As a specialist motoring solicitor I see a lot of cases in Nottingham, London, Birmingham and throughout England. There appears to be a lot of misconceptions about drink driving.

A lot of people confuse what amounts to a defence and what is special reasons, I even see this mistake being made by non specialist motoring solicitors.

There are very few defences to drink driving. Basically they are - either you weren't driving or you hadn't been drinking. There are technical defences to drink driving and these relate to the drink driving procedure. To prove a case of drink driving the prosecution have to show you were driving and at the time you were over the legal limit. If you are caught at the scene and the police can show that you were over the legal limit then it is unlikely that you have a defence to drink driving unless they make a mistake on the drink drive intoxiliser procedure.

If you were not caught at the scene then you have a potential defence to drink driving. If you can establish that you drank after you drove then this is a defence, simply put; at the time of driving you were not over the limit.

How would you go about proving this? You are going to need an expert to give evidence of the effect of the post driving drinking. One of the questions you will be asked when giving a breath test is "have you drank since the accident?" If you have then it is essential that you tell the police this. You will probably then be interviewed and a detailed note will be taken of what you had to drink, how much and when. This will form the basis of the experts report who will be able to calculate what your breath reading would have been at the time you were driving by taking away the effect of the post driving drink.

If the experts report shows that you would have been under the limit at the time of driving then this is a valid defence and you should plead not guilty at court.

In terms of technical defences these are rare, the police have a form to fill in to help them through the procedure and generally mistakes are avoided. That is not to say mistakes are not made and a good specialist motoring solicitor will go through the form to ensure it is accurate.

For further advice on a drink driving matter contact us anytime on 07799 383239 or email at info@motoringlawyersonline.com

How to reply to a motoring summons if you are not guilty

So you have received a summons for a motoring offence and you deny it, what do you do from here?

The summons will include a form asking various questions. The most important of these is in relation to the 3 options you get for your plea. Either – Plead Guilty by post, Plead guilty at court or plead not guilty.

The summons will normally tell you whether you need to attend court. Normally for a motoring summons it can be dealt with in your absence. This can be an advantage because it avoids taking more time off work.

The aim of returning the form when you deny it is two fold. Firstly you want to avoid any extra court hearings and secondly you want to try and get the matter dropped as soon as possible. This is the best stage to instruct a specialist motoring solicitor.

I see lots of advice from non lawyers online suggesting that you keep your cards close to your chest in relation to your defence.

I disagree with this, if you have a strong defence then let the court and the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) know. The CPS will probably not have even seen the file until a not guilty plea is entered. The matter is dealt with as an admin function until a not guilty plea is entered. The CPS have a duty to review cases and see whether there is a realistic prospect of success and whether it is in the public interest.

You may be tempted to follow the advice of a non motoring solicitor and give very few details. The reality is that if you just fill the form in with no details of your defence the matter will be listed for a case management hearing when you will need to attend and explain your defence. This defeats the object of having as few hearings as possible. I would advise that you go through the matter with a motoring solicitor, get advice on what you should put in here, if they won’t give you this advice for free try someone who will (me ) In brief I would suggest you need to give details of your defence,what witnesses you have and tell the court how long you think the case will take (assume about 30 minutes per witness) I would also suggest you tell the court if there are any witnesses for the Prosecution that you don’t neet to give live evidence – in other words if there is a witness whose ‘evidence’ is not contested then you can allow their evidence to be read out rather than them attend court. An example of this may be a Police Counter clerk who simply says she checked your documents when you produced them at the police station.

An example of the advantage of doing it this way happened to me only last week. I had been consulted by a client who was charged with failing to furnish details of the driver. His defence was that he never receieved the paperwork. We completed the form and told the court of our defence, we also told them the names of 8 witnesses who would give evidence that they have had postal difficulties at that address. The result? It was dropped by the CPS at this first hearing without the need for my client to ever attend. Bear in mind this was the first time the CPS had seen the case, by setting out a full and strong defence they took the view there was not a reasonable prospect of success for them and dropped it.

This is not an early april fools joke, it is the latest idea from the government.

Phil Darnton Chief Executive of Cycling England, an agency funded by the Department for Transport presented proposals to the Government.

Government advisors are looking to introduce a law that states that for insurance purposes the owner of the most powerful vehicle will always be at fault for any collision. So if a cyclist jumps a red light, cycles into you because he wasn’t looking or is practicing riding no handed along the High Street whilst standing on his cross bar – it’s the car drivers fault!




