Paddy McGuinness avoids driving ban thanks to 'Mr Loophole' lawyer

The 44-year-old Bolton comedian had been booked over a year ago after his luxury Land Rover was caught by a speed camera being driven at 50mph in a 40mph zone on the outskirts of Manchester.

But although it is thought the father of three was initially offered a speed awareness course, he was later charged with failing to identify the driver of the car after he claimed he thought his car might have been in a garage at the time.

Last April, he was found guilty and warned he faced being banned from the roads under the totting up procedure. He then subsequently asked lawyer Nick Freeman for legal advice claiming he failed to receive relevant documents.

Today the case then went back to Manchester magistrates court where Mr Freeman, 61, whose previous clients have included David Beckham, Sir Alex Ferguson, Van Morrison and explorer Sir Ranulph Fiennes, argued the star's case was flawed. Following legal submissions, prosecutors offered no evidence.

The saga began on August 21 last year when Paddy McGuinness' Land Rover which has a personalised number plate was caught by a speed camera on A5103 Princess Road, near Mauldeth Road West in Chorlton, Manchester.

Mr Freeman told the hearing: ''The defendant allegedly was served with a notice of intended prosecution but his defence is he didn't receive it and didn't receive a reminder.

''He received a single justice procedure notice (SJPN) and he emailed the appropriate address and said 'can I have a photograph please, I'm not sure it was me because my car was in the garage'. But he never received a photograph.

"He then pleaded guilty and said the original letter must have gone missing because he moved addresses three times in two years.

''The guilty plea was accepted but it carried six penalty points and the case was adjourned to decide a period of disqualification. In the meantime after that he contacted my firm for legal advice.

''It was quite clear his plea was equivocal. He said he was guilty but had not received anything.

''Our counsel spoke to the prosecution solicitor and explained the issue which was the defendant had not received the notice of intended prosecution and a reminder and that was the issue.

"A not guilty plea was entered and the case was stood down. We wrote to the CPS by email and invited them to provide copies of any further evidence they intend to rely on. But neither myself nor my client has seen the notice of intended prosecution - at the day of trial.

"Apparently what happened was Mr McGuinness had committed an offence of speeding on August 21. He was apparently offered a speed awareness course but he hadn't heard anything from that.

''We advised the court on Wednesday last week saying we had not received any information. I arrive at court with my client without absolutely anything.

"The burden is on the Crown that he case must be prosecution led or driven. We arrive at court today and the situation is in it's very worst case. Nothing has been served and the Crown have not complied with any of their legal duties.

''My friend knows what the statutes are and what their duties are. There are various ingredients that they have not complied with. The whole purpose of having these provisions in place is to arrive at court and have everything in a proper manner to do the job properly. The system is clearly flawed. The ball is in the Crown's court. That is the position as far as the defence is concerned.

"There is no point having these rules in place if they are going to ignore the procedures and do nothing about it.

Prosecuting James Gore said: "The police took the lead and we are instructed at the time of the trial, it's solely down to the police why these items have not been provided. There are a number of items of correspondence but it's gone to a number of email addresses - none which are the people that have been dealing with this case.

"Whilst I accept that my learned friend has been forthcoming trying to progress this matter it seems to me that that has not been received by the appropriate office. I have the documentation here, the question was he has not been served with the documentation, I don't know what the issue was.''

He added: It's a police led prosecution and if they come to trial the trial papers are sent to the CPS. The witness statement has been provided, the items in that statement are not exhibits. The witness is even here from the central ticket office.

''Whilst I accept the Crown have not provided an unused material document that doesn't go to the heart of the issue of the case. The issue is whether he received the items or not that can only be done by giving evidence.

"We have a photograph which takes us not much further because it's simply the back of the car showing its number plate. Could this matter proceed today, I can suggest it would.

''The issue has been raised he didn't receive it, it's something you're capable of working with. I've got copies of the notice of intended prosecution and the photographs I can provide him with.''

But later after JPs retired to consider the argument Mr Gore added: ''I've taken full instruction and we offer no evidence."

Mr McGuinness, of Prestbury, Cheshire spoke to give his full name, address and date of birth and to formally pleading not guilty to the charge of failing to give information relating to the identification of the driver of the Land Rover.

As his case was dismissed he said: "Thank you" before bending down to pick his car keys up from under the table and leaving. He did not comment after the hearing.