Statutory declaration

[Rob_8567]

Although Northern say they can't respond to individual queries among the thousands, if this was SJP they may respond to you because you've applied to make the declaration.

Do you reckon I contact northern from the angle of gaining a settlement from the beginning or initially enquire to see if I am on the list through them?

 

[some bloke]

The list.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 4 Dec 2024 ==

If this was SJP you don't need a settlement - "nullity" means the proceedings were never valid in the first place and you get a refund.

 

[pedr]

I would suggest that if you're making a statutory declaration in front of a solicitor, you put in the 'why is this late' box on the form the date that you contacted the courts and name the court which set up an appointment to make the declaration in front of a magistrate but say that now you wish to make it earlier than that.

I believe you're meant to indicate the plea if the case began by Single Justice Procedure Notice, so you need to indicate somewhere/somehow that you intend to plead not guilty. You don't have to explain (though the actual reason is both a) that your position will be that the case was improperly brought and the proceedings were void and b) to give time to ask Northern if it would consider not proceeding with the case.)

If this was a Regulation of Railways Act case brought using the Single Justice Procedure Northern shouldn't request or require any payment or settlement because they chose the wrong process for prosecuting that offence.

 

[some bloke]

I can't see how a statutory declaration about SJP can be validly submitted where there was no valid SJP notice to begin with.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 4 Dec 2024 ==

The 1980 Act says the section applies if an SJP notice has been issued.

You could ask the court at an earlier stage,

"If there was no valid SJP notice, because Northern is not a "relevant prosecutor" for that offence via SJP, and/or because the offence alleged is "imprisonable", then can a statutory declaration really be applicable, or is the appropriate route a reopening through section 142(2) instead?"

"16E Accused not aware of single justice procedure notice...

(1)This section applies if—

(a) a single justice procedure notice has been issued"

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 4 Dec 2024 ==

I guess the court might say, if the proceedings haven't yet been declared a nullity, that the current position in law is that there was an SJPN.

But there doesn't seem a need to do anything about the declaration yet anyway.

 

[WesternLancer]

Hello, yes all a bit confusing now. HMCTS have refused to tell me if my case falls under the ones being quashed and advice I carry on with the SD. I received a digital copy of the SD today from the courts that I can get notarised. However I am now worried that 1) if I can even pull my SD now having showed interest in doing it - man from HMCTS reckoned the courts had accepted my intent to appeal. And 2) if I pull the SD would it give up any chance at reappearing it if I don’t get my case quashed with the rest.

I now wonder if it would be worth going the SD route, still trying for a settlement and perhaps knowing it was under an SJP northern would be more willing to take a settlement and get rid of my prosecution. Thanks for all the help everyone, a little lost on where to go now.

Thanks for your reply to my post #25. I see others have also posted helpful info for you since that point, albeit there seems to be some differing views on courses of action, esp ref the SD.

What I would say though is before you communicate with either the courts or railway company about any of this (including when following the advice people have posted) I would urge you to post a draft of what you want to say so that people here can help you get the wording right.

Like all official organisations, there will be a language and form of words that such organisations use and some people here will be fairly familiar with that language. Making use of that knowledge will help you get clear answers as this gets progressed.

I know there is an urgency to pursuing this for you, but you have time to allow 12 to 24 hours before sending stuff to allow it to be checked which I think can only be of help to you.

 

[Rob_8567]

Thanks for your reply to my post #25. I see others have also posted helpful info for you since that point, albeit there seems to be some differing views on courses of action, esp ref the SD.

What I would say though is before you communicate with either the courts or railway company about any of this (including when following the advice people have posted) I would urge you to post a draft of what you want to say so that people here can help you get the wording right.

Like all official organisations, there will be a language and form of words that such organisations use and some people here will be fairly familiar with that language. Making use of that knowledge will help you get clear answers as this gets progressed.

I know there is an urgency to pursuing this for you, but you have time to allow 12 to 24 hours before sending stuff to allow it to be checked which I think can only be of help to do so.

