Loopholes? – as at December 2010
From time to time someone will discover a potential loophole that can assist you with a speeding case. These loopholes are often shaggy dog stories – with no basis in fact. Sometimes a loophole may exist and be useable for a few months until a higher court clarifies the matter and closes the loophole. We have summarised the four main loopholes below. Two are currently unusable (pending a judgement from the European Court) but the other two can often produce a favourable result.
Loophole #1 – Section 172 conflicts with PACE
The main loophole that people have been exploiting is the Section 172 loophole. This loophole was exploiting an apparent conflict between the PACE (Police and Criminal Evidence) rules where you must be cautioned first and the process of receiving a Notice of Intended Prosecution from a Gatso (or similar scamera) where you don’t get cautioned and just receive paperwork through the post. This loophole has for now been closed following a ruling by the High Court in the case of Francis -v- DPP. This is being taken to the European courts but it is unlikely to get a hearing this year.
Loophole #2 – Conflicts with European Human Rights Laws
Some people were also attempting to use European human rights legislation to make a case for not being forced to incriminate yourself by filling out paperwork effectively saying that you were breaking the law by speeding. Sadly the European court did not rule in favour and this potential loophole is dead.