Garda going back on word

deco87

Frequent Poster
Messages
171
My ex wife insurance was out a couple of weeks.
She has a work van and doesn’t use car much.
She didn’t get a renewal as she had moved address before renewal was issued. She forgot to inform insurance company/ divorced few months and had moved address as a result, ( stressful times).
Bringing the young lad to a disco in her slippers a few months ago stopped at checkpoint.
Garda accepted her account , she was very upset and shocked. Never in trouble before.

She asked the Garda would he talk to me on the phone. I took call and explained like most husbands I looked after the renewals / paperwork for the last 20 years ... it was a genuine oversight..
he said to me ... and subsequently to her ...
I will accept whet you say ,and as it is a genuine error I propose to deal with it as follows ...
I will seize the car for no insurance.
I will issued a fine on the spot notice for no insurance disc ... car was taxed .... if those fines are paid .. in full and on time , that will be the end of it.
Thought that was very decent until .....
Today .... summons arrive for no insurance in the post .... she drives for a living , now her job is on the line.
She is in an awful state of worry now.
She paid over 250 euro in retrieving the car paying the fixed penalty notice etc produced her licence ....

Question.
Rather than spend the day in court and liar out further financially is it ok to send a letter by registered post to the district court clerk .. that will hand the letter to the judge when the case is called ?

-advice appreciated
 

mathepac

Frequent Poster
Messages
6,837
No, a summons to appear is just that. The minimum requirement is to have a legal representative in court to answer the summons or to appear personally.

Having recently appeared for the first time, the first day in court is a lot of waiting around until the case is called and then asking for discovery of the evidence in support of the charge, essentially the details of the Garda statement and a date for a further hearing.

My advice is to consult a solicitor now - this is a serious charge and I have to say that I take a dim view, as will the court, of a professional driver disregarding the law, if that is what happened.
 

Brendan Burgess

Founder
Messages
38,685
You need to re-orient yourself here.

forget the “my wife is a victim” mentality.

go to the court,explain the backstory , apologise and hope for the best.

by all means take legal advice. But she Should appear herself and apologise personally
 

deco87

Frequent Poster
Messages
171
This was her own car. Genuine oversight.
All fines paid in full immediately.
that was the course the Garda outlined he was doing as he accepted the facts.
He then decided to issue summons out of the blue.
Genuine oversights can happen especially in stressful times.
there is no issue as to insurance it was not.
but it was genuine . Thks for reply
 

deco87

Frequent Poster
Messages
171
You need to re-orient yourself here.

forget the “my wife is a victim” mentality.

go to the court,explain the backstory , apologise and hope for the best.

by all means take legal advice. But she Should appear herself and apologise personally
probably best to appear. not sure if money is well spent ... on a solicitor to say same thing
Food for thought
 

Palerider

Frequent Poster
Messages
1,445
If this is a first offence then you should be fine, get representation, have your ex attend court and outline to the Court as you have here, contrary to a lot of people's opinions the Judges tend to be reasonable and understanding but they must have your exs side of the story, bear in mind that you have paid fines already therefore you should plead guilty but offer the mitigating circumstances.
 

Palerider

Frequent Poster
Messages
1,445
Also the title of your post is disingenuous, the Garda was doing his job, she had no insurance, what would the public say if she were let through that checkpoint and hit a kid on a bike at the next junction.
 

deco87

Frequent Poster
Messages
171
I completely disagree with that ... no issue no insurance . But it was a genuine error absolutely 100 per cent . No intent .... whatsoever. The Garda told me on the phone also my ex wife , that he accepted it was a genuine error. In his words he said “ I propose to deal with the matter as follows ..... they was nearly 300 euro in fines. A lot of arranging to get over and back to the recovery place.
the state had imposed fines which were considerable .... and stated that the end of the matter and no other sanction would follow.
He then issued summonses quite the opposite of whet he stated he would do.
Yes he most certainly went back on his word.

punishment was issued ..... this is a further punishment.
That’s fine. No excuses... what will be will be ....
Better if he was truthful from the start ... whets new
 

deco87

Frequent Poster
Messages
171
Also the title of your post is disingenuous, the Garda was doing his job, she had no insurance, what would the public say if she were let through that checkpoint and hit a kid on a bike at the next junction.
Couldn’t happen if you read the post. Car was seized immediately, and quite rightly
 

twofor1

Frequent Poster
Messages
1,290
But it was a genuine error absolutely 100 per cent . No intent .... whatsoever. The Garda told me on the phone also my ex wife , that he accepted it was a genuine error. In his words he said “ I propose to deal with the matter as follows .....
Possibly on reflection the garda realised his mistake. He /she does not have any discretion in such an offence, even genuine 100% errors. Their job is to prosecute, it is the courts job to decide the penalty.

