{"id":239935,"date":"2023-10-31T13:23:19","date_gmt":"2023-10-31T13:23:19","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/lovemainstream.com\/?p=239935"},"modified":"2023-10-31T13:23:19","modified_gmt":"2023-10-31T13:23:19","slug":"mother-faces-court-after-term-time-holiday-fine-missing-in-the-post","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/lovemainstream.com\/world-news\/mother-faces-court-after-term-time-holiday-fine-missing-in-the-post\/","title":{"rendered":"Mother faces court after term-time holiday fine 'missing in the post'"},"content":{"rendered":"
A mother was left horrified after being summoned to court for taking her children on holiday during term-time – after the fine sent to her went ‘missing in the post’.<\/p>\n
Lisa Percival, 35, took her two children Hunter, eight, and Pandora, six, to Cyprus on June 10th for a 10-day ‘educational’ all-inclusive family holiday, knowing she would be faced with a \u00a360 fine for each child for the unauthorised absence on their return.\u00a0<\/p>\n
But after returning from the \u00a32,000 vacation, Ms Percival claims she only received a penalty notice for her daughter and was never issued a fine for her son’s time off school.<\/p>\n
The mother-of-two claims she assumed her son didn’t receive one because his attendance was higher than Pandora’s – but five months later she received a single justice procedure notice through the post from North Northamptonshire Council outlining she was being charged under the Section 444 (1) of the Education Act 1996.<\/p>\n
The single justice procedure notice means Ms Percival could have pleaded guilty and avoided court altogether – but refused to do this as it would mean admitting to a criminal offence and therefore having a criminal record.\u00a0<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
Lisa Percival, 35, took her two children Hunter (left), eight, and Pandora (right), six, to Cyprus on June 10th for a 10-day all-inclusive family holiday<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
Ms Percival claimed the holiday was ‘educational’ and that she believed she didn’t receive a fine for her son because her daughter’s attendance was worse overall<\/p>\n
Section 444 (1) of the Education Act 1996 states that if a child of compulsory school age who is a registered pupil at a school fails to attend regularly at school, their parent is guilty of an offence.<\/p>\n
A person charged with the offence has to prove they had a ‘reasonable justification’ for their child’s failure to attend regularly at the school.<\/p>\n
The mother-of-two was given until November 4th to plead guilty or not guilty to the charge and said being convicted would have a detrimental effect on her career and financial situation.<\/p>\n
Although Ms Percival repeatedly contacted the local council to explain she did not ever receive a fine in the post for her son, she says she received no response.<\/p>\n
But after being contacted by journalists North Northamptonshire Council agreed to reissue the fine, meaning she has 28 days to pay it before facing a criminal record.\u00a0<\/p>\n
Lisa, from Kettering in Northamptonshire, said: ‘This is the first time I have taken my children out of school for a holiday and I assumed that because my daughter’s [overall] attendance was worse than my son’s, [that’s why] I was fined for her [and not him].<\/p>\n
‘I strongly disagree that parents should be criminalised for something so trivial, especially when I didn’t receive the fine letter [for my son] in the first place.<\/p>\n
‘I don’t understand how I can be a criminal for one child and not the other.<\/p>\n
‘I have been trying to contact North Northamptonshire Council since October 20th [when I received the charge letter] and no one has responded.<\/p>\n
‘I have asked to pay the fine for my son and even looked online to see if I could find the council’s bank statement so I can transfer the money before [going] to court.<\/p>\n
‘No one at the council has been helpful. I don’t think it’s fair that they can send me a [fine] letter in the post on not recorded delivery but then when I don’t receive it [they] issue a criminal charge, as this can have serious consequences.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
The mother-of-two was given until November 4th to plead guilty or not guilty to the charge<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
Ms Percival accused the council of ‘trying to catch her out’ over the missed fine<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
The council has now agreed to reissue the fine for Hunter, with a copy also sent via email<\/p>\n
‘It’s almost as if they’re trying to catch me out.’<\/p>\n
Ms Percival said she took her children out of school during term time because it was cheaper and believed her children would educationally benefit from the trip.<\/p>\n
She said she has now been informed that her son’s penalty should have been paid by August 10th but because his penalty charge was ‘lost’ she wasn’t given the opportunity to do so.<\/p>\n
North Northamptonshire Council failed to chase up the payment, according to Ms Percival, who said she paid her daughter’s fine within 48 hours of receiving it.<\/p>\n
Speaking before being offered a fresh 28 days to pay the fine, Ms Percival said:\u00a0‘If I enter a guilty plea we don’t need to go to court and then this comes with an automatic criminal record, regardless of the sentence. This is what I want to avoid.<\/p>\n
‘But if I plead not guilty, I could go to court and explain the situation and want to pay the fine but then they could still find me guilty and would still receive the criminal record.<\/p>\n
‘I don’t think it’s in the public interest for it to go to court.<\/p>\n
‘As a landlord, it is definitely not in my tenants’ interest to go to court as I could potentially have to issue 12 S21 eviction notices as I may no longer be able to do my job.<\/p>\n
‘I’ve got until November 4th until I have to enter a plea and it goes to court. The whole process is barbaric.’<\/p>\n
She added she\u00a0does not blame her children’s school for the confusion as she knew taking Pandora and Hunter on holiday during term time would be classed as an unauthorised absence.<\/p>\n
A spokesperson from North Northamptonshire Council said: ‘We have been made aware of some postal issues recently and as such, offering the benefit of the doubt and in order to seek a satisfactory resolution for all parties, the local authority has contacted the court and requested the matter be withdrawn from hearing to enable payment of the original penalty notice. We apologise for any distress caused.<\/p>\n
‘We have agreed to reissue the fixed penalty notice via post, with a copy via email, allowing the full 28 days to pay as afforded originally.’<\/p>\n