Defending Yourself Against a Speeding Offence in the UK Magistrates Courts

If you have been given a fixed penalty notice for a speeding offence in the UK you have the option to pay the £60 fine and accept three penalty points on your driving licence or challenge the prosecution to prove their case in the Magistrates Court.

By opting to go to court you may risk additional points and court costs but you also may be acquitted in which case you can recover any defence costs you have incurred. You will also save yourself a considerable amount of money in lower insurance premiums (for five years) if you avoid penalty points.

The following article explains some of the defences available to you and is written by a specialist UK road traffic offence lawyer.

The offence of speeding in the UK is outlined in Section 89 Road Traffic Regulations Act 1984.

In essence, the prosecution have to prove that a person drove a motor vehicle on a road at a speed exceeding the speed limit prevailing on that particular stretch of road.

In most cases a speeding offence is dealt with by a fixed penalty notice which brings 3 penalty points on a driving licence and a £60 fine.

Most speeding offences are caught on camera or by some mechanical device. You cannot be convicted on the uncorroborated word of a police officer — there has to be some form of additional evidence — but such is the proliferation of fixed and mobile speed cameras in the UK that more than half UK drivers have penalty points on their licence and more than a million drivers are at risk of a ban if they are given any more points.

The penalty system in the UK works on the totting-up of points. Reach 12 penalty points as an experienced driver and you are at grave risk of receiving a driving ban of six months. Reach six points as a “New Driver” — which the law defines as within two years of passing your first passing your driving test — and your licence will be revoked, meaning you have to reapply for it and resit your test. In the latter case there is no right of appeal – all you can do is challenge the points in the magistrates court and either persuade the court to find you not guilty or that there were good and pressing reasons of mitigation which necessitated — or provided you with an excuse for — breaking the law.

You will be liable for prosecution if your speed is 10%+3mph more than the speed limit. So if the speed limit is 30mph you can be prosecuted for a speed of 36mph or more. In some cases however the police may offer an alternative in the form of a speed awareness course if your speed is less than 10% +6mph over the limit. However this depends if the police offer such a course in the area you were caught. Many police authorities do not.

In some circumstances when the speed is excessive (as a rule of thumb when the speed is 26mph or more greater than the speed limit) the case will be dealt with by a summons to court. This is because of the danger element and the court will want to consider an immediate ban. In such circumstances the court can ban you immediately for a period of up to 56 days.

If you are to keep your licence in such circumstances or you are at risk of reaching 12 penalty point under the “totting up” system then providing the speed is proved you will need to use “exceptional hardship” arguments to persuade the court to allow you to continue to drive.

An exceptional hardship argument is not easy to make. The “hardship” cannot be yours. The court will want to know how banning you might affect the welfare of others — such as family members, your employer or co-workers — however this can include economic hardships inflicted on others, such as the effect on your family (not you) were you to lose your job.

In general the reason why only around 25% of exceptional hardship arguments succeed when made by the defendant is because they make their arguments based on their own hardship, to which the court’s reaction is almost invariably “tough”. A good advocate should succeed in around 80% of exceptional hardship cases. In the case of my own practice, AutoMate from Quality Answers, we currently succeed in preventing 94% of at-risk motorists from receiving a ban.

It is not always necessary to use exceptional hardship arguments and of course you are better defending the original speeding offence if possible. But it is not always quite as easy as it first seems. The police will have a great deal of evidence and while it is necessary for them to prove their case “beyond reasonable doubt” magistrates are increasingly trustful of speed detection equipment.

Quite often defendants in speeding cases will raise the issue that there were no signs on the road indicating a restricted speed limit and intend to use this as a defence.

Unfortunately there is no requirement for signage to mark a 30mph limit in the UK.

Section 81 of the Road Traffic Regulations Act 1984.indicates that a road is limited to 30 mph limit (even when there are not signs in place) when there is in place a system of street lighting furnished by means of lamps placed not more that 200 yards apart. This means that if you are driving on a road where there are no specific speed limit signs and there is a system of street lighting in place and street lamps are no more than 200 yards apart, the road is automatically restricted and the speed limit is 30 mph. Therefore, if you get a Notice of Intended Prosecution warning you that you are going to be prosecuted for exceeding the speed limit and you believe there were no specific signs in place then you need to check whether or not there was a system of street lighting in place. If so, the limit is lawful.

