cameras dont give the road or weather conditions on the day, where a plod would give the benefit of doubt and possibly a warning

Taxi Driver Online http://www.taxi-driver.co.uk/phpBB2/

'Speeding' drivers should pay http://www.taxi-driver.co.uk/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=10079	Page 1 of 1

Author:	Sussex [ Thu Nov 27, 2008 7:54 am ]
Post subject:
I think the point is that if they are innocent of the charge then they should get their reasonable costs back. Of course a court can, at present, decide to not issue costs if a defendant is found not guilty. Be amazed if that changes.

Author:	cabby john [ Thu Nov 27, 2008 12:55 pm ]
Post subject:
Well if you do not need a Lawyer to defend yourself, then I do not see that they need one to prosecute you - I mean to say a court room is a fair and just place! is it not?

Author:	captain cab [ Thu Nov 27, 2008 1:12 pm ]
Post subject:
cabby john wrote: Well if you do not need a Lawyer to defend yourself, then I do not see that they need one to prosecute you - I mean to say a court room is a fair and just place! is it not? Yes you can....but to the majority of innocent folks they are intimidating places. CC

Author:	bloodnock [ Thu Nov 27, 2008 2:18 pm ]
Post subject:
cabby john wrote: Well if you do not need a Lawyer to defend yourself, then I do not see that they need one to prosecute you - I mean to say a court room is a fair and just place! is it not? Aye...the systems so fair that if you dare have the audacity to question the Fixed penalty in the NIP they threaten that if it goes to court the Fine will be doubled and the Points issued Increased also...that is the British Justice system at its proud , brave best....It reeks of injustice from top to bottom.

Page 1 of 1	All times are UTC [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/