Rugby woman told to sort out childcare arrangements by judge ahead of potential prison term

Zarina Hussain, left, and Imran Ali
Zarina Hussain, left, and Imran Ali
0
Have your say

A Rugby mother-of-two has been told to sort out childcare arrangements – because a judge plans to jail her for trying to con magistrates with a false insurance certificate.

Zarina Hussain and her cousin Imran Ali had produced the bogus certificate after they were stopped by the police while her Vauxhall Zafira was being driven by uninsured Ali.

They both pleaded guilty at Warwick Crown Court to doing an act intended to pervert the course of justice, while Ali also admitted driving without insurance and Hussain admitted permitting him to do so.

Ali (23) of Whaleys Croft, Willenhall, Coventry, was jailed for six months and had six points put on his licence.

But the case against Hussain (27) of Bath Street, Rugby, was adjourned after Judge Richard Bond was told she had not made any arrangements for her two young children to be cared for.

Prosecutor Blondel Thompson said that in July last year the police had stopped Hussain’s car in Oliver Street, Rugby.

She was the only person who was registered as being insured to drive it but was sitting in the passenger seat while it was being driven by Ali, her cousin.

As a result, Ali was prosecuted for driving the car while uninsured, and Hussain for permitting him to do so.

They denied the offences, and when they turned up at the magistrates’ court in Leamington on March 30 this year, they handed an insurance document to the magistrates’ legal advisor.

Despite the legal advisor fully explaining her role, they both insisted the document proved there was insurance in place to cover Ali to drive Hussain’s car.

Asked why they did not submit the document, which Hussain said she had received a week before they were stopped, earlier, she claimed they had not received a letter from the prosecution.

But checks with the insurance company named on the certificate revealed that it was fraudulent, and they were both arrested at the magistrates’ court.

Ali told the police he had bought the certificate from a friend for £1,000 because he had received quotes of £3,00 to £4,000 from insurance companies – but claimed he did not know it was ‘dodgy.’

Hussain denied producing the bogus certificate at court, and blamed Ali, who she said had shown her the certificate a week before they were stopped, and thought he was insured.

Sophie Murray, for Hussain, said: “These are serious matters, of course. The difficulty for Miss Hussain is that she has two young children, and there’s no-one to look after them.”

Judge Bond immediately interjected: “I’m going to adjourn her case because I’m thinking of sending her to prison today.”

Ravi Sidhu, for Ali, said: “He is fully aware of the seriousness of his predicament. I would invite you to look at the act of driving as a solitary act of stupidity.”

The judge responded: “That doesn’t bother me at all. What bothers me is that he goes and buys a false insurance certificate, and he went to court and handed it over.

“They were trying to con the court, and trying to avoid the penalty for the original offence.”

Mr Sidhu conceded there was not much that could be said about the offence of perverting the course of justice, but said Ali is a carer within his family, and if he was jailed, it would have ‘a negative impact on those who rely on him.’

Miss Murray said of Hussain: “She hasn’t been able to suggest any alternative carers for her children. She didn’t seem to be fully grasping the prospect of custody today.”

She suggested Hussain had played a secondary role, but Judge Bond said he did not accept that, and told Hussain he was adjourning her case and granting her bail, to give her time to make arrangements for the care of her children.

Jailing Ali, he told him: “You had no insurance, and she permitted her vehicle to be used without insurance. That on its own is considered to be relatively minor by the courts.

“But this case revolves around what happened when you went to the magistrates’ court and together produced a document to the legal advisor which, if accepted, would give you a defence.

“This was a deliberate attempt by both of you to pull the wool over the eyes of the court. Unfortunately for you, you didn’t realise the court would check the validity of the document. It is so serious, only an immediate sentence can be justified.”