Cyclists are not immune in all of this, if they knock over a pedestrian then they are to blame because their ‘vehicle’ is more powerful.

Most drivers would agree that cyclists need prtotection, they are of course more vulnerable. Most car drivers do make allowances for this but does it make sense to make car drivers automatically at fault for any accident? Anyone who has been an a main road in Central London is only too aware of the crazy antics of some of the despatch riders, weaving in and out of traffic at speed. Should they be encouraged by making the driver responsible regardless of the clyclists actions?

Many drivers see this as yet another attack by the government on the car driver, the majority of whom are law abiding. Is this just another attempt by the governemt to get more money from the already squeezed motorist?

"I think I have been flashed by a speed camera, what will happen" or "I think I have been flashed by a speed camera, how long do they have to write to me" are the 2 most common questions I get asked as a motoring solicitor.

The first thing I say is that just because you saw the flash does not mean for sure you will get a ticket. Some cameras simply don't work, some don't have film in etc. That will change when they all become digital and I wouldn't advise taking a chance that they aren't live!





So you have seen the speed camera flash - now what? Provided the car is registered at your home address you will hear something within 14 days. The police have just 14 days to write to you with a notice of intended prosecution. If they don't - they are out of time and there is nothing they can do. But be aware that if the car is not registered at your address, if you have changed address or it's a lease car all the police need do is send it to the address on the log book. If you don't get it for a few weeks later it still counts as valid service.

If you receive the Notice of Intended prosecution you will need to send it back within 28 days. If you don't then you are guilty of failing to furnish drivers details and that carries 6 points.

I will look at what happens after the Notice of Intended Prosecution in the next blog.

Q. How many points do I have to have before I am liable to be disqualified under the totting up provisions?

A. 12 within a 3 year period going from the date of the oldest offence to the date of latest offence.

Q. If I delay the court proceedings can I take it over the 3 year period?

A. NO. The time limit starts on the date of the oldest offence and runs to the date of offence. So if you have 9 points and the oldest was imposed on 12 September 2006. You are stopped for speeding today (28th July) it's todays date that counts not when it is dealt with in court so even if you delayed it until after 12 September at the time of the offence (28th July) you would have had 9 points.

Q. I think I was flashed by a speed camera a few weeks ago but I still haven't heard anything how long do I have to wait to see whether I get a speeding ticket

A. The Police have to issue a notice of intended prosecution to the registered owner of the car within 14 days so assuming the car is registered at your address you should have heard within 2 weeks. If you haven't then they are out of time.

Q. There are road works on the motorway and a temporary speed limit of 50 I was doing 70. I have been told that temporary speed limits don't count. Am I right.

A. No, you can still be fined and points imposed for exceeding temporary limits

I have been asked to tell the police who was driving my car but I don’t know; what do I do?

This is a common scenario and something motoring solicitors get asked often.

Typically a car is shared by a husband and wife. The registered owner gets a notice of intended prosecution because the car was flashed by a speed camera.

The couple know it can only have been one of the 2 of them driving but cannot remember who was driving at that time. What can they do?

The law says that the registered owner must identify the driver. The police must send the Notice of Intended prosecution to the registered owner within 14 days. If they have done that then it is easier for the owner to remember who was driving. It is easier but the reality of life is that it is not always possible. Can you remember where you were at 9:47am 11 days ago? This is a source of frustration for lots of clients. Where husband and wife equally share the driving how are they to remember?

You can ask for a photo to see if it helps identify the driver but more often than not it does not help.

The case becomes even more difficult if for some reason the initial Notice of Intended Prosecution does not arrive. The police have posted it but it got lost. Now the couple may get a reminder, this might be some 6 weeks after the event. Now try and remember who was driving on that unremarkable trip 6 weeks ago.

The temptation is just to name one of you, pick a name, any name. The risk with that is that if you were wrong and if it was proved that you were wrong it could be said that you have perverted the course of justice.

The alternative is to do all that you can to co-operate with the police. Tell them that you cannot identify the driver, explain why. You will probably get a summons for failing to give the drivers details.

If you can show to the court that you have done all you can to find out who was driving but cannot then that is a defence. It is a matter for the court to decide whether they accept that you have done all you can so keep a not of enquiries you have made.

