But the lady was not driving in the area, in fact quite far from where she lives. She therefore did not pay the collection, which would automatically have put an end to the proceedings.
And as she considered herself within her rights, she contested the fine. At the same time, this driving file was also transmitted, and this is also the procedure, to the public prosecutor’s office. But very quickly, the traffic police for their part reported to the prosecution that there was indeed an error. An officer had examined the file and noticed that the rear plate flashed did not in fact correspond to that of the lady. There had been a reversal of letters.
But the file had then already been automatically transmitted to the national road safety prosecutor’s office, a body created a few years ago to automatically ensure the administrative monitoring of road fines by relieving the local prosecutor’s offices of this task.
But at the level of the prosecution, the file will not be examined until December 2023. Problem, the computer system noticed that the driver had not accepted the immediate perception. A transaction proposal was then sent just as automatically before finally a payment order. All this before the initial challenge is considered.
The tax authorities took €336 at source
At each stage, the amount of the fine increased. The driver did not react to it, thinking that her initial challenge automatically canceled the rest of the procedure and that these were reminders that she could ignore. But it will ultimately be sanctioned by the Tax Office!
At the start of 2024, the tax administration informed her that she was entitled to a tax refund of €580 but from which €336 would now be taken, which is now the amount of the fine she would have had to pay to the State. She then challenged this automatic debit within 2 days.
But that’s not all, because the case then landed before the police court to be contested. The first judge held that the challenge was out of time, since the lady should have reacted within 30 days to the payment order served in November 2023. And this even if the lady had contested the immediate collection. The motorist was unaware that without a response from the authorities, she would also have to contest the following stages of the procedure!
The public prosecutor sticks to deadlines
New act this time, this Tuesday, before the Neufchâteau criminal court, acting in the appeal jurisdiction of the police court. For the driver’s defense, there is a question of principle even if the amounts are low.
“We are facing a tremendous injusticeestimates the driver’s lawyer, Me Ronan Vilaine. My client is not a specialist in criminal law and in her mind, from the moment she contested, the procedure was suspended.“
The driver’s lawyer requests that the challenge be deemed admissible.
The Luxembourg public prosecutor’s office, which has now taken over the case given the referral to court, is caught in a pinch. On the one hand, the traffic police almost immediately pointed out that there was an error with the plate. But on the other hand, the deadlines, which according to the public prosecutor are equally legal, were not respected to introduce a second challenge, even though the driver would have received letters indicating the deadlines.
“The law is the law, and it must be applied“, says the representative of the prosecution, substitute Sarah Stevenin, while nevertheless mentioning the inversion of letters in the plate.
If the challenge is deemed admissible by the court, the public prosecutor’s office would take steps to ensure that the lady remits what was wrongly withheld from her tax refund. But if the challenge is inadmissible, if she wants to get her money back, she should turn to the administration herself.
The court will deliver this judgment for this textbook case on February 4.
