MACCLESFIELD Silk Road/Mill Lane fixed RED LIGHT CAMERA.

How To Get Your Case Reopened in Magistrates Court
Reopening a Case in the Magistrates Court

The only standard practice method of setting aside a conviction is to appeal to the Crown Court, or if you were not aware that proceedings were happening you can make a statutory declaration.

On A Mobile? Click to Call Us or click HERE if on a PC/Laptop

Under Section 142 of the magistrates Court Act 1980, magistrates have the authority to get your case reopened in order to rectify an error.

This might be used if you have missed a stage in the case proceedings, or if you have been found guilty and convicted in your absence.

It might for example be possible for a Magistrate to re-open your case if you have an insurance certificate that provides insurance cover for you in relation to an alleged offence but you weren’t able to provide it to the Court when you were originally convicted, either because it wasn’t possible to get hold of a copy or you were not present for that stage of the court proceedings.

Magistrates are required to act on proper judicial grounds in deciding if it is the interests of Justice for the case to be re-opened to allow for the error or mistake to be amended. This is a general power to amend errors and mistakes.

As soon as you become aware that a mistake has been made you should make an application as a matter of urgency. The less delay in making an application under Section 142 the more likely it is to be successful.

If you wish to request the Magistrates to use their powers under Section 142 to re-open your case you will need to speak to the Court Listings Department so that you can attend Court and make an application.

There isn’t an application form for the request, instead you will go before the Magistrates and outline the circumstances of the mistake that you believe has been made. This is your opportunity to persuade the Court that they should re-open the case in the interests of Justice.

Driver Vehicle and Licensing Agency
Complaints team
Longview Road
Morriston
Swansea
SA6 7JL
__________________



REF: A116943/D31611908.

Dear DVLA complaints, Ursula Harris,

I have checked the Government legislation website,

An endorsement for a MS90 - failure to give driver details cannot carry 0 points.

no matter how the court might assume that can go about giving points and disqualifications out.

the MS90 Conviction is a fixed 6 points. with no option for a magistrate to change the number of points.

With other endorsements, such as a SP30 there is option of number of points given 3-9 points.

If a endorsement is NOT given to the Driver, only a fine, the DVLA need NOT be contacted at all.

The DVLA are only contacted if POINTS are given to a driver.

There is no TS10 traffic light endorsement been applied to my driving licence from Crewe South Cheshire magistrates Court.

Only a MS90 and a disqualification. The Disqualification must be in relation to the MS90 and for it to carry genuine effective disqualification onto my driving licence it must carry the 6 points with it. no MS90 can exist with 0 points attributed to it. It is not within the Courts authority to issue any MS90 without 6 points. It is fixed as that only. or else if they are not to give the points, no endorsement is given at all.

As for you having no "Reason" to assume the court has, or would do something wrong.

The entire existence of a Complaints departments very purpose is the identification and investigation of "Things that are wrong" that is the whole point of complaining.

I do not see how you assume the role of the job is to "knock away" complaints as if the purpose of the complaints department is to "defend" the DVLA against things that are wrong.

My entire website is trying to get things put right that are wrong.

The Department of transport publish road sign manuals that give the correct road signage. I have bought these manuals which the government have published, inlculding the legislation that you operate by. As a Department of the Department of transport you are part of the organisation responsible for these manuals being followed.

When a road sign that is lawfully required to be in place for lawfull enforcement, has been done WRONG.. the traffic regulation order on the road is not enforceable.

By section .85 of the road traffic regulation act chapter 27. no court has the Authority to convict a driver on the road.

That COURT/ any and all courts of LAW have NO jurisdiction on the road to enforce.

It is not within the powers of the court to issue ANYTHING at all.
It is not a criminal matter. It is a civil matter. The police will not act when unlawfull road signs are reported. Yet they act when they are not allowed to in prosecutions when the road is not enforceable.
They can not pick and choose when to act and when not to.

Please listen to my explainations in these new videos.

In Civil proceedings there are rule .11 which is exemption from court jurisdiction.

in criminal proceedings there is not rule .11. mostly because the situation rarely would arise to contest court jurisdiction. Unless you were in a different "County" to the one being prosecuted in. Say just over the border into Lancashire, when being prosecuted incorrectly by West Yorkshire police.

That happened to me. A charge was dropped because I was Over the Border on a motorway in West Yorkshire and It was out of Jurisdiction of Greater Manchester.