The courts are reluctant to find people not guilty in these sort of cases because it is easy for people to just make it up but a well prepared application properly presented can often be successful. You will need to show that you have made all reasonable enquiries.

I would advise that you contact a motoring solicitor as soon as possible once you have received the Notice of Intended Prosecution so that they can guide you through what needs to be done.

I have had my licence for less than 2 years and have been charged with no insurance, what can I do to avoid having my licence revoked?

This is one of the most common questions I get asked as a Motoring Solicitor - how can I avoid points on my licence if I am guilty?

Driving without insurance carries a minimum of 6 points so a new driver with less than 2 years experience will have their licence revoked if convicted.



There are no real defences to driving without insurance, unless you are driving your employers vehicle. Generally if you have no insurance you are guilty. The fact that you thought you had insurance is not a defence.

So how do we get around this? Whilst it's true you will almost certainly have to plead guilty there is a way to avoid penalty points. It doesn't apply in all situations but if it does it can make a huge difference to someones situation.

Even though you have pleaded guilty you can argue that there are special reasons not to impose penalty points.

Special reasons are not easy to win but with careful preparation they can avoid points on your licence. Special reasons have to relate to the offence, not the person. So the fact that you only drove a short distance may be a special reason, the fact that you will lose your job will never be special reasons. What might amount to special reasons? The list is never closed and can apply to any offence where penalty points or a disqualification are obligatory. I recently successfully argued that a client should not have points on her licence because although she did not have any insurance she had been misled into thinking she did have insurance. The court accepted this because she had been misled, if she had merely made an oversight and thought she had insurance that would not have been enough.

Other special reasons might be that you had driven a very short distance, that you drove because of an emergency or that your drinks had been spiked.

If you are successful in arguing that there are special reasons not to put penalty points on your licence then the court will simply mark your case as guilty but no points and normally impose no fine and no costs.

The list is never closed so if you think you may have a good reason to avoid penalty points on your licence contact a specialist motoring solicitor.

I received a summons, or notice of intended prosecution but I wasn't driving.

This is a common problem and is getting worse. Basically someone with the same make, model and colour car as you copy your number plate and fix it to their car and hey presto they can go through all the speed cameras they want and guess who gets the tickets? – You!

I spent this weekend helping a great family who have suffered with this.
The father of the family received a summons for speeding, he knew that he couldn't have gone through that light at that time because he knew where he was at that time and he wasn’t anywhere near the camera.

He had evidence from about 10 witnesses confirming where he was. He co-operated with the police from the start and sent all the details he could.

You would think that this would be enough, but no. He was pursued by the police to court. This despite various letters offering witness details, proof of purchases showing he was somewhere else and even a visit from the police to check his car against the photo taken from the speed camera.

His daughter called me last week in a panic, her father was very stressed about this, he was a proud man who had never been involved with the law before. He could not understand why they wouldn’t accept his and his witnesses word that he wasn’t the driver who went through the camera.

We spent Sunday going through the case and playing a game of spot the difference, armed with the photo from the camera and his car. We spotted 4 minor differences, a sticker in the back window, a slightly different colour bumper etc. We also got all the witnesses together and got his case fully prepared ready for trial the next day.
Despite all of the evidence we provided the police at court still didn’t accept it was a different car. Fortunately the court did and it was thrown out and the fees he had paid me were ordered to be repaid to him by the court forthwith.

The relief was visible, he had had 6 months of stress, at times questioning whether it wouldn't just be easier to pay the £60 fine but he was a man of principles and refused all offers of help to pay the speeding fine insisting that he was not going to admit something he hadn’t done.

He was lucky in many ways, he is a well known character and lots of people were able to confirm where he was. He had evidence of purchases and was determined not to give in.

But how do we avoid this happening to us? It is so easy for someone to copy our number plate and you may be faced with having to remember where you were 10 days earlier. The only thing that you can do is make your car distinctive, I’m not suggesting you ‘pimp your ride’ but something like a sticker in the back of the car and a dated photo or maybe something distinctive on the number plate.

The Government annuounced today that it is doubling the current fixed penalties for not wearing a seat belt and for having illegal number plates.

At the moment the penalty for both of these is a £30 fixed penalty fine, from today it will be £60.

The Home Office minister Alan Campbell said "This is not about taking money from motorists, it’s about doing all we can to keep the public safe on our roads."



