Payback for speed fines?
9:21am Wednesday 13th August 2008
Comments (15)DRIVERS wrongfully punished for speeding could be due for half a million pounds in payouts, a motoring law expert claimed.
This follows magistrates overturning three speeding convictions a woman received in 2007 after driving through Chideock.
Barrister Joseph Kotrie-Monson, who is pushing for a judical review on the issue, said: "The Dorset Safety Camera Partnership, as the public body administering fines, could be responsible for paying out something like half a million pounds in fines and court costs.
"And of course it is local tax payers that will ultimately be coming up with the money."
His comments came after Kathleen Wallis, 56, appeared before the Weymouth court with nine points on her licence from speeding' convictions.
Simon Brimacombe, representing her, told magistrates her case followed an earlier hearing at Dorchester Crown Court at which it was ruled that speeding legislation in Chideock was flawed when she was punished.
The crown court ruled that because the road was referred to as Seatown Road', rather than the correct name of Duck Street in legislation, that speeding convictions from there were technically unlawful.
Mr Brimacombe said Wallis, of Barnslose Mead, Dulverton, Somerset, was banned under the totting up' procedure after speeding' three times in February and April 2006.
Prosecutor Anita Gibson-Lee asked magistrates to reopen the case and immediately dismiss it, which they did.
Wallis heard the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency (DVLA) would be informed that nine points should be removed from her licence.
Mr Brimacombe was told legal and travel costs incurred by Wallis during those cases could be refunded, but other claims - such as loss of earnings - would require an application to the Dorset Safety Camera Partnership.
Following the Wallis case, a spokesman for the partnership said there was no further update' regarding compensation for wrongfully convicted motorists, but that it was working with government departments to try to resolve the issue.
Commenting on the situation, Mr Kotrie-Monson, head of motoring law for Mary Monson Solicitors in Manchester, said people who paid fixed penalty notices rather than go to court could be in line for their money back as well as those who paid court fines.
He said: "This mistake could have caused tens of thousands of pounds worth of damage to people's lives.
"We're in contact with around 40 people who wrongly paid penalty charges.
"When we get that figure to between 50 or 60 people we will effectively be in a position to launch an action that could lead to a judicial review.
"I expect to make a loss in doing so but I think it's very important to do because it's a scandal."
Your Say YourDorset Echo
D Smith, Frampton says...
11:34am Wed 13 Aug 08
thousands of pounds of damage to people's lives! scandal!! I don't think so. Mrs Wallis really shouldn't be on the road at all if she thinks it's OK to speed through a village like Chideock (or Frampton, come to that).
maximus, Weymouth says...
11:42am Wed 13 Aug 08
techie, Weymouth says...
12:47pm Wed 13 Aug 08
It may be that the lady was driving at what she considered to be an appropriate speed for the time, traffic conditions and weather.
I am going to quote the relevant section of the Highway Code here as you obviously don't understand how it works.
http://www.direct.go
v.uk/en/TravelAndTra
nsport/Highwaycode/D
G_070304
You MUST NOT exceed the maximum speed limits for the road and for your vehicle
Top_Starfish, UK says...
1:31pm Wed 13 Aug 08
The speed limit was on display and appropriate for this village - why should anyone get away with speeding because of a small technicality in the speed limit regulation.
They drove through a residential area with no regard to the signed limit and weren't even paying enough attention to see a big yellow box at the side of the road, so were NOT driving in a safe manner.
There is something seriously wrong with our judicial system if these people are paid compensation!
SHAME on anyone who thinks this is a good thing!
JamesY, Dorchester says...
1:47pm Wed 13 Aug 08
techie wrote:And you should also assume that in built up areas, with street lights, the speed limit is 30.
It may be that the lady was driving at what she considered to be an appropriate speed for the time, traffic conditions and weather.I am going to quote the relevant section of the Highway Code here as you obviously don't understand how it works. http://www.direct.go v.uk/en/TravelAndTra nsport/Highwaycode/D G_070304 You MUST NOT exceed the maximum speed limits for the road and for your vehicle
Fishman68, Weymouth says...
3:09pm Wed 13 Aug 08
Top_Starfish wrote:Gosh Top_starish!
Ridiculous... The speed limit was on display and appropriate for this village - why should anyone get away with speeding because of a small technicality in the speed limit regulation. They drove through a residential area with no regard to the signed limit and weren't even paying enough attention to see a big yellow box at the side of the road, so were NOT driving in a safe manner. There is something seriously wrong with our judicial system if these people are paid compensation! SHAME on anyone who thinks this is a good thing!
