The public is cautiously optimistic about the ruling, appreciating its potential to increase accountability among drivers while expressing concerns about existing legal loopholes and the risk of exploitation within the insurance system.

Supreme Court

Drivers

Insurance Companies

Legal System


---
###Welcome to /r/LegalAdviceUK
---


**To Posters (it is important you read this section)**

* *Tell us whether you're in England, Wales, Scotland, or NI as the laws in each are very different*

* If you need legal help, you should [always get a free consultation from a qualified Solicitor](https://reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/wiki/how_to_find_a_solicitor)

* We also encourage you to speak to [**Citizens Advice**](https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/), [**Shelter**](https://www.shelter.org.uk/), [**Acas**](https://www.acas.org.uk/), and [**other useful organisations**](https://reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/wiki/common_legal_resources)

* Comments may not be accurate or reliable, and following any advice on this subreddit is done at your own risk
    
* If you receive any private messages in response to your post, [please let the mods know](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FLegalAdviceUK&amp;subject=I received a PM)

**To Readers and Commenters**    

* All replies to OP must be *on-topic, helpful, and legally orientated*

* If you do not [follow the rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/about/rules/), you may be perma-banned without any further warning

* If you feel any replies are incorrect, explain why you believe they are incorrect

* Do not send or request any private messages for any reason

* Please report posts or comments which do not follow the rules

*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/LegalAdviceUK) if you have any questions or concerns.*

AutoModerator

Its fairly common.

3rd party insurance agreed to the damage
Your insurers offered hp hire car to you 

Payment was made hire car returned and now your insurers have the hire car bill, 3rd party dont want to pay that much. Your insurers want to take it to court under your name because its you who has the agreement. There's a high chance the 3rd party insurers will cave before court anyway, you need to do what you can to assist your insurers with this, dont drag it out.

roasty-duck

This is a credit hire claim. It's entirely normal for insurance claims where a replacement vehicle has been provided. 

Your gut is correct; credit hire is normally a lot more expensive than any other hiring process and that is well known in the industry. 

You filling out these forms does not necessarily mean that you'll need to attend Court (you might need to, but given liability was admitted your evidence, if any, will be around the hire car and what your need for it was - it won't be to do with the accident itself). The parties will be encouraged to settle the claim before a trial is necessary. 

Fill out the forms as requested and leave the work to your insurers/solicitors. You shouldn't ignore the requests at all. That could expose you to liability from your own insurers (it'll be in your policy that you must reasonably assist your insurers to recover associated losses).

HouseOnAHill12

Sounds like you got pushed onto an AMC (Accident Management Company). They have come under fire a lot in recent years as often they do not mitigate their costs as well as they should. For example a £25K bill for car hire for two months is insane. 

I'm not a big fan of AMCs due to this. They make a lot of their money by taking out expensive hire agreements and then getting "referral fees" from the companies, it's shady as hell and long term bad for the industry and prices for consumers. 

As for the underlying issue. Refer to your insurance company but the AMC or (Solicitors) should be taking action against the third party. However, check the agreement you agreed to as if the third party doesn't pay out or wins in court, you may be held liable for some of the costs.

Them taking action in your name is perfectly normal, this is how it works and you agreed to it. You'll need to fill in forms etc but it's extremely unlikely you'll need to go to court or do much except fill in forms. 

Note there will absolutely be a clause that if you do not assist you'll be liable for all the costs.

Defiant_Simple_6044

You've got to help where you can unfortunately,  sounds like an accident management company known for obscene charges. You would have agreed to their t&amp;c's, if you ignore you will more than likely be liable yourself.

carnage2006

I have been through precisely this, very many years ago. 

My hire car was at an elevated rate provided to me through a company acting with my insurers. The other insured contested the cost of the hire, and it went to court. 

I had to attend court and my insurers provided a very expensive barrister to represent me on the day. In the end only 50% of the hire fee was agreed after an extensive argument around how quickly I could have bought a replacement car by saving up while waiting for the settlement and thus minimising the liability for the 3rd party insured.

I expect you will need to attend court if the solicitors between the two companies cannot agree the hire cost. 

This is effectively a predatory hire cost designed to make money for your insurance or a party acting on their behalf.

I've been in a couple of non-fault car accidents since and leverage this experience by directly asking the 3rd party insurance to supply the hire car. They have always capitulated when  threatened with an "accident hire help company" - they would much rather provide a hire car at a minimum rate they can find to reduce their own liability. No arguments over hire costs or court dates this way.

cognitiveglitch

Give it to your insurance company, ignoring it is not an option.