Really? Do we believe them? No one would disagree that seatbelts are a vital safety feature but number plates? Illegal number plates include using plates with the wrong font, size or colour. Not being properly spaced can also amount to an illegal plate. I have never really understood how a number plate that is spaced in a different way to spell a word can hamper police investigation. After all if Gordon Brown had a number plate RE51GND we would all be able to remember it.

I think that the vast majority of personal plates are just a bit of fun, if they are spaced a little wrong so what? it makes it easier to remember, from celebrity chefs James Martin's 6hef to Gym owner Duncan Bannatynes F1TSO they are all more memorable.

What does annoy me is when people go to stupid lengths to try and make a word out of numbers such as one putting a 1 and 5 together, changing the 5 a little, lean it, push it up to the 1 and hey presto you have an R!!? Those sort of plates should be fined but lets not pretend it's a road safety issue call it what it is - 'stupidity tax'

If the government were genuinely concerned that this was a road safety issue why do they sell number plates that are clearly going to be miss spaced on their own DVLA site? They make money when you buy them and fine you when you miss space them. Not a bad little earner.

Essex police today confirmed that they are investigating claims that thousands of speeding tickets issued are in fact invalid.

The reason for this is that the correct procedure was not followed invalidating the speeding tickets.

This opens the door for the speeding fines to be overturned and the points removed from the licence. This has proved too late for some motorists. We were contacted by Andy who said "I went to court because I had 9 points on my licence, stupidly I did not get a motoring solicitor to represent me. The magistrates gave me 4 points and disqualified me from driving for 6 months. This meant I lost my job as a delivery driver, this has had a huge effect on my family. It's all very well taking the points off my licence and refunding me the fine but that won't get my job back"

Motoring Solicitors have confirmed that applications could be made for compensation for loss of employment arising from this.

Should the procedure prove to be defective, the police could face a flood of claims from motorists who were convicted by magistrates of speeding since March 2007.

It would not apply to those motorists who were dealt with by post and paid the fine on receiving a Notice of Intended Prosecution by the police. Drivers who went on speed awareness courses would also not be covered.

Donna Veasey, a force spokesman, added: “We are currently looking into whether there is an issue with the Section 20 notices we have served. It should be stressed, even if this does prove to be an issue, it would only affect a proportion of cases where the person went to magistrates’ court since March 2007.”

This comes on the back of 2 other errors we discovered this week relating to thousands of speeding tickets in Dorset and Lancashire.

If you have been affected by this and want to make an application to have the points removed from your licence, speeding fine refunded or compensation apply at info@motoringlawyersonline.com and we will investigate your matter and advise you whether you have a claim.

More common questions we get about speeding fines.

Q - I have received a notice of intended prosecution for speeding, I have 9 points. Should I say it was my wife driving?




A - A speeding fixed penalty will carry 3 points and in this case will lead to a disqualification under the totting up provisions unless a good motoring solicitor can convince the court not to disqualify. If you tell the police someone else was driving and they weren't that's called 'Perverting the course of Justice', that carries a maximum life imprisonment for you and your wife. There are plenty of cases where people have been convicted of pretending someone else was driving and have been sent to prison. Hmmm losing your licence or spending years in prison??? If you are that desperate to avoid a disqualification just take good advice as soon as possible from a motoring solicitor.




Q - I have been summonsed for speeding - the police say I was doing 37 in a 30. I have been back to the area and there are no 30 signs just a 40 later on. Is this a defence?

A - There is no requirement to put speed signs in 30mph limits if there is street lighting and the lamp posts are less than 200 yards apart. In fact it is prohibited to put what is called 'repeater' signs in these zones. Any area that has street lighting and no speed signs is a 30mph - the only exception is motorways.

Q - I have 9 points and have just received a summons, I know I will be disqualified if I get 12 points, it will be hard to get to work without my licence - will the court let me keep my licence?

A - Probably not if you phrase the application like that. The law states that the court must disqualify someone for 6 months if they get 12 points within 3 years, the only way you can argue this is to show it will cause exceptional hardship. Note the word Exceptional, it is assumed that there will be hardship if disqualified - that's the point of the punishment.
You will need to show it will cause exceptional hardship, a well constructed application will often succeed but it has to be well presented. If you can show that it is not realistic to get to work on public transport and that as a result you will have to give up your job then this may be enough provided you also show that it will mean financial difficulties for your family. If your partner can still provide for both of you then it will not be enough. This is an area where many people try to save costs and do it themselves. I have sat through no end of cases that I am sure the magistrates would have allowed the person to keep their licence but it is not presented well and the important points are missed meaning they lose their licence.