So far I have emailed northerns debt company to ask if my case falls under those being investigated to be quashed. I have also emailed the courts asking for all correspondence to this point, I also asked them if my case falls under those being investigated. Will run anything further through the forum. Thank you.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 4 Dec 2024 ==

Hi so minor update. I have been sent the single justice procedure notice that was sent in July but never received. The charge is
“on request by an officer or servant of the railway company, to produce and deliver up a ticket showing that your fare was paid or to pay the fare. Contrary to S.5(1) of the Regulation
of Railways Act 1889”. Upon further reading the officer has taken my address wrong by two letters in the post code. As I recall he was struggling with the drop down menu and couldn’t find it so I wonder if a wrong one has been selected. All other details are correct.

 

[KirkstallOne]

I presume this is July 2023 that it was originally sent?

 

[Rob_8567]

I presume this is July 2023 that it was originally sent?

Yes it is

 

[KirkstallOne]

Ok it is all pointing towards this being one of the cases quashed last Thursday. Keep us posted as things progress - I think we are all curious what the letter you are probably going to be sent will say!

 

[Rob_8567]

Ok it is all pointing towards this being one of the cases quashed last Thursday. Keep us posted as things progress - I think we are all curious what the letter you are probably going to be sent will say!

Fingers crossed! Talking with a solicitor now so that I’m ready in case I have to go SD route and try get a settlement. But ultimately waiting on northern to reply and enlighten me as to whether there is even a case to fight. Will keep you informed.

 

[some bloke]

HMCTS have refused to tell me if my case falls under the ones being quashed

the officer has taken my address wrong by two letters in the post code.

Just to be sure - did you correct the postcode via the phone number on the government web page?

Talking with a solicitor now so that I’m ready in case I have to go SD route and try get a settlement. But ultimately waiting on northern to reply and enlighten me as to whether there is even a case to fight.

As far as I can see, the position is this:

In paragraph 60 of his decision on the test cases for the SJP error, the Chief Magistrate wrote that the original charges were invalid.

Northern Trains Limited -v- Ballington, Wylie and Cooke and Greater Anglia -v- Baggaley and others - Courts and Tribunals Judiciary

In the Westminster Magistrates’ Court 15 August 2024 Before:Senior District Judge Goldspring(Chief Magistrate)For England and Wales Between:Northern Trains Limited-v-Mark BallingtonJade Wylie Northern Trains Limited-v-Sarah Cooke Greater Anglia-v-Joshua BaggaleyPaul JenkinsSarah McKenzie

www.judiciary.uk

So there are no charges which a train company can revive after a statutory declaration (even if a declaration could have effect - see above). There is no case to reopen.

It's highly unlikely that any other decision by a magistrates' court will have ruled, or will rule, differently on that point. The test cases were meant to decide the approach for other cases.

Also, Northern couldn't start a new prosecution against you for any of the usual ticketing offences even if they wanted to, because it is more than six months after the incident.

There is, and will be, no case to settle or fight.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 5 Dec 2024 ==

In the case linked to above, the person had an appointment to make the declaration at court, and the company instead used the section 142(2) reopening route.

got to the court was only in there for 30 seconds (it's so official and very nerve racking) they checked my details and northan applied for a section 142 and it was accepted the conviction is now gone away same with any fines.

The companies and court service are trying to make sure all the convictions are quashed and money refunded.

If by chance your case isn't in the list, it's easy for Northern to sort it out as in the other case, and you wouldn't need to go to the court.

 

[Rob_8567]

For anyone interested I received news today from northern rails debt recovery that my case is being nullified at Westminster, and therefore do not need to attend court. This is following me signing the DC etc just in case. Thanks for all the help from everyone who commented. All the best.

 

[WesternLancer]

For anyone interested I received news today from northern rails debt recovery that my case is being nullified at Westminster, and therefore do not need to attend court. This is following me signing the DC etc just in case. Thanks for all the help from everyone who commented. All the best.

Thanks for taking the trouble to update - it is of interest as i don't think there have been any other cases on the forum like yours so helpful to see your experience. If there are any further updates you want to share in due course I'm sure people will be interested in seeing them.

best wishes