If there is no system of street lighting in place then the road can only be restricted to a particular limit by specific signs. The requirements for speed restriction signs are set out in the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2002.

The traffic signs must comply with those directions in terms of the visibility, size, shape and colour. They must also be positioned at regular intervals throughout the speed limit and within set distances of junctions.

If the signs do not comply with these directions then the speed limit is not lawful and cannot be enforced.

The regulations are relatively complex but a good motor lawyer will be able to check the signage is fully compliant. In one case a number of tickets had been issued for a Hampshire road which was not compliant. All had to be withdrawn so it is well worth conducting a detailed check.

Speeding carries 3 to 6 penalty points and if it is a particularly high speed then the Court can consider imposing a discretionary ban under Section 34 of the Road Traffic Offenders Act.

Normally any discretionary ban imposed by the Magistrates will be up to a maximum of 56 days but Section 34, Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988 states the period of any discretionary disqualification can be for whatever period the Magistrates feel is appropriate.

Discretionary disqualifications are normally used as a short sharp shock.

Defending Your Case

Speeding allegations can be defended on the basis that it was not you driving at the time of the alleged offence or on the basis that the evidence put forward by the Prosecution is unreliable. In theory, a speeding offence could also be defended on the basis that you were not driving on a public road at the time of the alleged offence or that you were not driving a motor vehicle.

These are all technical defences and if you have any questions in relation to the way in which these defences can be raised then you will need detailed and expert advice from specialist motoring lawyers.

The Prosecution have to prove the allegation against you beyond reasonable doubt. In order to defend this allegation you have to cast a doubt.

One of the most common ways of defending speeding allegations is by showing that the speed detection device has not been used in accordance with the ACPO (Association of Chief Police Officers) codes of practice.

In order for the Prosecution to rely on the evidence from a speed detection device, they have to show that the device was being used in accordance with Home Office Approval. The Home Office Approval involves the device being tested by ACPO TET.

ACPO TET then set down the criteria for use. If the device is not used in accordance with that criteria then it is not being used in accordance with the Home Office Approval and the evidence must be treated as unreliable.

Uncorroborated evidence of a police officer

It is important to note that a person cannot be convicted of a speeding offence on the uncorroborated opinion evidence of a Police Officer. The procedure required is that a Police Officer forms the opinion that a vehicle is speeding and then uses a device to corroborate his opinion. The devices commonly used include hand held laser guns, VASCAR device (which measures distance and time) located in a Police vehicle that effectively conducts a follow check. A calibrated speedometer can be used again by means of using a follow check. A further method of detecting speed can be the GATSO camera, which is a static box camera, located at the side of the road, which operates on the basis of a radar that measures distance and time.

All these devices are subject to stringent calibration requirements and have to be used in accordance with Home Office approval for the evidence obtained from them to be treated as reliable.

Successfully defending your case

Lets get this straight from the start – you cannot make up a defence – you either have one or you do not!

If you mislead the police – for example by saying that you were not the driver when in fact you were – then you can be charged with perverting the course of justice. You would have effectively talked up the offence from a minor road traffic matter into an offence which is going to get you a prison sentence. Do not do it under any circumstances.

If you mislead the court when giving evidence on oath you are committing perjury. If you get found out you may go to prison.

The best way to deal with any offence is to seek free motor legal advice from a specialist motor offence solicitors such as mine so you are well prepared and properly advised.

There are lots of dodgy sites on the internet that promise the earth in relation to defending allegations of speeding: “Pay us money and we guarantee that we can get you off!” or “Use these letters when you get the NIP and the police won’t issue a summons”… and so on.

Unfortunately we see cases everyday where people have tried to beat the police by saying things like “It was my friend from Africa driving and he’s gone back now and I have lost his address…”

The police hear it all the time. They don’t believe you and they will investigate further or prosecute you for failing to give the driver identity (6 points). They will probably ask you to prove that he was insured and if you can’t they will threaten you with permitting him to drive without insurance (6-8 points) if you can’t prove he was covered. If they really don’t believe you they will start asking questions of those around you to see if they can prove you are attempting to pervert the course of justice. They will try and tie you up in knots. They deal with these issues day in day out and no matter what you think you know from your research on ropey internet sites they will outwit you 9 times out of 10.