Q - My phone has a loudspeaker, when I get a call I just answer it, put into onto loudspeaker and then I can talk whilst it is in my top pocket. Am I committing a offence?




A. - YES. It is an offence if the phone is or must be held at some point during the course of making or receiving a call. The only way you can answer a call is with a hands free kit that allows you to answer by simply pressing a button without holding the phone. But beware - if you are distracted whilst on a call you could still be committing an offence of driving without due care or failing to have proper control of the vehicle.





Q. I drive a van, it is taxed the same as a car, it is registered as Private Light Goods but I have been stopped driving at 56 in a 60 zone,and the police say I was speeding. Are they right?




A. The law has changed, vans are now limited to 50 mph on a single carriageway and 60 on a dual carriageway. The only van that is classed the same as a car is a 'car derived van' These are vans that are both derived from a car chassis and also have a maximum laden weight of no more than 2 tonnes. This means that the weight of the vehicle and the payload it is designed to be able to carry when added together do not exceed 2 tonnes. The van design must be a derivative of a car body, it is not sufficient that it looks similar to a particular car.



Q My partner is 7 months pregnant and finds it hard to wear a seat belt, is she exempt?


A. No, pregnancy itself is not a ground for exemption but if a doctor certified it was not safe for her to wear one on medical grounds then that would be sufficient.


If you have any questions you can call or email us for a FREE initial advice - visit our website at http://www.motoringlawyersonline.com

One of the most common questions we get asked at Motoring Lawyers Online is "I was doing x mph in a x limit" what will happen?

As specialist motoring solicitors we have access to the document that the magistrates use when deciding sentence for speeding offences. This is the Magistrates Courts Guideline that all magistrates are issued with.

The following table shows the likely outcome -



Speed Limit 20 -Speed 21-30 = 3 points
Speed 31-40 = 4-6 points OR Disqualify for 7-28 days
Speed 41-50 = Disqualify 7-56 days OR 6 points

Speed limit 30 -Speed 31- 40 = 3 points
Speed 41-50 = 4-6 points OR Disqualify for 7-28 days
Speed 51-60 = Disqualify 7-56 days OR 6 points

Speed limit 40 -Speed 41-55 = 3 points
Speed 56-65 = 4-6 points OR Disqualify for 7-28 days
Speed 66-75 = Disqualify 7-56 days OR 6 points

Speed limit 50 -Speed 51-65 = 3 points
Speed 66-75 = 4-6 points OR Disqualify for 7-28 days
Speed 76-85 = Disqualify 7-56 days OR 6 points

Speed limit 60 -Speed 61-80 = 3 points
Speed 81-90 = 4-6 points OR Disqualify for 7-28 days
Speed 91-100 = Disqualify 7-56 days OR 6 points

Speed limit 70 -Speed 71-90 = 3 points
Speed 91-100 = 4-6 points OR Disqualify for 7-28 days
Speed 101-110 = Disqualify 7-56 days OR 6 points

The second most common question we get asked is - do I need a specialist motoring solicitor? The figures given above are guidelines not rules, a good solicitor will be able to convince the magistrates to sentence at the lower end of the scale. This can make a difference between keeping or losing your licence.

If you have any questions you can call or email us for a FREE initial advice - visit our website at http://www.motoringlawyersonline.com

SPEED cameras could be taken down following a review of their impact on road safety.

A study of 264 camera sites in Staffordshire was carried out to see if the speed traps were effective.


The review looked at every camera and placed them into one of 4 categories - Justified, Not Justified, Superseded (for example other road safety measure - speed humps etc) and Under- performing (not effective in reducing collisions where people were injured or killed).

Those that were classed as not justified or superseded will now be considered for removal, those that under performed will be investigated further.

The deciding factor in whether they were justified or not seems to be one of 2 things. Firstly they looked at the number of collisions for 3 years before the camera against a 3 year period after they were introduced and also a more vague. Chief Inspector Simon Tweats said - "We also look at the speed issue – we can monitor speed through the sites to give us a picture of driver behaviour over a period of time"

the findings apparently found that nearly all were justified.