Court jurisdiction is not limited to physical space but legal space as well.

When section .85 of the chapter 27 is relevent it is the court by LAW (not their decision powers) CANNOT convict a driver. IF the prescribed road signage/markings do not comply with the TSRGD & Traffic signs manuals.

That is the same for a TRO (Traffic regulation order) which also is required for enforcement.

Please see this newspaper story, very important.

Drivers were convicted on a road (A65) in Rawdon. the COUNCIL told the police, the drivers could not have been convicted. NO APPEALS WERE NEEDED. But even though the COUNCIL had reported it to the POLICE, the police kept saying they had not told them! and avoided the situation being dealt with for three years, until finally the drivers were refunded and points removed.


www.wharfedaleobserver.co.uk/news/1990095.legal_loophole_closed_after_fines_for_speeding_at_rawdon_are_refunded/

You must have record of this on your computer system. And that West Yorkshire Police removed the Points. It was not seperate appeals.

The Department of transport/Highways agency - your colleagues Govern the Main UK Trunk roads, Motorways and Highways of England. One of these is the A56 Haslingden bypass. I have 3 penalty points currently from that road Burnley Magistrates Court.

Part of that road is the responsibility of your colleagues in the Highways agency. And they have NOT disagreed with me about the road signage. Thus is is not for a Local council such as Rossendale council to "Report" the road to the Police. or East Lancashire council. It is the HIGHWAYS AGENCY who should report it. And you are a department of the highways agency.

I just dont think that you want to do it. Or the men you work with dont want to acknowledge it.

Now I need to go to work & drive. This is very important to me.

The Stop line at the Silk road Macclesfield is Not enforceable either. But according to your records on my driving licence KELLY706137RA9SA there is no TS10 traffic signal endorsement anyway. Only a MS90 for 0 points that cannot exist. and the disqualification.

True, if the Court can disqualify you for 6 months as an lone endorsement itself from no other endorsement.. fair enough.

But the MS90 cannot carry 0 points. if it is 0 points it has not been applied lawfully and is not enforceable. it is an error. and my driving licence should be returned to me.

If it is an MS90 then it must carry 6 points to be correct.

That is why I have contacted the F.O.I. department to get the rules & terms in detail of the points system rules & regulations.

If you are saying the only rules are the points system listed on the government website, then it specifically says that you can only have 6 points for an MS90. not 0.

I have questioned your staff over this, without mentioning the mistakes. & they have confirmed that the total number of points is supposed to be the TOTAL even through the disqualification until it has expired. not a total of 0 points - which mine currently shows.

And you can NOT have 0 points for an MS90.

There IS good reason to believe the court has or is doing something WRONG because I am reporting it to you!!!!!!!!!

How else could I or anyone inform you about it & make you aware!!!!!!!

That is the point!!!! Why would I be writing to you if I did not have genuine concern!!!!!!

Why am I doing an entire petitions website www.bentcop.biz?! because there is something WRONG and I am trying to get some action concerning it.

Why would anyone write to you to complain? Why do you insist on claiming people are lying or making it up?! this is serious it is peoples jobs and driving licences.

Once it has been identified that road signage is incoreect is is NOT within the power of the court to DO anything at all. And any communication by computer or otherwise from the Court, once you have been informed of the fact IS of your concern.

YOU ARE OPERATING THE FACILITY OF ENDORSEENTS ON DRIVING LICENCES!!!

I should not complain to a burger stand in cardigan bay, concerning a problem with unlawfull driving licence endorsements!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Or a handbag shop in Newport!!!!!

I have serious national complaint about MULTIPLE COURTS ACROSS THE UNITED KINGDOM ISSUING UNLAWFULL POINTS ON THE DRIVING LICENCES OF UK DRIVERS WHERE IT WAS NOT WITHIN THE POWER OF THE COURTS TO DO SO!!!!!!!!!!

There is NO OTHER PLACE ON THIS PLANET OTHER THAN THE DVLA WHO IS THE MORE CONCERNED, APPROPRIATE OR CORRECT DEPARTMENT & PLACE TO GIVE NOTICE TO OF THIS UNLAWFULL ACTIVITY.

YOU HAVE REASON TO BELIEVE ME AND INVESTIGATE IT BECAUSE I AM REPORTING IT TO YOU!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! what other purpose is there of the DVLA complaints department??!!!