To build a case you need to assemble your arguments and be prepared to present your case to the court – or have a professional motor lawyer present them on your behalf.

Components of a successful speeding offence defence

So what are the defences and do I have one?

The prosecution have to prove beyond reasonable doubt each of the following elements;

• The identity of the driver
• That they were driving a motor vehicle
• That they were driving on a public road or in a public place
• That they were exceeding the speed limit at the time

They have to prove each and every one of those elements of the offence and if they can’t prove one of them then the whole prosecution case fails.

So if you can cast doubt on any or all of the following;

• The suggestion that you were driving
• The suggestion that you were in a motor vehicle
• The suggestion that you were on a public road or in a public place
• The suggestion that you were exceeding the speed limit

you must be found not guilty. It’s that easy.

You don’t have to prove anything, you only have to cast a doubt.

Unfortunately it’s not that simple.

How do I cast a doubt?

1. The identity of the driver.

You will have probably admitted being the driver in response to the request for driver identity under s.172 Road Traffic Act 1988. This is evidence that amounts to a confession and can be used by the prosecution to prove that you were the driver. But it’s your confession and we have had clients who have admitted that they were the driver and have later discovered that they weren’t and have retracted that confession. As long as you are believed when you retract that confession this may be sufficient to create a doubt in relation to that element of the prosecution case. If there is a reasonable doubt in relation to one element the whole case fails.

We have had cases where the defendant claims to have never driven that vehicle and disputes that he was the person stopped. Someone else has given his details to the police. If the police have failed to sufficiently verify the identity of the person stopped then they run the risk that the person they have stopped isn’t the person they think they are.

To sum up, this is basically the argument – I wasn’t driving at the time.

People have argued that they weren’t driving when they were pushing a car with the engine off (not in speeding cases but in relation to other types of road traffic offence) – it’s all about motion and control. If the car is moving and you have control over it you are likely to be treated as driving it.

2. It wasn’t a motor vehicle.

This is a difficult argument in relation to speeding because anything going fast enough to be speeding is likely to have an engine and constitutes a motor vehicle…but it is possible and has been used in some exceptional cases.

3. It wasn’t a public road or public place.

If it isn’t then it is unlikely there will be a speed limit in force – so again this is a difficult and unlikely argument in relation to speeding. Basically any road or place to which the public have unrestricted access is treated as a public place and the road traffic laws apply. Supermarket car parks are nearly always a public place…

4. I wasn’t speeding.

This is the most common way to defend a speeding allegation.

Remember that you have to cast a doubt. A police officer forming an opinion that you were speeding combined with the reading of an LTI 20/20 or a Prolaser is going to get you convicted if all you can say is, “I wasn’t speeding – the officer is wrong.” You have to have more than that. You have to show that the officer didn’t use the device properly and therefore his evidence is unreliable or that the device wasn’t working properly or the court will not be convinced.

The devices the police use are very accurate and reliable but they can only be accepted in evidence if they are used in accordance with Home Office Approval.

Home Office Approval is only granted after rigorous testing of the device by ACPO TET ( the scientific branch of the Association of Chief Police Officers). ACPO TET state the conditions in which the device was tested and found to be reliable and if the police don’t stick to using it in this way then they are using it outside of the Home Office Approval in which case the evidence of the device is inadmissible.

Things to check (or get your lawyer to check)

• Check calibration certificates (every device has to be calibrated once a year).
• Check the officer did pre and post tour of duty calibration checks.
• Check the officer used the device within the range abilities of that particular device
• Check the secondary check on the GATSO – the white lines painted on the road are a secondary check and should provide a speed reading within 10% of the primary check, if not the GATSO is not reliable.

The Magistrates and Crown Prosecution Service will have little patience for people who try and raise these arguments with no real foundation. So make sure you know what you are doing and don’t make a fool of yourself.

Always remember – if you have a trial and lose you will get a heavier sentence and hefty court costs on top of your fine!

If in doubt you can ask me a question at the AutoMate free motor legal advice website.

I guarantee if it is about road traffic offences I will always know the answer and will respond within one business day.

About the Author

Lucy Bonham Carter is a specialist motor lawyer with AutoMate, the free UK motor legal advice site

Hampshire Police – Unmarked BMW 330D Roads Policing Unit Traffic Car