# Letter from a far away town council telling me that my car involved with littering!



## pansyflower (14 Mar 2010)

On Friday I got a letter from a far away town council telling me that my car had been involved in a litter offence, and that in order to avoid prosecution I must pay a fine. I was hundreds of miles away at the time, in the presence of independent witnesses, and I am of the belief that my car was in a multistory not far away from me.

I rang the phone number provided and a very nice lady advised that I write to the Authority and visit the local guards as a back-up, which I am in the process of doing.

Any other ideas?


----------



## mathepac (14 Mar 2010)

*Re: Mistaken identity*



pansyflower said:


> ...I was hundreds of miles away at the time, in the presence of independent witnesses, and I am of the belief that my car was in a multistory not far away from me...


What does this mean? Either you know where your car was at the time of the alleged offence and have some supporting evidence, or you don't and haven't. Which is it?


----------



## pansyflower (14 Mar 2010)

*Re: Mistaken identity*

I parked my car and when I returned some hours later it was where I had left it. I have no supporting evidence that it was unmoved but given the timescale involved there wouldn't have been time for someone to break in, drive the distance, throw womething out the window and then return to the carpark. The keys were in my possession. So, as I said, I am of the belief that my car was not involved.


----------



## ajapale (14 Mar 2010)

*Re: Letter from a far away town council telling me that my car involved with litterin*

Hi pansy, why so convoluted? Your car was parked up miles away. aj


----------



## pansyflower (14 Mar 2010)

*Re: Letter from a far away town council telling me that my car involved with litterin*



> why so convoluted?


Because 


> What does this mean?


 
I'll get me coat!!


----------



## SparkRite (14 Mar 2010)

*Re: Mistaken identity*



mathepac said:


> What does this mean? Either you know where your car was at the time of the alleged offence and have some supporting evidence, or you don't and haven't. Which is it?



Dear God!!

So speaks Judge Mathpac. Explain yourself Pansy.

Look Pansy if you didn't do it,then so be it, you didn't do it.

Thank God it is still the case, you are innocent until proven guilty,ask the local authority for their evidence, if it is not forthcoming then seek a "Gary Doyle" order via the District court, to get their "evidence"

A lot of hassle, I know, but if you are accused, then what else can you do?


----------



## allthedoyles (14 Mar 2010)

*Re: Letter from a far away town council telling me that my car involved with litterin*

You need to pay the fine , which is probably € 125 , otherwise you will be prosecuted .

You were 100's of miles away when you received the letter which is fine .

Check the date of the letter from your local authority and you will probably find that your car was involved in a litter offence on that day.

It is likely that your registration plate was recorded on CCTV .


----------



## SparkRite (14 Mar 2010)

*Re: Letter from a far away town council telling me that my car involved with litterin*



allthedoyles said:


> You were 100's of miles away when you received the letter which is fine .



I understood that he was hundreds of miles away at the time of the  alledged offence.


----------



## pansyflower (14 Mar 2010)

*Re: Letter from a far away town council telling me that my car involved with litterin*



> You were 100's of miles away when you received the letter which is fine .


 


Gosh, I must learn to be more precise - or should that be convoluted?

I was hundreds of miles away when the offence was committed, as well as being far away when I received the letter.


----------



## Brendan Burgess (14 Mar 2010)

*Re: Letter from a far away town council telling me that my car involved with litterin*



pansyflower said:


> On Friday I got a letter from a far away town council telling me that my car had been involved in a litter offence,
> 
> ...
> 
> Any other ideas?



Just scrunch up the letter and throw it out the window.


----------



## SparkRite (14 Mar 2010)

*Re: Letter from a far away town council telling me that my car involved with litterin*



Brendan said:


> Just scrunch up the letter and throw it out the window.



I agree, at least then you would feel justified, when you pay your fine.


----------



## Sansan (14 Mar 2010)

*Re: Letter from a far away town council telling me that my car involved with litterin*

If you parked in a multi story car park do you have the ticket, I know the ticket won't have your reg on it but tell the council to ring the car park and CCTV will show your entrance and exit times, let the council do the donkey work and check it out


----------



## BOXtheFOX (15 Mar 2010)

*Re: Letter from a far away town council telling me that my car involved with litterin*



pansyflower said:


> as well as being far away when I received the letter.


 
So you weren't at home when you got the letter?


----------



## Leo (15 Mar 2010)

*Re: Letter from a far away town council telling me that my car involved with litterin*



Sansan said:


> If you parked in a multi story car park do you have the ticket, I know the ticket won't have your reg on it but tell the council to ring the car park and CCTV will show your entrance and exit times, let the council do the donkey work and check it out


 
What multi-story gives you the ticket back once you've entered it in the machine to exit?


----------



## mosstown (15 Mar 2010)

*Re: Letter from a far away town council telling me that my car involved with litterin*

ask them for photographic evidence ?


----------



## galwegian44 (15 Mar 2010)

*Re: Letter from a far away town council telling me that my car involved with litterin*

I wouldn't scrunch up the letter pansyflower but I wouldn't pay the fine either. I got a similar letter from a distant City Council but it was for a parking offence. 