The Police LED prosecutions (not the Crown Prosecution service) are mainly the culprit here (witholding information from the courts, when there is a lawful duty to disclose it) NOTE that it took 3 years for the Police to act even after Rawdon Council themselves complained (newspaper story attached)

The Police are doing the points unlawfully. They refuse to acknowledge it because they are not going to admit it and incriminate themselves!!!!! Dame Julie Moore has resigned from the parliamentary Ombudsman position!!

You CAN refuse to accept & record endorsements from any Court IF a driver can show evidence that the road signage does NOT comply with TSRGD & traffic signs manual. the COURT does NOT have the POWER of jurisdiction to APPLY them! that is the point of the legislation!!!! there is no powers. If you claim you have no reason to doubt or challenge the court, then I am sorry, but as a TAX PAYER, the complaints system you have is useless an not existing at all. its a pretend system to obstruct true complaints, This complaint is an absolutely relevent and exact complaint for the DVLA!!! you ARE the department of driving licence points!!!! who else?! a court does not decide if it has jurisdiction or not!!! that is the entire point. It is NOT ALLOWED to decide on the matter. If it CAN then why would the legislation be WRITTEN to say it CANNOT!

As the court has convicted MANY drivers already at this & other roads. My reason for claiming they refuse to acknowledge it, is because they do not want responsibility for past mistakes. Same goes for the Police as well. And, unfortunately yourselves the DVLA.

This cannot go on. Someone has to act to stop this unlawfull convicting of drivers. There is no reason why you should not want to examine the evidence, or support my complaint. And I do not accept that you cannot act. You just dont want to. And that goes for the Chief executive as well. If you simply "dont understand" my complaint then I do not believe that you should be employed to represent the TAX payers DVLA licencing complaints department.

As a TAX payer who funds your department. If I identify that a LARGE NUMBER of licences have been endorsed unlawfully, at 1, 2 or 3 or more roads stated... and I provide evidence that the road signage is not lawfull. It IS a serious matter for you to act and notify the local council highways department and/or Highways agency Colleagues of the Road. And in relation to the M66/A56 haslingden, the Highways agency have agreed with my road signage evaluations. Because they cannot disagree when the manual is correct. Only attempt to avoid the situation as you are doing. and as West Yorkshire police did try to avoid it in the Rawdon Council story (attached) You are doing what the police were doinbg for 3 years in that story. Refusing to do anything, when you can do something.

Please see my new video explainations (contains no strong language)

youtu.be/ro-hu4vfDF4

youtu.be/hi5R9lsXpbI

youtu.be/Inn-Ta_i27o

Yours sincerely
Mr __________


additional letter attachments


What would be the purpose, or USE of a complaints department, that no reason to believe any of the complaints it was getting, or acting on them.

Complaints regarding ANYTHING to do with

1. Driving Licences

2. Endorsements on driving licences

ARE EXACTLY TO BE SENT TO THE DVLA (& yes courts)

But to who else?!

Not to the Minister for recreation and media.

Not to a Fish Shop in Edinburgh

Not to a swimming pool in Lincoln

Not to an ice cream parlour in Birmingham.

THIS IS A SERIOUS NATIONAL COMPLAINT ABOUT MULTIPLE DRIVING LICENCES AND THEIR UNLAWFULL ENDORSEMENT BY COURTS ACROSS THE UK. CONCERNING A LARGE NUMBER OF DRIVERS!

To whom else would it be sent to other than the department of driving licences and endorsements!!!!!

Why would I lie about it?

You are Paid by the Tax Payer to believe every single complaint as 100% the truth with complete investigation and action. That is why you are there, not to play tennis with complaints !! I am paying your wages!!

No wonder people get angry!

Now if The Chief Executive does not act then the drivers are doomed.

The Wharfedale observer story is ENOUGH evidence to the Chief executive that multiple drivers WERE and HAVE been convicted unlawfully and that no appeals were required.

It is a CIVIL exemption from jurisdiction where all endorsements are removed automatically.

No Magistrates court or Crown court needs appealing to. it is outside ALL courts jurisdiction. they HAD no jurisdiction.

evidence in the story, with NO LIES, or else the newspaper are lying.. STATES that the POlice REFUSED the COUNCIL for 3 years, DENYING that they had been told about it, more evidence the police have been lying.

