intriguing legal issue re fixed penalties

Forth · Post by **Forth** » 14 Feb 2005, 08:04

Legal twist exposes 'miscarriage of justice' for the Metric Martyrs
Sunday Telegraph
Christopher Booker's Notebook
13th February 2005
Pensioner challenges the power to penalise without trial
Two years ago, when Robert de Crittenden, a pensioner, emerged from Sandwell council offices in the west Midlands, he was irritated to find a £30 fixed penalty ticket on his windscreen. He little realised he was embarking on a battle which calls into question the legality of the entire principle of automatic penalties, which now earn local authorities and government departments hundreds of millions of pounds a year.
As a student of constitutional law, Mr de Crittenden was aware that under the 1689 Bill of Rights, it is fundamental to British law that no one may be fined or financially penalised unless they have been convicted by a court. When he inquired into the power of traffic authorities to levy automatic fines, he found it had been created by the Road Traffic Act 1991, in contradiction of the Bill of Rights.
But Mr de Crittenden was also aware of the historic judgment in the "Metric Martyrs" case in 2002, in which Lord Justice Laws pronounced that there were certain "constitutional statutes", such as the Bill of Rights, which cannot be set aside by subsequent legislation unless this is specifically stated. This was crucial to the argument whereby Laws upheld the conviction of the Metric Martyrs.
The law making it a criminal offence to sell goods in pounds and ounces was issued under the European Communities Act 1972. But the Martyrs' defence was that this had been overridden by the Weights and Measures Act 1985, which authorised continued selling in non-metric measures. By ancient tradition, when one Act says something different from another, the later Act, by the principle of "implied repeal", takes precedence. But Laws ruled that, since the European Communities Act was a "constitutional statute", it could not be overridden by the 1985 Act, since this had not made the point explicit.
After conferring with the British Weights and Measures Association (BWMA) and Neil Herron of the Metric Martyrs Defence Fund, Mr de Crittenden concluded that, if Lord Justice Laws was right, the 1991 Road Traffic Act could not implicitly repeal the relevant clause of the Bill of Rights, because, as Laws stated, this was a "constitutional statute". Either the automatic penalty system was illegal; or Laws was wrong, in which case the Metric Martyrs should not have been found guilty.
Using this argument, Mr de Crittenden refused to pay his fine unless Sandwell took him to court. Two years later they have still not done so. But the significance of his challenge can scarcely be overestimated. Since his legal argument began to be widely circulated, ever more motorists have similarly refused to pay fixed penalties in towns all around the country – for example in Sunderland, where Mr de Crittenden was last week given another parking ticket, when he drove up to confer with Mr Herron in connection with this story.
The dilemma facing councils is stark. If they obey the law as it stands, they cannot impose parking tickets on hundreds of thousands of motorists without taking them to court. But if they do so, the court system would rapidly collapse. Furthermore the same applies to all the other official bodies that have jumped on the "fixed penalty" bandwagon, such as the Inland Revenue, which imposes an automatic £100 penalty for a late tax return.
If all these bodies imagine that, under the Laws judgment, they have a simple remedy – namely to rush through an Act of Parliament explicitly overruling the Bill of Rights – Mr de Crittenden has another trick up his sleeve. The Bill of Rights may have been enshrined in an Act of Parliament, but the Declaration of Rights on which it was based was a contract between the sovereign and the people. It is by that Declaration that the monarch occupies her throne and by which Parliament enjoys its power, and it cannot be repealed. Thus, if Laws is right, fixed penalties without conviction cannot be legalised. Either that, or the Metric Martyrs were innocent.
Anyone wishing to know more can contact the BWMA (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/exit.jh ... nline.com/) or the Metric Martyrs Defence Fund at PO Box 526, Sunderland SR1 3YS.

Homer · Post by **Homer** » 14 Feb 2005, 11:35

It's not just parking tickets.
It is every fixed penalty including the millions handed out by speed cameras.

tomsheppard · Post by **tomsheppard** » 14 Feb 2005, 13:53

The system always wins though.
They'll just round you up and throw you into gaol for ever without trial.
Like they do.
There ain't no justice.

DervDonkey · Post by **DervDonkey** » 14 Feb 2005, 15:58

Agreed. They'll slime their way out of it as usual. Hopefully not before someone causes chaos in the legal system though. Not really worth me trying to recover the cost of the 2 parking tickets I've picked up in the last 20 years...

jeremy · Post by **jeremy** » 14 Feb 2005, 16:05

This has always been the position. The first fixed penalties were introduced for parking and I think generally were welcomed by motorists who, instead of making a personal appearance in court could simply pay the fixed penalty and get rid of the matter. if they didn't deal with the matter or prefered they could still go to court and argue the matter and risk the magistrates imposing a heavier penalty for having their time wasted.
From the 1950's onwards there has been a movement to simplify procedings for routine motoring matters and you have been able to enter a written plea for charges such as speeding or driving without due care and attention. Certainly these used to be dealt with in open court with the mitigation being read to the court by the clerk to the court.
Yes in theory you could clog the system if everyone refused to co-operate - so what - you'd never manage it firstly as no-one could be bothered to do it it would never happen, and secondly what do you really want? Any constitutional problems could be solved eventually and you'd be back to square one.
Now if you could persuade someone that speed cameras and traffic enforcement as a whole was contrary to European legistation or the Human Rights legislation - then you might get somewhere but I think pigs have more chance of sprouting wings first.
jeremy

turbolag · Post by **turbolag** » 14 Feb 2005, 19:15

I dunno what the old chuffer is whinging about - if you didn't do the crime then you can opt for court. The whole idea of the FPN system is that if you choose to admit guilt you can opt straight away for the lesser fixed penalty. Even better, don't speed/drive unlawfully/wrongly park then you'll never get one in the first place. Wish i'd thought of that one sooner.

