A teenage girl has received a criminal conviction for failing to get insurance on a surprise 18th birthday gift of a car – before it had actually been given to her.
The waitress, from Poole in Dorset, said her family bought the Fiat as a present to celebrate her landmark birthday, but mistakenly did not insure it immediately.
Last month, the DVLA charged her with keeping an uninsured vehicle and brought a criminal prosecution over the unpaid bill.
She explained the mix-up in a letter to Ipswich magistrates court, saying she had never driven the vehicle as she does not yet have a licence and at the time of the offence she did not even know the car was hers.
But it was not enough to spare her from a criminal conviction.
It is the latest piece of harsh justice to emerge from the Single Justice Procedure, an under-fire fast-track court process where magistrates hand out convictions in private court hearings.
The Labour government is dragging its feet on reforming the court process, despite lobbying from prosecutors, lawyers, and even magistrates themselves that the system is broken.
The teenager wrote in her letter: “My family got the car for me as my 18th birthday present. I was still 17 at the time of the offence and had not actually been given the keys to the car and was not aware that it would be mine.”
She set out that she and her father have reading difficulties, and it was only when a friend read an official letter for them that they realised the car needed to be insured even if it was not being driven.
She said they received a rebate on car tax after declaring the 17-year-old Fiat “off road” with a Statutory Off Road Notification (SORN), and did not realise she could pay a fine to avoid a criminal case.
“I have never used the car as I have still not passed my driving test”, she continued. “My dad is willing to pay the fine for me as he thinks this is his fault.
“He receives Universal Credit and PIP for his mental health, and I have just finished college and currently have a part-time job as a waitress on the minimum wage for an 18-year-old.”
She pleaded guilty to the offence, dated in January and just under four weeks before her 18th birthday, and added: “I was a good student in school and college studying art and have never been in any trouble in my life. We just misunderstood the letter, I thought it said I had to SORN it or pay a fine if it doesn’t get sorted.
“I am very sorry.”
One of the flaws in the Single Justice Procedure is that prosecutors do not see mitigation letters, due to the fast-track nature of the process.
It means they do not get the chance to assess the personal circumstances of defendants, and cannot decide if a prosecution continues to be in the public interest.
The DVLA itself has called on the government to change the system, so that prosecutors see all mitigation before a magistrate is called on to decide a case.
This reform has been backed by the Magistrates Association and the Bar Council, but is opposed by the BBC.
The government closed a consultation on Single Justice Procedure reform in early May, and has repeatedly refused to set out a timetable for reform. In a statement to The Standard, it said it is “currently evaluating responses” to the consultation.
The system operates every week at magistrates courts across England and Wales, dealing with around 800,000 low-level criminal cases a year.
It was also the subject of a damning recent report by think tank Transform Justice.
Responding to the report, the Ministry of Justice claimed that there has never been a recorded miscarriage of justice due to the Single Justice Procedure.
In the teenage waitress’ case, a magistrate gave her a 12-month conditional discharge instead of a fine. But she chose not to send the case back to the DVLA for an extra public interest check.
The teen will now have a criminal conviction, and must also pay a £20 court fee.