Rugbylady1982

Yes they can start proceedings in your name and your insurance have the right to try and get the cost of the hire car from the other side. This is normal. 

If your insurance lose they are the ones who will pay so trust me when I say you should take the path of least resistance here and fill out the forums. I know it is overwhelming when everything going on in your life right now but this is all very ordinary. 

I’d check your terms and conditions of your insurance to see what may happen if you refuse to go to court. Sounds like they can fine you but not all insurance is the same. 

This is something I’ve experienced with a company car insurance claim where I needed a car to work, and like you I was on the hook for a lengthy credit hire period, exacerbated by to the length of time to get the claim settled as the at fault driver inadvertently gave incorrect details (subcontractor in a leased vehicle).

Essentially the other parties insurance company believed the claim was excessive, so like you it was my name on the court documents vs theirs, I had to provide proof the other vehicle in the household was unavailable, that I couldn’t afford to cough up the £12k myself instead of credit hire, that the company I work for didn’t have a spare vehicle etc.

My insurers sent a great solicitor who ran absolute rings around the other parties insurance company representative, I’d definitely talk to your insurer about this aspect.

Two factors really helped on the day in court, key factors to mitigate the cost were that I had taken a 2 week holiday during the finance hire period, and asked for the car to be returned and re delivered as it wasn’t needed, and at the end of the period I worked 500 miles away for 10 days and got the train instead, which I could prove, so again the hire vehicle was returned early.

We won, though the judge reduced the hire charge slightly, and awarded costs, again reduced.

I’ve never personally insured a company car since, and avoid car hire or courtesy cars like the plague..

velotout

Standard credit hire stuff.. it often costs more for the hire car than the vehicle let alone the repair cost.. I deal with this all the time the insurance drag their heels like it’s nobody’s business all while they are making hundreds of pounds extra a day

Select_Grocery_1667

Credit hire is a dodgy area. I had one a while back in October where my insurer wanted to give me a credit hire but also wanted me to sign on to say I was responsible if they couldn't get the charges back. As it was they wanted to give me a Nissan Qashqai at something like £600 a day. 

As the other party had admitted liability, I decided on the off chance to call their insurer and they thanked me hugely as they know they all rip each other off on credit hire and leave the claimant potentially with a liability. The 3rd party insurer took on the entire claim, arranged to repair my own vehicle and got me out an Audi RSQ7 instead, which was costing them only £180 a day instead of 600 for a Qashqai. In the 6 weeks or so it took, it had a much better car and saved them around £17,000.

Sometimes, when the other party has admitted liability in full, it's worth giving their own insurer a shot. Especially when you have the leverage of them potentially having a monster payout for credit hire hanging over them. 

It would be nice if these savings were given back in lower premiums, but you can bet it went to the shareholders instead.

GemballaRider

Look up the GTA hire rates matrix. If your hire bill is within those rates then your hire bill was fair and possibly cheaper than if you’d hired a car yourself to cover the period you were without your car. You can’t hire a car for £100 a week any more! 
If the rates are way out of line with the GTA matrix then put in a complaint to your insurer. 
If you block court proceedings then you will likely be liable for all costs. Typically if you lose you won’t then have to pay anything.

adambrads80

I actually had basically the same experience, someone went into the back of me , I had a hire car, their insurance said the loss of the use of my car is a an uninsured claim and they won’t pay the hire car damages.

My insurance said would you (me) be happy to go to court, I said yes the whole way through, ended up up being settled and I was told via email by my insurances lawyer.

So long story short you shouldn’t worry and just co operate with your insurers as the blame is all on the other party

sVapour93

This is very Common, but depending on the situation, will result in different outcomes. 

The Hire Car you used was a Ford Kuga, could it be described as a ‘like for like’ car. Similar to the car you had before the accident? Could you have used a smaller car for the interim? 

Did you sign a Waiver to agree to assist in recovering the Hire Car expenses and to Absorb all costs and legal expenses if they can’t recover it from the 3rd party? Did you speak to the 3rd party directly via a phone call at any point after the incident? Did you send all correspondence to your insurer from the 3rd party to deal with?

fthefrench

2 issues here. Is credit hire fair or right. Very arguable but too late to worry about in this case.

Insurer or their solicitors taking legal action in your name is the only way they can do it. After an accident there will eventually be an agreement as to who was at fault and that side has to pay the innocent party. Any further disputes also have to bet settled by those involved in the accident.