I wrote them an email explaining that I lived hundreds of miles aways, was at work at the time (approx. 11:00AM on a Tuesday morning) and could provide a letter from my employer substantiating that claim if necessary. Surprisingly, they thanked me for my letter and eventually responded to me by saying the matter was dropped.

http://www.askaboutmoney.com/showthread.php?t=124079 

Just give them a call and explain to them and I'm sure they will be reasonable about it.

Good Luck.



pansyflower said:


> On Friday I got a letter from a far away town council telling me that my car had been involved in a litter offence, and that in order to avoid prosecution I must pay a fine. I was hundreds of miles away at the time, in the presence of independent witnesses, and I am of the belief that my car was in a multistory not far away from me.
> 
> I rang the phone number provided and a very nice lady advised that I write to the Authority and visit the local guards as a back-up, which I am in the process of doing.
> 
> Any other ideas?


----------



## Sue Ellen (15 Mar 2010)

*Re: Letter from a far away town council telling me that my car involved with litterin*



pansyflower said:


> *I rang the phone number provided* and a very nice lady advised that I write to the Authority and visit the local guards as a back-up, which I am in the process of doing.





galwegian44 said:


> Just *give them a call* and explain to them and I'm sure they will be reasonable about it.



Always best to put things in writing.


----------



## pansyflower (4 Jun 2010)

_Update_. Result....I got a letter from Outpatients backing up my alibi and forwarded it to Youghal Town Council. 
I received written confirmation [yesterday] that the fine had been cancelled which included an apology for the delay in replying. 
Yowzah!!


----------



## Welfarite (5 Jun 2010)

Much ado about nothing, methinks!


----------



## pansyflower (5 Jun 2010)

> nothing,


 
Well, no €180 payout, no court appearance, so I'm happy.


----------



## Sue Ellen (5 Jun 2010)

pansyflower said:


> Well, no €180 payout, no court appearance, so I'm happy.



Well done.


----------



## pudds (5 Jun 2010)

> ask the local authority for their evidence, if it is not forthcoming  then seek a "Gary Doyle" order via the District court, to get their  "evidence"



what da hell is a 'Gary Doyle' may I ask


----------



## Tinker Bell (5 Jun 2010)

How about claiming expenses for (a) stress, (b) labour costs for writing plus postage and also asking for the 'proof' that they had, so that the little toerag that inputted your number wrongly can be brought to book.


----------



## Crugers (6 Jun 2010)

pudds said:


> what da hell is a 'Gary Doyle' may I ask


*Summary Prosecutions*

9.6 The scope of the duty of disclosure in summary prosecutions has been defined by the Supreme Court in _Director of Public Prosecutions v. Gary Doyle_ [1994] 2 IR 286. In the light of that judgment the following principles should be observed by the prosecution:

there is no general duty on the prosecution in a summary case to furnish in advance the statements of intended witnesses whether or not there is a request for them from the defence. However, if there is some reason arising from the particular circumstances of a case why advance disclosure of the details of the case, whether by furnishing statements or otherwise, is necessary in the interest of justice, this should be done whether or not there is a request;
the test to be applied by a court on an application by the defence to be furnished pre-trial with the statements on which the prosecution case will proceed is whether "_in the interests of justice on the facts of the particular case_" this should be done (_Gary Doyle_'s case, at p.301). The requirements of justice must be considered in relation to the seriousness of the charge and the consequences for the accused. Very minor cases may not require that statements be furnished. Complexity of the case is also a factor. Amongst the matters which the Supreme Court in _Gary Doyle_ identified as possibly relevant to the court's decision were:
"(a)_ the seriousness of the charge;_
_(b) the importance of the statements or documents;_
_(c) the fact that the accused has already been adequately informed of the nature and substance of the accusation;_
_(d) the likelihood that there is no risk of injustice in failing to furnish the statements or documents in issue to the accused."_​(_Gary Doyle_'s case, at p.302);

in making a decision whether to furnish statements the prosecutor should have regard to the principles set out in _Gary Doyle_'s case and referred to above;
a request for statements made by the defence should be considered in the context of the witnesses whom it is proposed to call at the trial and whether the _Gary Doyle_ principles require disclosure. It is primarily a matter for the defence, when requesting statements in summary cases, to advance the reason or reasons why the accused considers that statements should be furnished. If the defence does not advance any adequate reason for disclosure, and the case does not appear to be one where the _Gary Doyle_ principles require disclosure, then they need not be furnished without an order of the court;
statements or information not intended to be tendered at a summary trial should be furnished to the defence where it is necessary in the interest of justice. This should be done with or without a request. This includes statements or information which, even if the prosecutor does not regard them as reliable, might reasonably be regarded as of assistance to the defence;
while the _Gary Doyle_ case arose from indictable offences which were being dealt with summarily, the principles set out in that case are applicable to all offences being tried summarily.


----------



## haminka1 (6 Jun 2010)

I got a similar letter from Galway /lived in Dublin at the time and last time I'd been to Galway was seven years ago/ - called them, asked what it means and was told that it was a typo because the car in question was some 97 nissan primera /which i don't have/ and told to forget about it


----------

