- News
- Reviews
- Bikes
- Accessories
- Accessories - misc
- Computer mounts
- Bags
- Bar ends
- Bike bags & cases
- Bottle cages
- Bottles
- Cameras
- Car racks
- Child seats
- Computers
- Glasses
- GPS units
- Helmets
- Lights - front
- Lights - rear
- Lights - sets
- Locks
- Mirrors
- Mudguards
- Racks
- Pumps & CO2 inflators
- Puncture kits
- Reflectives
- Smart watches
- Stands and racks
- Trailers
- Clothing
- Components
- Bar tape & grips
- Bottom brackets
- Brake & gear cables
- Brake & STI levers
- Brake pads & spares
- Brakes
- Cassettes & freewheels
- Chains
- Chainsets & chainrings
- Derailleurs - front
- Derailleurs - rear
- Forks
- Gear levers & shifters
- Groupsets
- Handlebars & extensions
- Headsets
- Hubs
- Inner tubes
- Pedals
- Quick releases & skewers
- Saddles
- Seatposts
- Stems
- Wheels
- Tyres
- Health, fitness and nutrition
- Tools and workshop
- Miscellaneous
- Buyers Guides
- Features
- Forum
- Recommends
- Podcast
forum
Mr Loophole does it again (Beckham case)
"David Beckham will avoid prosecution over a speeding charge, after his lawyer Nick Freeman, who calls himself Mr Loophole, argued that it had arrived a day after the legal time limit.
The former England football captain was accused of driving a loaned Bentley at 59mph in a 40mph zone on the A40 in Paddington earlier this year.
Beckham’s lawyer argued that “it would be unsafe to allow these proceedings to go any further” due to the original speeding notice arriving a day later than the statutory 14-day window."
So, not contesting whether or not he was speeding, just whether the Royal Mail works properly.
How long ago did Freeman actually sell his soul...?
If you're new please join in and if you have questions pop them below and the forum regulars will answer as best we can.
Latest Forum Topics
Latest Comments
- anagallis_arvensis 2 min 32 sec ago
Look at the still Pict at the top of this article, had the driver been in secondary, roughly in line with the left most part of the lighter bit of...
- Rendel Harris 2 min 12 sec ago
I regularly see the Household Cavalry and Royal Artillery horses exercising when I'm out and about in London and they are absolutely fine with...
- chrisonabike 2 min 20 sec ago
Well I agree we're constantly paving paradise essentially because we all want to live longer and don't want to share our space. Same in my city of...
- Hirsute 44 min 37 sec ago
Ex black cab https://twitter.com/KingArtAT/status/1783296299787309088
- bensynnock 1 hour 40 min ago
Quite. I was wondering where the cycling infrastructure is located that causes drivers to go 90 on the M3?
- I love my bike 2 hours 9 min ago
If one is prepared to pay £28 for a TPU tube, the butyl comparison should be Continental's Supersonic ~50g or Schwalbe at 70g. Both costing £8 - ...
- I love my bike 2 hours 21 min ago
Media needs to do their part, but the readr/consumer also needs to do theirs as well:...
- ubercurmudgeon 2 hours 57 min ago
Kona makes practical, affordable commuter bikes and goes bust. Colnago makes toys for the affluent and it is booming. Just goes to show that the...
Add new comment
24 comments
Surely the lawyers fees are more than the potential fine?
Shows how some people have more money than sense, and how money gets you preferential treatment.
As I think it may have been the great Judge and legal thinker Lord Denning who said "The Law, like the Ritz, is open to all".
He should man up and take the fine - if the evidence is clear then contesting it is simply morally wrong. Just fuels the myth that rich and famous people are in some way "better" than normal decent hard working folk, and sadly, a lot of decent hard working folk buy into that too - and look up to these"heroes". What example is he setting for them?
From a cycling point of view....Sharing the surname with another allegedly dodgy character called Freeman....any relation.....LoL...?
Points would be the problem, not the monetary fine.
....only a problem if you're a repeat offender, who has been caught multiple times. My understanding that for a first offence you can go on a speed awareness course instead. If he has managed to rack up any where near the maximum 12 points he is clearly as bright as he sounds.
Less publicised is that Freeman loses most of his cases where the CPS allow specialist prosecutors to handle the case. In this case I suspect they weren't involved. The police are capable of issuing the ticket to the registered keeper within a couple of days, in which case Bentley would not credibly have been able to show it didn't arrive for another 2 weeks. Most police forces would also have up-to-date computerised auditing systems to prove postage, so that the police administration staff would not have to be cross-examined about it. What appears to have happened here is that the police evidence was less compelling than Bentley's. To be fair, Freeman's (and his copycat firms') antics have sharpened up the police and CPS to the point where it is rare for drivers to escape on technicalities; Beckham got lucky this time. Let's hope he has a good tax lawyer as well.
You cannot remember whether or not you were at work more than 2 weeks ago?
The 200 miles away thing is over the top, but you might, say, not remember whether you drove or took the train one day two weeks ago.