Forth · Post by **Forth** » 15 Feb 2005, 00:05

Got done for parking in Edinburgh one time last year, plus an extra penalty for not paying up within the time specified on the ticket.... which would have been rather difficult given that someone (maybe even the warden, who can tell with such privatized profiteering apparachiks) had removed the ticket before we could even see it. It's supposedly an offence for a third party to remove such a ticket. So we -- the victims? ... must be, since the vampires would get their blood anyway -- effectively got fined for someone else's action. Best of luck to anyone who tries to stuff 'em.

Forth · Post by **Forth** » 15 Feb 2005, 00:18

"Even better, don't speed/drive unlawfully/wrongly park then you'll never get one in the first place. Wish i'd thought of that one sooner."
Aah, yes, that fatuous old crumpet "the innocent have nothing to fear".
Well, consider recent Government and/or EU legislation on various subjects which is both sloppily drafted (one suspects by ulterior intent), increasingly subjective (guess who's interpretation would prevail!), open ended (so they can just make it up, whatever and whenever happens to suit their purposes), and with a tendency towards the retrospective (done it yesterday, innocent then and today yet guilty tomorrow?).... and start fearing.
The guilty have nothing to fear, 'coz they're the Government and above what used to be "the Law".
<div align="right">Chips with everything.... your surgeon awaits.</div id="right">

Homer · Post by **Homer** » 15 Feb 2005, 01:29

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by turbolag

Even better, don't speed/drive unlawfully/wrongly park then you'll never get one in the first place. Wish i'd thought of that one sooner.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
How about don't hand out illegal fixed penalty notices then you will not have billions of pounds in compensation to shell out when you get caught.[}:)]

turbolag · Post by **turbolag** » 15 Feb 2005, 01:36

I got stuck on a parking one some months back. turns out it was a pay and display area but being totally unlit at night it was not possible to see the sign or the machine, some 20 feet away down a further unlit passageway. I chose not to admit guilt by paying, challenged the ticket as detailed on the rear and the council in question dropped it before it even went to their ajudicator. It's not rocket science, is it?
The innocent really do have nothing to fear (except perhaps in the case above where some little turd removed the poor blokes ticket so he knew nothing about it, but you can't legislate for malice). Don't ar5e about, no ticket. Park lawfully, no ticket. Hell, even unwittingly park unlawfully with a good case of mitigation (like I did) and you'll be fine. Lets be honest, as much as we all hate the parking Taliban, the streets of some of our towns would be utter gridlocked chaos by now as people park in a free for all frenzy, as recently happened in Northampton when someone parked stupidly on Gold St causing the one way system in the town to be blocked from that point on - a FPN well earned by the driver which illustrates why we have them. If the populace could be trusted to behave itself then we wouldn't need them. Like speed enforcement - we all moan, but it's self funding. If everyone observed all limits for a month the whole speed enforcement system would be bankrupt as the fines (the only source of speed enforcement income) dry up, so its a hated system perpetuated by the very people most vehemently opposed to it.
I propose a month of civil obedience - no speeding, no illegal parking. By this we'll hit them where it hurts most - the bank account. Whats the betting folk just carry on as normal and then moan about something they could have easily prevented with a moments thought, attention or patience?

Forth · Post by **Forth** » 15 Feb 2005, 02:07

Like speed enforcement - we all moan, but it's self funding. 
Could say that of the Government...... come to that, so's the Mafia though perhaps slightly less corrupt.
If everyone observed all limits for a month the whole speed enforcement system would be bankrupt as the fines (the only source of speed enforcement income) dry up, so its a hated system perpetuated by the very people most vehemently opposed to it.
Sadly, although the idea would work within a basically honest system, the existing regime with its apparachiks and crony extortionists would quickly find some other means of financing their own plush lifestyles and nefarious purposes -- such as an oxygen tax, or the compulsory fitting of thought-meters.
(mind you, there's many would have no prob in evading the latter)

uhn113x · Post by **uhn113x** » 15 Feb 2005, 13:21

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Homer

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by turbolag

Even better, don't speed/drive unlawfully/wrongly park then you'll never get one in the first place. Wish i'd thought of that one sooner.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
How about don't hand out illegal fixed penalty notices then you will not have billions of pounds in compensation to shell out when you get caught.[}:)]
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
Which, of course, you and I will be paying for. Remind me, what qualifications do you need to become a cabinet minister?

Post by **martyhopkirk** » 15 Feb 2005, 14:26

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by uhn113x
[ Remind me, what qualifications do you need to become a cabinet minister?
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
None, but I believe there is a 6 month wait on the NHS to have your spine removed, which is a necessary prerequisit.[:D]

tomsheppard · Post by **tomsheppard** » 15 Feb 2005, 14:46

They go private.

turbolag · Post by **turbolag** » 15 Feb 2005, 20:39

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Forth
such as an oxygen tax, or the compulsory fitting of thought-meters.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">For God's sake - don't give Bliar any more ideas!