Do you work for Dorset Safety Camera Scheme, the parish or are you just another annoying righteous civil do-gooder?
Enough said, we all appreciate you are just so right and good! We are not worthy to eat the crumbs from under your exalted table!
The point here is that the correct enforcement procedure was not done correctly and these people should have there fines back! Irregardless of your righteous moral high ground and aspirations to be a self appointed preacher of the Highway code.
genghis, portland says...
4:47pm Wed 13 Aug 08
Fishman68 wrote:Why are people that obey the law always "do gooders" in your eyes? You go on about speed cameras and stealth taxes but didn't you also complain about the people who speed on the road outside your house?
Top_Starfish wrote: Ridiculous... The speed limit was on display and appropriate for this village - why should anyone get away with speeding because of a small technicality in the speed limit regulation. They drove through a residential area with no regard to the signed limit and weren't even paying enough attention to see a big yellow box at the side of the road, so were NOT driving in a safe manner. There is something seriously wrong with our judicial system if these people are paid compensation! SHAME on anyone who thinks this is a good thing!Gosh Top_starish! Do you work for Dorset Safety Camera Scheme, the parish or are you just another annoying righteous civil do-gooder? Enough said, we all appreciate you are just so right and good! We are not worthy to eat the crumbs from under your exalted table! The point here is that the correct enforcement procedure was not done correctly and these people should have there fines back! Irregardless of your righteous moral high ground and aspirations to be a self appointed preacher of the Highway code.
I think there are many roads (particularily motorways) where the speed limit could very well be raised and still be safe. However until that decision is made (although I would be very surprised if it was) you just have to accept the speed limits as they are now. That includes the fines if you break them.
AG, Weymouth says...
5:51pm Wed 13 Aug 08
What about the cost of lives when someone gets killed by a speeding motorist?
John, Weymouth says...
6:49pm Wed 13 Aug 08
JamesY, Dorchester says...
7:12pm Wed 13 Aug 08
John wrote:Ha ha ! Brilliant !
There may have been an administrative error, but that doesn't mean that the spirit of the law shouldn't apply... particularly to Kathleen Wallis, 56, who failed to observe the speed restrictions on three occasions between February and April 2006.
Anybody who doesn't see the speed signs and bright yellow cameras - which are amongst the most visible in Dorchester - shouldn't be trusted to drive at 30 through the village let alone any faster !
derek, dorset says...
11:02pm Wed 13 Aug 08
In a word DCC speed partnership you messed up .
In the real world you would be out of a job , in the cosy world .,........We laugh at you
techie, Weymouth says...
2:43am Thu 14 Aug 08
derek wrote:Whatever the problem with the fixed penalty notices was does nothing to change the fact that these people were SPEEDING and got caught in the act.
Give the money and points back that you took from people that you ripped off and you did not have the legal authority to take.
In a word DCC speed partnership you messed up .
In the real world you would be out of a job , in the cosy world .,........We laugh at you
Now imagine that it's your house at the side of that road, complete with small children/pets/aged relatives/whatever. And you see these idiots speeding past your house every day. How do you feel about it then?
JamesY, Dorchester says...
9:29am Thu 14 Aug 08
JamesY wrote:For "Dorchester" read "Dorset" !
John wrote: There may have been an administrative error, but that doesn't mean that the spirit of the law shouldn't apply... particularly to Kathleen Wallis, 56, who failed to observe the speed restrictions on three occasions between February and April 2006.Ha ha ! Brilliant ! Anybody who doesn't see the speed signs and bright yellow cameras - which are amongst the most visible in Dorchester - shouldn't be trusted to drive at 30 through the village let alone any faster !
weymouthfox, Weymouth says...
1:08pm Thu 14 Aug 08
SLOWING TRAFFIC: One of the two speed cameras in Chideock
In this section
- Shamed fraudster left victims in tears
- Vital work at Bovington can mean safety on the front line
- Top marks for school.. again
- Singing for the brain to help those suffering from Alzheimer's
- Speed limit plans welcomed for danger road
- Top celebrity chefs to cook at Dorset Seafood Festival
- Weymouth lecturer to tackle charity Channel swim
- Pet dog escapes from hole lot of grief
- Bar licence suspended after drinks sold to under-age girls
- Campaigners’ ‘concern’ after councillors support two-tier school system
Sponsored Links
Local Advertisers
Local Information
Enter your postcode, town or place name
JMS455, weymouth says...
11:22am Wed 13 Aug 08
If they are not guilty of a speeding offence they were, due to the repeated and inappropriate nature of their driving, driving dangerously and should be procecuted accordingly.