If a person is caught speeding by a speed camera, for example, they will receive a fine if they can be identified as the driver by the authorities. The person against whom the fine is issued must be sufficiently identifiable in the fine notice. The fine notice regularly contains ambiguities, errors and confusions regarding the person. Father/son relationships are a classic example of name confusion.
Any doubts about the identity of the person being summoned?
However, not every mistake in the personal details will invalidate the fine notice, especially if the identity of the person concerned can be established beyond doubt from the remaining (correct) information provided. There must be no doubt about the person's identity. The minimum requirements are met by stating the person's first name, family name or birth name, place or date of birth, marital status, occupation, place of residence, home or nationality.
Thus, a false first or last name should not be detrimental,[2] nor should the provision of an incorrect year of birth lead to doubts about the identity of the person concerned.[3] Nor should a misspelled first or last name (e.g. Schmidt instead of Schmitt) or an incorrect gender salutation.[4] Commonly occurring obvious typing errors do not lead to ineffectiveness. However, if both father and son have the same first and last name and no date of birth is given in the fine notice, the fine notice would be ineffective because it is not clear against whom it is directed. Likewise, if there are curious mix-ups: If the father's name is Alois Schmidt and the son's name is Leon Schmidt, a fine notice addressed to Alois Leon Schmidt would be invalid. The author recently succeeded in having the competent district court discontinue such proceedings. Time and again, fines are also issued against people who don't even exist: if the managing director of the freight forwarder Meyer GmbH is called Rainer Müller, then fines are erroneously issued to Rainer Meyer.
Common mistakes in bulk fine proceedings
Confusion over names can occur at almost any point in the fine proceedings. Sometimes the fine notice is sent to the wrong person by mistake, and sometimes the court summons the wrong person to the hearing. In the past, a wrong person has even been convicted by mistake, although the order to pay a fine was not even directed against that person.
Is there a statute of limitations for the offense?
Care should also be taken to check whether the offense is already time-barred. In the case of traffic offenses, this is already the case after three months. If, for example, Michael Müller, the son, is initially suspected of driving and he is 1 OWiG, the father Paul then receives a hearing form, and ultimately a fine is imposed on the son Michael, the proceedings against Michael Müller would be time-barred if more than three months elapse between the hearing and the fine.
In any case, you should seek the help of a specialized traffic lawyer.
References:
[1] Fromm, Verteidigung in Straßenverkehrs-OWi-Verfahren, 2nd ed., 2014, 596 ff.
[2] Kurz, Karlsruher Kommentar zum OWiG, 5th ed. 2018, § 66 Rn 49
[3] OLG Oldenburg OLGSt. § 66 OWiG S. 3.
[4] BayObLG Beschl. v. 26.11.1976, DAR 1977, 209 [Rü] and of August 17, 1978, DAR 1979, 243 [R.]; OLG Naumburg NStZ 2015, 527; Fromm, in Haus/Krumm/Quarch, Gesamtes Verkehrsrecht
2nd ed. 2017, § 66 Rn 13.
The statements represent initial information that was current for the law applicable in Germany at the time of initial publication. The legal situation may have changed since then. Furthermore, the information provided cannot replace individual advice on a specific matter. Please contact us for this purpose.