Neither insurer is directly responsible and therefore cannot pursue the other. Therefore you are the party claiming from the person at fault. However, you have a legal contract with your insurer that they will cover all your costs and recover any additional costs such as the hire car. Therefore insurer takes legal action in your name and does all the work etc. though you may be asked to give evidence etc.

Insurers effectively stand in your place at all stages of a claim as they are not legally responsible for anything that happened. The insurance contract allows them to act in your place and on your behalf so that you do not suffer the financial consequences.

Jezzamk2

Highly unlikely it will make it to court but on the small chance it does then you will have to attend. Similar thing happened to me and it was settled a couple of days before.

Desperate_Implement9

My last claim took nearly a year to resolve for similar reaaons. It was an open and shut no fault incident (car was hit and written off while parked, I wasn't even in it). Many months after I had been given a hire car, got paid out, got a new car etc I got a letter from a solicitor relating to court proceedings in my name, never had to do anything and a few weeks later it was all resolved. As others have said, as it's your claim, your hire agreement etc, it will be in you name, but that doesn't necessarily mean it's actually your problem.

TC801A

I also discovered a year ago how shitty (to everyone) the modern insurance “way” is.  It’s about the claims companies profits, not supporting the insured.  Mine involved 7 weeks of hire car before mine was finally considered both drivable and fixable (had been written off without anyone inspecting the car !) when they mysteriously suddenly discovered they did have a repairer nearer than 250 miles away.  The final solution took 4 days, and could have reduced the third party’s costs from 7 weeks to 1!  All the more stupid was that I’m fairly sure this all came about because they couldn’t distinguish between 2 towns with same name 200 + miles apart, despite having my postcode, and one being -upon-“insert name of river”. and the other being - under- river x.
Incompetent doesn’t begin to cover it.

AgeingMuso65

This is a **courtesy message** as your post is very long. An extremely long post will require a lot of time and effort for our posters to read and digest, and therefore this length **will** reduce the number of quality replies you are likely to receive. We ***strongly suggest*** that you edit your post to make it shorter and easier for our posters to read and understand. In particular, we'd suggest removing:

* Details of personal emotions and feelings
* Your opinions of other people and/or why you have those opinions
* Background information not directly relevant to your legal question
* Full copies of correspondence or contracts

Your post has **not** been removed and you are not breaking any rules, however you should note that as mentioned you will receive fewer useful replies if your post remains the length that it is, since many people will simply not be willing to read this much text, in detail or at all. 

If a large amount of detail and background is crucial to answering your question correctly, it is worth considering whether Reddit is an appropriate venue for seeking advice in the first instance. Our FAQ has a [guide to finding a good solicitor](https://www.reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/wiki/faq_civil#wiki_how_do_i_find_a_.28good.29_solicitor.3F) which you may find of use.

*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/LegalAdviceUK) if you have any questions or concerns.*

There is a chance that you did not speak to anyone representing your insurance and it was actually a spoofed telephone number. I would call your insurance first from a phone number directly off their website and not Google, asking if they have it reported and if they referees you to the companies involved. 

If you say which companies it is, it will also be fairly obvious whether it was a spoofed one or legitimate

josephRF

Pass all correspondence to your insurance company. Its for them to sort this out. The few times Ive dealt with a claim myself the first letter/email I received stated this exact thing. Do not reply yourself.

simonsmithsmith

If they're contesting this, there may be something else going on in the background.

It sounds as though it's a Credit Hire claim - insurance companies don't usually bother contesting small amounts of direct hire or use of a courtesy car.

If a Defence has been filed, it means you (or, a Solicitor acting on yours/your insurance company's/your credit hire provider's behalf) have issued Court proceedings.

You need to check *EXACTLY* what is being claimed for.

Credit Hire is the scourge of insurance claims. Most people don't even understand they're signing up for a Credit Hire vehicle - they just think it's a Courtesy Car but don't understand what's being given to them, or read the T&amp;Cs.

Check any/all paperwork given to you at the time you took the hire car.

If it is just a few hundred pounds like you say, it's highly unlikely it will go to Court - there would be little economic sense in defending that. However, if it's actually a Credit Hire claim for thousands, then be prepared to jump through all the hoops your Solicitor asks of you - otherwise you could end up on the hook for the charges yourself.