It seems to us in our 20 years experience of dealing with motorists that the biggest gripe isn't the existence of speed cameras but their effectiveness and a feeling that the forces use them more as a way of raising revenue. Many clients have pointed out that they don't have cameras near schools which would be the obvious place to reduce speed. Many people argue that this is because most people do slow down near schools so the cameras would not earn as much money.

Particularly annoying it seems is where there is the impression of 'sneaky' tactics such as placing cameras within a feet of a speed change. One local camera to us is within 10 feet (and around a corner) of a 60 mph limit which drops to 30. Legally you could be driving at 60 and then expected to slow to 30 within a foot.

No one questions the need for safer driving but is this the most effective way? Should there be more speed signs, a gradual slowing down? Lights warning of your speed and more prominent warning signs when the speed is changing.

If you have any questions you can call or email us for a FREE initial advice - visit our website at http://www.motoringlawyersonline.com

In a scene reminiscent of George Orwells 1984 novel Transport for London (TfL) are planning to introduce measures that will prevent people from exceeding the speed limit.

They have launched a technology called Intelligent Speed Adaptation for all their buses. Basically it is a gizmo on board that uses GPS to identify the speed limit on the road you are driving and then limits your speed. Put the pedal to the metal and it brakes. The bus takes over and will not let the driver go any faster than the speed limit.


TfL want to introduce this to cars, initially voluntarily. There are 2 systems, one where you are notified (no doubt by an annoying nagging voice) that you are speeding and 'advised' to slow down and one where you are physically stopped from going any faster. Suggestions that such a system already exists and is called The Mother in Law have been made but we could not possibly comment.

TfL, however, believes ISA has several benefits, including a lower chance of speeding tickets, an associated reduction in CO2 and fuel costs and - 'improved driver style'

I wonder whether this sort of system could be extended? How about Burglars have a chip put in their arm and if they try to enter your house they are physically stopped by an electric shock...... but of course we couldn't do that because it is against human rights.

If you have any questions you can call or email us for a FREE initial advice - visit our website at http://www.motoringlawyersonline.com

I read an interesting survey today that said only 12% of over 2000 people questioned could correctly identify 8 road signs.

Even more staggering was that 67% did not recognise the signal for a zebra crossing and 15% did not know the national speed limit!

This of course has a huge impact on motoring offences and speeding tickets. The government tell us repeatedly that their priority is safer driving and yet no resources are used to ensure drivers are aware of the signals.

We take a test, which in my day consisted of the examiner showing you a couple of signs and if you didn't get them right he would show a few more until you did. After that test there is no further education, no need for a refresher, no adverts, no information sent through with your licence, nothing. We are expected to remember all that we were taught, sometimes over 20 years ago.

Motorists are keen to keep up to date with this knowledge, in the same report 40% of motorists wanted to see more speed signs to help them keep within the speed limit.

If the government is serious about the speed limits being for road safety and not to generate cash then they should do more to make it easy to keep up to date with the law.

If you have any questions you can call or email us for a FREE initial advice - visit our website at http://www.motoringlawyersonline.com

Not suggesting this is the best way to deal with speeding tickets!

This guy goes crazy driving through corridors into offices at high speed.

We reckon he got more than a speeding ticket after this!!!

http://tinyurl.com/ppbfko


If you have any questions you can call or email us for a FREE initial advice - visit our website at http://www.motoringlawyersonline.com

In April 2007 the Government introduced a controversial scheme - the Victim surcharge.

This meant that anyone who was fined in court also had to pay an extra £15 towards a fund for victims.

This was seen by many as an unfair 'tax' - the majority of crimes where there is a direct victim, for example burglary, assault etc are too serious to be dealt with by way of a fine.

Fines are for the less serious offences and as usual motorists fell into this category. So someone appearing in court for driving at 76 on the motorway would also have to pay £15 for the victims fund, someone who broke into an elderly persons home and stole their life savings would be exempt from paying into the victims fund!! Fair? We know where motorists are concerned fair is rarely an appropriate word.

The good news was that motorists who paid a fixed penalty were exempt from this. Until now.

A Ministry of Justice spokesman said: "The surcharge has, to date, been applied only to fines, at a rate of £15. The Government is considering whether to extend the surcharge to certain types of penalty notices and other court disposals."

So it looks like the motorist will be funding the victim surcharge even more!

If you have any questions you can call or email us for a FREE initial advice - visit our website at http://www.motoringlawyersonline.com