This piece of 'advice' on another thread (the details for which are irrelevant for this thread) presents, to me at least, a conundrum:
I get the argument (and even find it somewhat persuasive) that it may be preferable in terms of time, effort, stress and resources to resolve a matter swiftly at the cost of being 'wronged' (the difference between a right course of action and a "right" course of action as one poster put it). Yet I personally find such 'advice' quite puzzling and it concerns me that those who follow such advice out of mere convenience might put themselves in an even more tricky situation.
So, what are the legal implications here? Is it acceptable to willfully accept liability for and/or plead guilty to a crime which you knowingly haven't committed because it is the easy option to dispose of the matter? Does wilfully admitting guilt to a minor railway offence when you knowingly haven't committed it open one up to a much more serious charge of perverting the course of justice, I wonder?
I have asked this question in one form or another on numerous dispute threads where such advice features, but these questions have so far been overlooked and a clear answer has not been forthcoming. I ask not to be difficult, but because I am genuinely interested in the answer.
I can't help feeling that the whole thing is going to cost you more than the £20 PF in terms of time, stamps, and antacids for the stomach ulcer you are getting from fighting it.
I think I'd have paid it and moved on a long time ago...
I get the argument (and even find it somewhat persuasive) that it may be preferable in terms of time, effort, stress and resources to resolve a matter swiftly at the cost of being 'wronged' (the difference between a right course of action and a "right" course of action as one poster put it). Yet I personally find such 'advice' quite puzzling and it concerns me that those who follow such advice out of mere convenience might put themselves in an even more tricky situation.
So, what are the legal implications here? Is it acceptable to willfully accept liability for and/or plead guilty to a crime which you knowingly haven't committed because it is the easy option to dispose of the matter? Does wilfully admitting guilt to a minor railway offence when you knowingly haven't committed it open one up to a much more serious charge of perverting the course of justice, I wonder?
I have asked this question in one form or another on numerous dispute threads where such advice features, but these questions have so far been overlooked and a clear answer has not been forthcoming. I ask not to be difficult, but because I am genuinely interested in the answer.