InfiniteAstronaut432

Did your insurance give you two options? One where you’d need to pay your excess and then claim it back from the at fault party, and another using their managed service where they do everything for you including sorting a hire car?

If the latter then yes this is a possibility. It’s more than likely the insurance companies will come to an arrangement before the court date, but not guaranteed.

Cultural-Ambition211

You'll probably find that your insurer didn't actually deal with your claim. Or at least the hire car element. 
It's likely that your insurer passed your details to a credit hire company to provide you with a like for like vehicle. 
They may also have referred your repairs out on a credit basis, but that is less common these days. They more likely repaired the vehicle themselves, and then rerated the invoice to make themselves some healthy profit from the repair. 
If your car hire claim is only a few hundred pounds, it is highly unlikely this will ever lead to litigation. 
I suspect what you are being asked are standard investigation questions from the third party insurers team that deals with credit hire. 
Don't worry about it, and speak to your insurer/credit hire company before responding to any questions.

Present-Dirt5758

Your insurer is probably subrogating costs back to the third party insurer and they are disputing it. This is pretty normal with hire claims. Just pass this back to your insurer to deal with

Source- underwriter that deals with hire claims

kaf678

I've been through this and it actually went as far as me going to court.

It sounds scary but it's not. You are not on trial, the people that provided the hire car &amp; your insurance company have to negotiate with the other parties insurance company about how much they are going to pay.

You won't have to pay anything. In the terms and conditions of the hire car you will have designed to say that you would appear as a witness if the other parties insurers went to court.

Just to add, it rarely gets to court but in my case it did. The heating took place in the judges offices, not a court room as such and both solicitors (the insurers will provide one) &amp; the judge have been through this scenario lots of times before.

Cooperate with your insurers and you'll be fine.

Tutis3

Pass anything you receive onto insurers they will respond accordingly or ask you for information to close gaps they dont have such as an MOT certificate

Ok_Brain_9264

If and only if your insurer is directly asking you to deal with this (not the third party insurer):

1. Ownership of my vehicle (no probs)
   1. As you said - no probs
2. Proof of why I needed a hire car (to get to work)
   1. This would be as simple as showing that the time you had the hire car was not significantly longer than the repair took - hoping this was not a same day repair, and you returned the courtesy car on the day repairs completed.
3. That I acted reasonably and the car was “like for like” (it was, but insurance provided it, I didn’t get to choose)
   1. List makes and models, with evidence, should be enough
4. To disclose a copy of my certificate of insurance (can the insurance company not just show them this?)
   1. Send it to them anyway - its not hard to do.
5. That I was “legitimately entitled to be on the public highway at the time” (wtf?)
   1. Copies of your driving licence and MOT
6. That I “should have utilised my comprehensive policy of insurance to get my vehicle repaired by one of their approved repairers and in so doing avail myself of a free courtesy vehicle” - this is EXACTLY what I did?
   1. The bill from the repair shop, and your policy document will cover this.

If third party has asked - just get your insurer to help out (bear in mind they might be the same company!)

puffinix

Always use the third party's insurance.


 You have a duty to mitigate your losses, and unfortunately using your own insurance company they don't do this, as they knows someone else will be paying. Hire cars are one of the ways they make money, so that's why the third party wants to be sure the charges are reasonable.


Contact your insurance company, and hopefully they'll come to an arrangement with the third party.

Mina_U290

You cant be guilty of defemation stating the truth. IF I it is unedited, you have nothing to worry about.

Chemboy77

If the police officer in the vid--I mean the unknown person making these calls--were serious about suing you, they wouldn't be anonymous. You can't sue anonymously for defamation.

This is not merely an intimidation attempt; it is an exceptionally sad and pathetic intimidation attempt.

ZT205

[deleted]

?Unknown Caller?  It is the police, some dumb officer is using police resources to run you down.  The next time your family members get a call from an unknown number respond "*Hello Officer, can I speak to your Chief over your threatening behavior. I'll wait or we you can hold on the line and I get TBI on the phone*".   

While you are waiting for the unknown number,  contact the Tennessee Bureau of Investigation at (615) 744-4530 and make a complaint about the officer in your video, for his behavior, AND that it apparent he is harassing you, or having others do it on his behalf.  Make sure you inform them that the State police is using their company phones to communicate threats. 

You video isn't defamation by any means. They are just trying to scare you.

MoutainGem

Truth is a defense against defamation. If you post the raw unedited footage and let everyone draw their own conclusions, that cannot be defamation.

Sad_Leg1091

Anyone can sue you. Whether or not they win is another story. If all you did is post a video of a traffic stop I wouldn't worry. What I would do is FOIA the body cam if the state trooper had one and put both videos online side by side that way there is no mistake that your video is genuine.

TheRiverInYou

Sounds like they're trying scare tactics because they can't win a defamation case if truth was shown.

Snapon29

she_makes_a_mess

They can sue, but they won't win (if the video is truly unedited). Anyone can sue in this country

princetonwu

SlideIll3915

People with a winning case don't threaten to sue, they just sue.

Striking_Computer834

Defamation suits have to show damage to a persons reputation or ability to function in society. Posting a video shouldn't violate any of those

soberscotsman80

This sounds like anti-slapp lawsuit, you should be fine even if you give opinion. It's not real until they sue or send actual cease and desist. If they do get an anti-slapp lawyer and chill

KellyDogDad

Post accounts or recordings of the calls as well. Post it all on the same social media and make sure it blows up. Post whatever info you have on the cop. Report it to his superiors.


Publicity is like the sanitizing rays of the sun. These bastards should be scared to conduct themselves this way. Make sure they feel the pain of their own actions being exposed.

Historical-Paper-992

Yes, you can be sued. Whether or not that suit is successful is a different issue.

There’s a lawsuit happening near me where some douchebag went on a racist tirade dropping racial slurs and everything. He lost everything and is now suing anyone involved in the recording of that video. They, too, made no claims about the person other than merely posting a video of his actions. It doesn’t matter as they’re all having to hire lawyers now to defend the suit.

VeiledShift

Defamation means you lied about something. 

Troopers are “public figures” as well. You did nothing wrong.

beyoncedoritosJR

Tennessee is a single party consent state. Meaning you can record anyone at any time with or without their knowledge. It's also a freedom of speech situation as you were out in public. They won't have much of a case.

Smoke_Water

This may be splitting hairs here, since the video in question is not linked. But if you added “funny sounds” to the video, it’s edited and certainly not raw. What were the sounds you added? Was it a sound effect? Did it/they cover or obscure any other audible sounds present in the raw video? Were they added over the incident itself, or were they added elsewhere, perhaps during commentary you made as you were introducing the video? Raw video means completely unaltered. Even video that is adjusted for lighting is noted as such so as not to question the credibility of the source. 

Again, this may be moot. But without seeing the video, I would question the need to add sound effects, leading me to question what else may have been done.

Videoroadie

If no one has mentioned it deeper in the comments, it’s important to remember that the police are public officials, and this trooper was in public, engaged in his official duties.  

The government doesn’t have any rights at all, much less a right to privacy in its official capacities.

Spuckler_Cletus

Aggressive state-backed bully asshole trying to intimidate you.  Behavior fully consistent with what you experienced during your traffic stop.


Hope you are recording the calls.  They can be traced.

SpiritAnimal_

Just let him know you’ve forwarded the video to the civil rights lawyer on YouTube

roadblocked

Insert standard blanket that anyone can sue for anything. 

If you posted the unedited video *without comment* then they shouldn't be able to *successfully* sue you. But if your comments along with the post include statements like "this abusive cop pulled me over" then there is room for interpretation. Just on that example, a single aggressive traffic stop does not show a pattern of abuse that would warrant calling him abusive.

96firephoenix

I would add to your video you know what since I’ve posted this video. I’ve suddenly started to get creepy calls that I’ll be sued if I don’t take this unedited video of a police stop down. I’m very worried and thinking about hiring an attorney or sending this to the attorney general of my state

me123456777

Honestly you could possibly sue for retaliation

UrbanFarmer213

The thing/problem here is if the suit is successful. It will probably be thrown out because it's not defamation if it's true, but it is one person of the law (cop) making another person if law (lawyer probably) sue OP. Since the guy is a cop, a person of the law, they can try to use that power of a cop to push the lawsuit through anyway. They know they don't have a case and they will lose, but by having the case go through, OP is still going to have to pay lawyer and court fees. Even if OP easily wins, they still lose as well by losing money because of those fees this cop will force upon them by having them have to show up to court. Even if the cop loses, they still have some sort of victory against OP in the end. The case may not go through, but in the chance that it does, I would ask my lawyer about any way we can countersue for that money we lost via fees back from the cop in our own lawsuit after we're done with the cop's.

