Friday, June 23, 2006



UK UNABLE TO DEAL WITH IDENTITY FRAUD

For the past two years Roderick Rigby’s life has not been his own. He says that his identity has been stolen so many times that he has lived in fear of a policeman or bailiff knocking on the front door and yet another court summons arriving in the post. The mild-mannered upholsterer has received 52 summonses for driving offences that he says he did not commit, been convicted and fined in his absence and mistaken by prosecutors as a dangerously violent felon serving a 14-month sentence. He has written repeatedly to the DVLA and pleaded with police that he is not the man racking up speeding and parking fines all over the country, but they have refused to believe him — until now.

At a hearing before Burnley Crown Court in Lancashire — his latest bid to quash a conviction for failing to supply his documents at a police station — the Crown Prosecution Service finally threw in the towel. Judge Barbara Watson, the Recorder of Burnley, told the court that heads would roll at the CPS if it could not explain the matter.

Mr Rigby, 51, of Rishton in Lancashire, said: “It has been a living nightmare for me and my wife.” Two years ago, fines for motoring offences started arriving in the post. They sometimes carried different names but were always delivered to his address. He has even received logbooks from the DVLA saying that cars have been registered in his name or at his address. “I write back to all the summonses and fines to explain they are not meant for me but it is an awfully long process and no one believes me,” he said. “Bailiffs have been around. We have had letters saying my goods would be seized and all because someone has registered cars in my name and been racking up parking and speeding fines. “I have had tickets from all over the country, from places I have never even visited — London, Northampton, Bolton and Burnley. I have even had fines when I have been on holiday. It is not easy sleeping at night.”

In May 2004, he was arrested when a Mr Royle, who was wanted for driving a car without insurance, MoT or licence, gave his address. The arresting officer cautioned him in the “names of Royle or Rigby”. Several weeks later the DVLA confirmed to magistrates in Accrington that Mr Rigby was not the culprit and the caution was wiped from the record.

In the same year a motorist stopped for jumping a red light in Blackburn gave Mr Rigby’s name, address and a close guess at his date of birth. When the motorist failed to produce his documents at a police station, the summons was sent to Mr Rigby ordering him to appear in court. “It was at this time that other documents started arriving at home, parking tickets and speeding fines,” he said. “I phoned and wrote to the DVLA and the authority issuing the fines but still they kept coming through the post.” He had to appear in court nine times to sort out the initial summons. Once, magistrates in Accrington threatened him with a contempt of court charge when he tried to explain that it was a case of mistaken identity.

Mr Rigby, who cares for his asthmatic wife Jacqueline, 51, was eventually convicted in his absence, given six penalty points and fined £540. Since then he has been fighting the conviction in an action that Mr Rigby’s barrister has estimated has cost £30,000.

The last straw came when Mr Rigby turned up in court to hear the prosecutor tell the judge that the defendant was excused from appearing in person because he was in prison for wounding. Jumping to his feet Mr Rigby said: “No, I am not. I’m here.”

A spokeswoman for the CPS said: “There is no doubt that people do give false details to the police, but equally people who are responsible for the offence claim it wasn’t them. “We needed to check that the right person was prosecuted. We tried to do that but Mr Rigby did not attend court and was convicted in his absence. “Clearly the conviction has been quashed and the appeal has been allowed. “From our point of view we were trying to find out who the person was the police stopped.” The spokeswoman said that the suggestion that Mr Rigby was behind bars for a wounding was an administrative error. He had been confused with a Roderick James Rigby currently serving a 14-month prison term. “I can confirm that the prisoner and the man who appeared in court are not the same person,” she said. [Brilliant!]

Report here




(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today)

No comments: