I’ve received this traffic violation note in mail, normal letter, nothing to sign. There are couple of things wrong with it.
First, the country written is Slovakia but I’m from Slovenia. The address itself is correct and was delivered properly, obviously postal sorting system works well enough.
Second is that the letter is in German only. According to EU regulations such things need to be translated into recipient’s language, in this case Slovenian. In the past such traffic violation notes had original German letter and translation into Slovenian so obviously the system works (different police departments, though). Also according to various official explanations from ministries and such in Slovenia documents without translation are legally invalid and no payment can be enforced.
Third is that, according to google translate, I drove too close to emergency vehicle and now the police want me to explain if it happen, if it did why it happened and if it didn’t to prove it didn’t. After that they’ll decide whether to fine me. I’m not disputing the event itself, It’s possible it happened, it’s just I don’t exactly understand what they want me to do here. There was no SEPA form included which I would be required to pay anyway.
So from what I understand I can just ignore the letter and if there is a follow up claim that I didn’t understand the letter since it wasn’t translated in my language or language I said I understand. Any advice, specially from people dealing with such matters, would be appreciated.
​
EDIT: photos of the letter [https://imgur.com/a/ahxxUEv](https://imgur.com/a/ahxxUEv)
by NoWingedHussarsToday
12 comments
> So from what I understand I can just ignore the letter and if there is a follow up claim that I didn’t understand the letter since it wasn’t translated in my language or language I said I understand
You can randomly click on any post in this subreddit and read, that this isn’t a good idea.
I did follow the traffic rules in other countries as of now, so I don’t know about all the rules like you. But in this case it sounds, as it’s not a traffic violation but a witness hearing. If you don’t answer they will assume something with the given evidence (not including your statement) and you will probably get your fine our your summons to court later this time including your translation.
I don’t have specific advice but under no circumstances I would recommend to *ignore* letters from police or authorities no matter where you live. Ignoring such letters is a recipe to get chewed up in the gears of bureaucracy, which can be difficult to stop once in motion.
My recommendation for such letters is always: go to a lawyer.
I’d answer in English with a note to the Ei directive and that you did not got a translation.
Second, if you receive traffic violations on a regular basis it might be prudent to adjust your driving style.
>I drove too close to emergency vehicle
That’s not an offense. What is an offense however is not yielding to emergency vehicles or following them through the rescue lane. Did you do any of these?
respond with a letter in slovenian, explaining that you would be happy to correspond with them, but require a translation per EU law, so that you can be sure you are responding correctly.
Two can play at that game.
I am not a lawyer and I am not giving advice. I got a weird letter about 4 years ago saying I was caught speeding on a radar camera, but that I needed to confirm it was me driving the car on that date / at that time. There was no photo (on previous occasions there would be a photo sent along with the option to pay immediately) and no invoice / amount to be paid / payment instructions. It was just a form saying ‘I declare it was me driving the car on this date at this time, signed’. A friend who had been through something similar advised me to ignore it, and said that some radar cameras are not ‘certified’ or they could be broken / or the hard-drive is full, and therefore they rely on the ‘offender’ to admit they were driving at the stated time / on the stated date, and then they send you the fine. You’re basically admitting guilt. Anyway, I ignored it and never heard anything again. (I live in Germany and the supposed violation occurred in Germany). I guess I got lucky (or I will receive a huge fine at some point). Good luck!
Either get a lawyer or write them back in English (certified letter that receiver must sign) that per EU law requirement it must be sent in the language of your residence country, give them a reasonable deadline and if you did not hear from them, you understand that nothing is required from you.
>If it didn’t to prove it didn’t.
How can you prove a negative? I would just reply (once it gets to that point, in Slovenian) that there must be some misunderstanding, that you followed locals laws (presuming you did). If they have evidence, it’s upon them to produce that, surely.
It’s unclear to me… you *were* in Germany? And there was some situation where an emergency vehicle drove near or past or in front of you? What exactly happened?
can you upload a sample after blurring personal information?
Sounds fishy.
“drove too close to emergency vehicle” sounds like a wrong translation. I recommend ChatGPT OR post the letter – without your name yadayada – here, so we can translate it for you.
> According to EU regulations such things need to be translated into recipient’s language
No, that’s wrong. Translations are only necessary in criminal proceedings or after an appeal to court. However, this is not about a crime, but an administrative offense, and it’s still at the stage before it goes to court.
If you don’t believe me, here is the relevant passage in Art. 1(3) Directive 2010/64/EU:
> Where the law of a Member State provides for the imposition of a sanction regarding minor offences by an authority other than a court having jurisdiction in criminal matters, and the imposition of such a sanction may be appealed to such a court, this Directive shall apply only to the proceedings before that court following such an appeal.
Indeed, recital 16 makes it clear that this exception was deliberately included specifically for traffic violations:
> In some Member States an authority other than a court having jurisdiction in criminal matters has competence for imposing sanctions in relation to relatively minor offences. That may be the case, for example, in relation to traffic offences which are committed on a large scale and which might be established following a traffic control. In such situations, it would be unreasonable to require that the competent authority ensure all the rights under this Directive. Where the law of a Member State provides for the imposition of a sanction regarding minor offences by such an authority and there is a right of appeal to a court having jurisdiction in criminal matters, this Directive should therefore apply only to the proceedings before that court following such an appeal.
Edit: There is another requirement in Art. 5 in Convention on Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters between the Member States of the European Union that requires proceeding documents sent abroad to include a summary in the recipient’s language. So certainly a translated summary of the final decision must be translated (this is currently just the document questionining you about your perspective, not the decision, so perhaps a translation of this document is really not necessary, as it even never reaching you has no practical effect on the proceedings). But even so, the authority does not have to consider anything you send them in any language other than German (as court language in Germany in German and there is no international agreement here that changes this), so if you decide to reply, try to do so in German at this stage.