Haunting_Bandicoot_4

Post a link here and see if it goes viral

piltdownman38

baddeafboy

Kinda fucked up they're trying to intimidate you into deleting fully legal evidence, but it's also kinda funny like what does this genius think that 'anonymously' calling protects

advancedSlayer96

If they're making threats, then the District/States Attorney can pursue it, potentially FBI.

Even in this age, there's no such thing as a true anonymous call.

theShinjoDun

Truth is an absolute defense; unless you edit the video to show something other than what happened or otherwise misrepresent what it shows, you should be good in the eyes of the law. 

That said, we’re talking about not just American police, but American police in Tennessee. So a defamation lawsuit isn’t the only option on the table for them. The fact that they’re calling your family seems to be a hint.

Rogueshoten

NOT A LAWYER  Let the anonymous coward sue you.   If the vid is raw/unedited you've done nothing wrong.  The caller has no grounds and is simply trying to scare you.  The caller is likely the trooper, and could perhaps be fired for intimidation, so the likelihood of him suing you is probably pretty slim

Elegant-Ad2237

Pro tip . . . Lawyers aren't going to call up random family members and threaten to sue their relatives as an alternative to an actual demand letter.  Whoever is harassing you does not appear to understand how any of this actually works.

Physical_Drive_349

Seems like you’re being harassed and intimidated.  Record that and show it to an attorney.

downcastbass

Anyone can sue anybody at anytime for anything… doesn’t mean they will win.

MinnSnowMan

Let the calls go to voicemail so that you have a record. Then publish them.

Dexter_McThorpan

If it is JUST the video, with no written or verbal additions by YOU or anyone involved in the incident, you cannot be sued for defamation. 

Defamation requires written or spoken FALSE statements which damage the reputation or character. 

Keep the video up, state ONLY facts (date, time, location, involved persons’ names, agency, etc) and you cannot be sued.

Aegri-Mentis

Extreme_Environment8

I kinda want to see this video now... got a link to where you've posted it?

Extreme-Book4730

trying to scare you to take it down post the link here for more veiws

Particular_Owl_8029

Hmm, you don’t happen to be around Harriman in East TN, do you?

Kostasii

OffMyRockerToday

Have they called you personally? Or just family as you mentioned. Because if you haven't directly received these calls, id question the legitimacy of the claim. After all, this isn't defamation.

shoosh14

Block unknown calls from going through. Make them use their real number. But you are good. There is no expectation of privacy in public

DereLickenMyBalls

Adding sound effects is literally editing. You probably don't have anything to worry about but that you're so actively trying to dismiss the fact that you did in fact edit it, combined with your description of the event leads me to believe you did so in an effort to humiliate or otherwise denigrate the officer. I suppose if you really are sued (which seems unlikely) it would be up to the judge to decide how successful you were in that attempt, and whether it rises to defamation (which also seems unlikely but INAL).

machine_six

I missed a speeding fine, never got delivered to my house. Got the summons to appear in court. Went without a lawyer, explained the truth that I never got the original fine or else I would have paid it, told the judge it was me in the car driving, my car in the picture, I would have paid the fine if I had got it. 
Judge accepted my explanation and I had to pay a fine to the poor box. The Garda in question didn’t turn up to court that day and I didn’t get points.

roxykelly

No harm in engaging a local solicitor who can advise you as to what the local judge's attitude would likely be to the circumstances you've outlined re the FCPN

O_Duill

This happened to me earlier this year, I went up and got speaking to a solicitor in there and he sent me home cause it was my second trip up as I didn’t get seen the first day and was made wait around all day with a newborn baby. He represented me and it got thrown out

Grouchy-Pea2514

If you say you never personally got the fine, some judges would strike it out. If you're convicted and fined it will probably be for a modest amount more than the original fine.

The 5 points is the killer, you should be fighting hard with every means to avoid. I was in recently for very similar missed circumstances. There were loads of speeding offences,  judge was medium strict on fines,  but everyone got the points .

I and a few others got struck out because one Garda did not show.

gmankev

A court summons has to be served to the person directly and the person serving must provide proof to the judge (Proof of Service ). All information on it has to be correct.

It should not have been left there for your previous landlord to sort out. As you got the fine last July I would get more legal advice to make sure or contact a solicitor. I would also update the NDLS of my current address.

the1minz

A Supreme Court ruling defines negligence by drivers, enhancing compensation for accident victims and holding drivers accountable.

Supreme Court Ruling on Negligence in Road Accidents

Why This Matters

Public Sentiment Summary

Highlighted Comments

Parties Involved

What the people want