Now if you are going to side with the police and protect them. fair enough. But dont pretend you are not doing. And claim not to be able to act. You have equal AUTHORITY to any COURT, POLICE or COUNCIL to remove the points, based on the evidence presented. The Police Chief has equal power to delete the points.

So you please* check your computer and find out WHOM removed the Rawdon A65 points, on the system. - See story for date & details.

And if it was the Chief Police officer who removed the points, then it was NOT a Court. Thus a court does NOT only have the authority.

And if it was the chief police officer or Ticket office, as they are only the "prosecution" - If they have authority to remove the points based on evaluation of evidence, then the DEpartment of transport also has the authority to remove the points as well as the DVLA.

ANYONE can remove them immediately as soon as they have been NOTIFIED, told, given notice and provided evidence that the COURT had no jurisdiction.

Or how else would the Police Chief be able to remove them?
He/she only has authority to do so, because they have access to the database that you pointed out in your previous letter. You also have access to the database.

And on the premise that you DO have access to the system.
On that basis alone -

By the LAW of the road traffic regulation act chapter .85 section 27
once evidence has been given to "Any person" whom has access to such a system (DVLA/Police chief) whom is not a court, can evaluate the evidence and invoke the legislation and say that....

"The Court has no jurisdiction on this road, between these dates"

Period.

That is the truth & fact of the matter & I strongly request that you investigate this matter, as I am paying for this departments funding, along with all the other drivers.

I BELIEVE THESE STATEMENTS TO BE TRUE TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE & ABILITY. I suffer no legal disabilities.

Yours sincerely signed.
Mr _______


Listen.

Anyone can do Plumbing work. You can pay a plumber, or you can do it yourself.

You do not need to be a police officer to do police work. You can do your own. I have done my own private police work. Becaquse the police have failed to and refuse to do it. Mostly because it is the Police who are being investigated! How else?

How do I do police work? I follow the LAW, legislation. It tells me what is an criminal offence. who should I investigate, for what.

The police are the "official" police force but they are only supposed to do what the law & legislation states.

They can not prosecute someone when it says they cant. (Well they CAN in action. but it is NOT lawfull. not right. not true. its actually illegal)

The "Official" police have the computer console to your database.
As do the Court.

If the Police Chief decides to "look at" evidence and "Choose" to accept a road is unlawfull, that is his personal choice.

He has command of the system & other officers. But he is supposed to obey the law.

He can Delate any court decision only because he has 1. access to the system. and 2. He chooses to look at & accept the evidence, and acknowledge the road evidence & Law.

No other reason.

The Court has access to the Database. They can only apply the LAW when the LAW says they can...

( they can still choose to, though by doing it unlawfully or illegally)

Either way, the system facilitates this.


Look....

You can cross a road. Look left & right.

You choose when to cross. you have access to your legs.


You can steal an apple. Or Pay for it.
You choose.

You follow the law that it is ilegal to steal.
So you dont steal. You pay for it.

You have access to the apple and your hands.
You can act.

The DVLA have access to the Penalty point database system.
You follow the Law.
You do not choose what to do. (apparently)..

You follow the law.

The LAW states that a driver CAN NOT *BE* (or have been) convicted of a speeding/road traffic offence IF the road does not comply with the requirements to give lawfull jurisdiction to that road for enforcement.

This is NOT a defence. its not about innocent or guilty.
The LEGISLATION STATES..

"CONVICTION CAN NOT BE DONE"
cannot have been done.
it is invalid.

Now you have access to the system equal to the police chief.
you can evaluate evidence and you abide by the LAW as well (when you choose to)

you HAVE authority by THE LAW. and nothing else, to remove unlawfull endorsed penalty points. in fact, they MUST BE REMOVED.

This is LAW.

Just like the COUNCIL & Highways agency are SUPPOSED to REMOVE any unlawfull road signage. which is classed as an obstruction to driving. This is the truth.

The 300mm national speed limit signs are NOT in the new TSRGD 2016 or any other manual. They are illegal. It is the TRUTH.

Why are they there then?
Well dont ask me! that is why I am doing my own police work to find out & I am reporting it to you.

No-one is choosing to do anything about it, just like the police choose not to in the Wharfedale observer story.. until 3 years later.

I have reason to believe that the REASON why the road signage is not lawfull in many of these instances is.... THAT THE GOVERNMENT & POLICE DESIRE TO GET MORE FINES & CONVICTIONS OUT OF DRIVERS.

