Quote:
|
Originally Posted by me283
OK, I see your point. But if it's a civil offence, why are they quoting the Act?
|
Because that is what you are breaching. I recieved a parking ticket the other day, which is the most minor of civil infractions you can get, and it still says I was in breach of the Road Traffict Act 1991.
Quote:
|
And also, my research says that the English Constitution is based partly on the Bill of Rights 1689. In there it states that "fines and forfeitures before conviction are illegal". In short, who has the right purely to issue me a fine in the first place? At the end of the day, the more I look into this the more it becomes clear that our "rights" are being chipped away.
|
It comes down to semantics and language. You recieved a "Notice of Intended Prosecution", not a fine. "Notice" and "Intended" are both words which indicate that a fine could be payable in the future, should you be proven guilty. If what you said was true, they wouldn't need to send the NIP out, they would just give the case to a collections agency. The NIP still says quite clearly that you are innocent until proven guilty, and no fine is payable until either you declare yourself guilty by returning the NIP or lose the case in court. Looking at my parking ticket, it says "... who
believes a penalty charge is payable..." "Believe" doesn't equal guilty of, or convicted of.
You have brought up an interesting point though about the fines before conviction. Does that apply to these on-the-spot littering style fines? Can you still fight those in court? On-the-spot fine wording pretty much seems to rule out the innocent-until-proven-guilty.