MILLIONS of pounds worth of fixed penalty fines handed out for minor offences such as dropping litter or vandalism could be refunded if a legal move is successful.
It is claimed the £40 fines, given for anti-social behaviour such as drunkenness and breach of the peace, are flawed because the system offers virtually no opportunity for appeal in cases where the ticket has been improperly served.
While in England there is an automatic right of appeal through the courts, there is no procedure here to challenge a police “on the spot” fine, even if the ticket is clearly defective or paperwork wrongly filled in.
It is also being claimed that fixed penalty legislation is incompatible with citizens’ rights, as it upends the presumption of innocence.
Now two Paisley-based lawyers are preparing to take their argument against the system to the Court of Session in January, in a case which could open the floodgates for claims from people who have paid the £40.
Solicitor Paul Lynch and civil law practitioner Jilly Melrose say people are being snared by a flawed system that robs them of basic human rights.
They point out that the law only allows for the ticket to be cancelled in very limited circumstances, and the issuing officer is the only person who can amend the ticket.
There is also no procedure to challenge a police on the spot fine, even when the ticket is clearly defective such as when the officer involved has incorrectly completed the paperwork.
According to Mr Lynch young people are particularly impacted by the “flawed” system because they often opt to pay a fine without telling parents or carers.
Mr Lynch said: “One of the main issues raised by the case is the absence of any appeal procedure. The equivalent English provisions allow courts there to set aside such fines.”
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article