Now you might not believe me.
You might not agree...

But I AM THE TAX PAYER. THIS IS THE DVLA COMPLAINTS.
You are the co-keeper of driving endorsements.
You DO have FACILITY and AUTHORITY to examine evidence and APPLY THE LAW.

The only reason your department exists is because it was CREATED.
driving licences EXIST. points exist.

You apply them. by LAW and REGULATION.

The LAW STATES that YOU** not just the COURT** CAN NOT APPLY A CONVICTION TO A DRIVING LICENCE IF THE ROAD IS NOT WITHIN THE JURISDICTION OF THE COURT.

Any communication sent from the COURT that is NOT LEGAL should NOT be acted upon.

ONCE IT HAS BEEN REPORTED TO YOU.

If you "Chose" not to contact the police or report it to the police... that is up to you.

You DO have Supporting LAW of the Road traffic act section .85 that states the driver can NOT be convicted thus you have NO LEGAL OBLIGATION to APPLY THE POINTS!

This is just like any other law.....

How about this one...

If a driver is still entitled to drive, he can still drive if a licence has been revoked, if he still has legal entitlement to.

That is one of your regulations.

If a Driver CAN NOT be convicted by LAW on a road where the road signage was NOT LAWFULL, then he never HAS been convicted!!!!!!!!!!!

It is in LAW the similar or SAME

As having your licence revoked, yet you are still lawfully entitled to drive.

The DVLA have revoked your licence for whatever reason. But you still have legal entitlement to drive.


The DVLA have endorsed you driving licence with a disqualification, yet by LAW you could not have been convicted of the offence!

Thus in TRUTH you are still entitled to drive!

No one is undertstanding or acknowleding this.

Please Please listen to the BBC 5 live programme, all of it, especially the end part.

You will hear the DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT STAFF MEMBER HIMSELF CONCUR THAT " I QUOTE"

IN TRUTH THEY HAVE NOT REALLY BEEN CONVICTED!!!!


HE SAYS IT!!!

PLEASE PLEASE MAKE CERTAIN THAT THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE AND COMPLAINT TEAM REVIEW THE FULL PROGRAMME

This is very important. to the whole country!!!!!!!! to everyone.

www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01r517y


As the Tax payer funding your complaints department, i require you to listen to this programme. concerning ALL uk drivers potentially who are effected by this.

The Gentleman states that drivers in truth have not been convicted.

He would not even been talking about it if there were not instances out there where this is the case! why are they even doing a programme about it??!!

Why would I make this up? there are programmes about it on the BBC even!!

the MS90 on my licence is in relation to an TS10. the TS10 is not lawfull as the stop line is NOT the proscribed size. I have given evidence of this. on my website & to you in video.

None of the Points on my driving licence have been applied lawfully. and I request that by law thay are removed. in fact you MUST remove them.

I am informing you of this, with supporting evidence that you are intelligent enough to evaluate. The Court is not the only authority with access to the system. The Police chief has access and control and is not a court. The DVLA can interpret the LAW and evaluate evidence. You can through complaints, look at evidence provided by the Tax payer and can agree with it. And you DO have lawfull authority to remove any conviction where the LAW states the court had no authority. Because the LAW GIVES YOU AUTHORITY and REMOVES the authority of the Court.

Any company folows legislation. A food producer has food regulations. It can refuse any MEAT if it does not comply with the LAW or regulations. even if it is in a contract with the supplier.

There will be a contract with the DVLA and courts somewhere that any endorsements made by the court must be done LAWFULLY.

I can guarantee you that contract exists somewhere.

That is what I am trying to find out from your F.O.I. department.

An email from them vanished the other day while I was reading it! thats why i am sending this by post as well.

Please obtain the contract between the DVLA and Court for me from the F.O.I. and have it posted to me please.

I want my driving licence returned & all these points removed. I am not lying. I have no reason to lie.

The Department of Transport staff on the BBC video stated that in truth the drivers have "Not really been endorsed"

It is official.

Ok.... So actually in the program he says "really they are not guilty"

Not "really they have not been convicted"

That is just my interpretation of what he said.
But I am correct to say my statement in terms of the legislation. So I quoted it wrong. But really if they are not guilty he is only saying that because of the legislation I am quoting section .85
So he is in fact basing his "they are not really guilty" statement on the legislation that says they "could not be convicted"