“IS it obligatory now in this country to include your Eircode on official documentation?” was a question posed during a confusing and rather convoluted case involving a man’s misinterpretation of how a fixed charge GoSafe speeding fine should be paid.
The elderly gentleman, who represented himself, told Judge James Faughnan that he accepted he had been speeding, was happy to pay his fixed charge penalty when it arrived in the post, but he’d somehow got tangled up in the red tape.
The confusion began when he received the first fixed penalty notification in the post. He filled in the form but got confused over the “nominated driver” section. This is for drivers who wish to state they had not been driving the vehicle registered in their name on the date of the GoSafe detection, and for them to nominate the person who had been driving.
The man explained, in some detail, how he thought as he had been driving then he should name himself as the nominated driver.
Judge Faughnan thought this a very reasonable and logical assumption as he had been driving, so why shouldn’t he nominate himself as a nominated driver? However, the mandarins didn’t see it this way and further correspondences followed. Eventually they appeared to accept his self-nomination but next he fell foul of some rule that required his Eircode be included on the paperwork and, by this stage, time had run out and it was moved on to a Court summons. This happens if the fine is not paid within 56 days.
The defendant expressed his frustration that he couldn’t simply accept he was speeding, pay his fine, learn his lesson and get on with his life.
With the assistance of a number of helpful and sympathetic Gardaí, the paper trail was unravelled and the gentleman’s plight outlined to the Judge.
The Judge was also sympathetic and expressed puzzlement that a form could be rejected on the grounds that an Eircode wasn’t included. “Is it obligatory now to include an Eircode on official documentation in this country?” he asked, adding that this was a new one for him.
He explained to the defendant that the problem for him now, as a Judge, was that if he proceeded to deal with his case there and then, and taking in the guilty plea, he could get five penalty points and a fine of up to €1,000. That was the law.
If the paperwork had been accepted initially, the fine would have been only €160 and three penalty points.
Judge Faughnan said he thought it best to adjourn matters to allow the man to get some legal advice as there was a distinct possibility his case might be struck out when it came up again. This was agreed. To be continued…