Possibly on reflection the garda realised if a car has been impounded for been driven with no insurance, there has to follow a charge of driving with no insurance.
 

galway_blow_in

Frequent Poster
Messages
1,476
Also the title of your post is disingenuous, the Garda was doing his job, she had no insurance, what would the public say if she were let through that checkpoint and hit a kid on a bike at the next junction.
dont be obtuse , the OP clearly outlines the sequence of events , the guard said he would take their explanation at face value and then apparently devised a practical solution by impounding and on the spot fine only to do a 180 and then subsequently decided to peg them under the bus .

had the guard given them chapter and verse from the start , it would not be as contemptible
 

Palerider

Frequent Poster
Messages
1,445
dont be obtuse , the OP clearly outlines the sequence of events , the guard said he would take their explanation at face value and then apparently devised a practical solution by impounding and on the spot fine only to do a 180 and then subsequently decided to peg them under the bus .

had the guard given them chapter and verse from the start , it would not be as contemptible
I'm not, the title is disingenuous, we only have one side of this story, the Guards always get the bashing but in this story we have just one side, it may be 100% correct but that's a big headline statement, let the Judge decide.

It's not the worst offence and I'm sure on the day will be dealt with on the easy side of the scales of justice but the Garda is entitled to issue that summons, his boss could have insisted upon it or he could have changed his mind.
 

galway_blow_in

Frequent Poster
Messages
1,476
I'm not, the title is disingenuous, we only have one side of this story, the Guards always get the bashing but in this story we have just one side, it may be 100% correct but that's a big headline statement, let the Judge decide.

It's not the worst offence and I'm sure on the day will be dealt with on the easy side of the scales of justice but the Garda is entitled to issue that summons, his boss could have insisted upon it or he could have changed his mind.
" we only have one side of the story "

you could say that about virtually any story on this site or any other , if we arent going to take people at face value , the whole thing is a bit of a farce .

lame arguement palerider
 

deco87

Frequent Poster
Messages
171
I'm not, the title is disingenuous, we only have one side of this story, the Guards always get the bashing but in this story we have just one side, it may be 100% correct but that's a big headline statement, let the Judge decide.

It's not the worst offence and I'm sure on the day will be dealt with on the easy side of the scales of justice but the Garda is entitled to issue that summons, his boss could have insisted upon it or he could have changed his mind.
I’m not bashing the Garda. I agree absolutely no insurance is outrageous and should be prosecuted. He is doing his job properly. No issue. He is doing exactly the opposite of what he promised he would do.
What prompted him I do not know,
I disagree it is one of the worst offences .
the damage that could have done ... thank god there was no injury or accident .
The insurance was out couple weeks ... as it happened she doesn’t use it ... has full use of work van.
It was insured the following morning. ..

she has had car insurance every year for the last 30 years. Genuine oversight. No issues only the Garda was unfair as coming to Xmas she is worried out of her skin... after getting summons unexpected as he went back on his word. He is right. better if he didn’t say what he did ... that’s all
 

Palerider

Frequent Poster
Messages
1,445
" we only have one side of the story "

you could say that about virtually any story on this site or any other , if we arent going to take people at face value , the whole thing is a bit of a farce .

lame arguement palerider
I agree with your core point, this is my view on the title of the post, I've nothing further to add for the OP, I hope and expect it will work out on the day, do get representation and try not to sweat it in the interim.
 

mathepac

Frequent Poster
Messages
6,837
Hopefully the fines for driving with no insurance and the pending prosecution have been declared to her insurers, otherwise, if she takes the car out again she may not have insurance.
 

deco87

Frequent Poster
Messages
171
There was no pending prosecution.
there was no convictions
There was no penalty points ... arising from this issue when insurance was taken out the next day.
that’s the whole point of what the Garda said he was doing . Which was decent. Monetary fines were paid. No issue. Then ....

now he has gone back on his word so these issues may now arise pending on the outcome of the court shortly.. including possible loss of her job .... no issue as I keep saying .... genuine oversight .... doesn’t change the facts that there was NO INSURANCE on that day
 
Top