I did say 'cloned'.
I based it on this link
https://www.theguardian.com/money/2016/feb/27/number-plate-cloning-drive...
"Baxter was able to prove she wasn’t guilty as her office car park had CCTV."
" At that time I was 200 miles away in Staffordshire, fast asleep, with my car parked outside."
Or a more simple example of one parent dropping off at the youth club and one picking up. Afer 28 days how are they going to remember which way round it was ?
I don't see any need for the 14 days to be changed given the level of technology.
Data is transferred daily to a central point, the dvla database is queried and a letter is sent out the next day.
You have to allow people a reasonable defence and to work out where they were on a given date and who was driving. Say a plate was cloned, if it were 28 days, less opportunity to get cctv that you were at work that day 200 miles away.
With technology CCTV is available easily for a month which is the minimum for most local authorities, it's not just for the evidence gathering, it's the vagaries of a private company to deliver the FPN.
If the date of the FPN is shortly after the offence then it's too easy for people to state they didn't recieve it and blame RM. it all sounds pony to me, but you know, legal BS/celeb.
Why don't the government extend FPN timescales to 28 days, there's no reason to have 14 days.
I wonder if the dimwit would think twice about speeding if his kids were badly hurt or worse by a speeding driver, I expect not, these entitled types don't give a fuck.
Either way its not put Beckham in a good light, its not clever he just looks like he's wormed out of a prosecution by employing an expensive lawyer.
It would be a band B offence, so would have been potentially a fine of 100% of weekly income, which would presumably be quite a lot!
Don't you find it unlikely that out of the 1000s upon 1000s of penalty notices that get delivery correctly, this one doesn't?
It's not a black and white as that because the NIP is deemed to have been received:
A notice shall be deemed for the purposes of subsection (1)(c) above to have been served on a person if it was sent by registered post or recorded delivery service addressed to him at his last known address, notwithstanding that the notice was returned as undelivered or was for any other reason not received by him.
The requirement of subsection (1) above shall in every case be deemed to have been complied with unless and until the contrary is proved.
I suspect a number of people do receive one late, however a claim of "it was one day late" is pretty unlikely to be accepted.
In this case, there was third party evidence that the NIP was late.
It does seem a bit perverse that the NIP is deemed to have been received but I guess that is simply cost cutting to avoid special delivery costs.
Not a loophole though. The NIP has to arrive in 14 days if not, then it isn't valid. This applies to anyone.
I think it was simply to avoid leaving people with no defense if they got one 6 months after the event whereby they could not remember where they were or who was driving.
I can't see the firm making stuff up, what benefit would there be and wouldn't they record incoming items such as this as a matter of course ?
Doing 59 in a 40 is ridiculous though.
A significant proportion of drivers still think this is perfectly fine.
IME too often they fit the stereotype of having expensive German / Swedish cars and feel that they have something to prove with it (mainly that they are insecure and exceedingly selfish).
Good to see Mr Arsehole...sorry, Loophole, is making the roads safer for us cyclists (that he obviously despises), pedestrians and law abiding motorists.
There's a special place in Hell for you Mr Freeman, probably getting your namesake Old Nick off with something (why does the image of Saddam Hussein and Satan from the South Park Movie come to mind...)
Hypothetically speaking, if you were to get flashed by a speed camera on 1 June and, knowing that the ticket if issued would have to arrive by 15 June to be valid, a ticket arrived on 16 June... what would you do. Accept the fine and points anyway, or object?
Obviously if you have never sped (can't write speeded even though it feels more "correct") or broken any other driving law, then this is N/A...
Basically you are stuffed as you won't have a way to prove it was late.
Otherwise you apply the NZ trick
https://www.thehits.co.nz/random-stuff/the-new-zealand-police-have-revea...
Except clearly as per the situation in question that's not always the case. So let's assume for the sake of the hypothetical question that you can prove it.
I wonder why David Beckham contests a ticket. Unless the points take him to a ban, the fine and any insurance cost increase is meaningless to him.
Didn't they say it was the post office's fault? Probably some con job with the Bentley firm to pretend they didn't receive anything until a day after the prosecution limit. I bet they opened it and it was Beckham they then wanted Mr Loophole to make sure there was a loophole.
If it was Joe Bloggs using Hertz they'd not be a late penalty notice.
It’s disappointing, sure, but you have to lay at least some of the blame with a force that is so apathetic it can’t get the notice out within two weeks.
You are assuming Mr Beckham registers his own cars that he drives, like most normal people do, and doesnt simply get loaned cars by manufacturers looking for the cache of saying look which celebrity drives our latest model and then doesnt have to bother with all that ownership cost malarkey ,and that then working out who the registered keeper is and where their postroom is to send the NIP too becomes more than just a little bit of investigation,as if you send it to the wrong corporate address Mr Loophole will get you off on another technicality...the obvious quick answer to this is campaign to extend NIP period to 28days
RTFA. The notice had to get to the keeper within 14 days. The keeper was still Bentley Motors, not Beckham, and it didn’t get to them until day 15.