Quizzes & Puzzles6 mins ago
Speed Camera Identification
My wife & I own 2 cars - 1 each. We both drive both cars on a regular and almost even basis. We are both named drivers on each others insurance policies. Early last Autumn one of the cars was caught on a mobile speed camera exceeding the speed limit on that road (34in an 30!). It became apparent that initial notification of this offence was significantly delayed by post office problems. Suffice to say exact details did not reach us until the end of the year (2008). The offence was a stretch of road we both use frequently and the time of the offence was early afternoon on a regular Saturday. Our problem is that we genuinely do not know who was driving that car at that time and despite taking what we think is all reasonable steps to try to establish this we are none the wiser. Certainly it was one of the two of us but we do not know which. What can we say to the Court? Does one of us have to put our hand up and risk a miscarriage of justice? Surely the British Legal system would not want to be party to that...? Any advice out there?
Answers
1 to 19 of 19
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by sparkie58. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
-- answer removed --
You mention that you eventually received "notification"
of the alleged offence but you fail to specify exactly what you received and to whom it was addressed.
Also, to whom is the car in question registered? I suspect that that's who the correspondence was sent to? You can't both be the registered keeper.
It's that person who will have to answer the allegation(s), regardless of whether or not both of you are insured to drive it.
of the alleged offence but you fail to specify exactly what you received and to whom it was addressed.
Also, to whom is the car in question registered? I suspect that that's who the correspondence was sent to? You can't both be the registered keeper.
It's that person who will have to answer the allegation(s), regardless of whether or not both of you are insured to drive it.
-- answer removed --
The situation is this:
The prosecuting authority writes to the registered keeper (RK) of the vehicle requesting the details of the driver at the time of the alleged offence. Along with this comes a Notice of Intended Prosecution (NIP) for speeding. This should normally arrive within 14 days, but the action is not automatically invalidated if it does not.
The RK has 28 days to respond. In your case, whoever of you is the RK should respond by saying you cannot remember who was driving. (As far as I can recall there is no space on the form you are asked to return for this. You will have to write a letter).
The RK will then receive a summons for �Failing to Provide Driver�s details� under Section 172 of the Road Traffic Act. You will then have to go to court and plead Not Guilty on the basis that you cannot recall who was driving. It is a valid defence but the onus will be on you to show that in the circumstances you describe in your question, it is impossible for you to remember.
Your case will be strengthened by the time delay in your receiving the paperwork.
In the event that you are convicted the offence carries a minimum of six penalty points, so you would be wise to employ a solicitor, as your argument needs to be properly put before the court.
For the sake of brevity I have left out other information such as prosecution time limits.
The prosecuting authority writes to the registered keeper (RK) of the vehicle requesting the details of the driver at the time of the alleged offence. Along with this comes a Notice of Intended Prosecution (NIP) for speeding. This should normally arrive within 14 days, but the action is not automatically invalidated if it does not.
The RK has 28 days to respond. In your case, whoever of you is the RK should respond by saying you cannot remember who was driving. (As far as I can recall there is no space on the form you are asked to return for this. You will have to write a letter).
The RK will then receive a summons for �Failing to Provide Driver�s details� under Section 172 of the Road Traffic Act. You will then have to go to court and plead Not Guilty on the basis that you cannot recall who was driving. It is a valid defence but the onus will be on you to show that in the circumstances you describe in your question, it is impossible for you to remember.
Your case will be strengthened by the time delay in your receiving the paperwork.
In the event that you are convicted the offence carries a minimum of six penalty points, so you would be wise to employ a solicitor, as your argument needs to be properly put before the court.
For the sake of brevity I have left out other information such as prosecution time limits.
I forgot - As Zac says, you can ask for a copy of the photograph to help you indentify the driver. Some prosecuting authorities will do this, but they are not, at this stage, obliged to do so. Also, the photographs I have seen rarely provide a good enough image to identify the driver, but it may help you distinguish whether it was you or your wife.
-- answer removed --
Parrafin - thanks for your response (thnks to you all) the RK is my wife. The delay was because we did not recieve the first notification, then we got the threatening second one. this prmpted us to respond in writing which produced the correct initial NIP. By now it was so long after the event we our memories are severly challenged! We have written explaining our plight and have yet to recieve a response. We understand that the RK has to answer the question as to who was driving but we simply do not know. It could so easily have been either of us. On a saturday at that time we both have good reason to be on that road going in that direction in that car. We have the photo and the sun visor is down and then is no way at all of telling who is in driving seat. We anticpate that the authorities will not let this rest and will pursue the RK (my wife). How do we proceed from here ???
sparkie - You may be onto a winner here, in the sense that it would be difficult to say the least for the authorities to prosecute anyone if it cannot be proven who was driving at the time of the alleged offence.
New Judge has outlined the procedures and it would appear that you have little other option(s).
If you can genuinely not remember who was driving at the time, then say so, who can argue? Your visor was down and if the photo is of the usual CCTV standard you'd be hard pushed to recognise your own granny!
Good luck!
New Judge has outlined the procedures and it would appear that you have little other option(s).
If you can genuinely not remember who was driving at the time, then say so, who can argue? Your visor was down and if the photo is of the usual CCTV standard you'd be hard pushed to recognise your own granny!
Good luck!
-- answer removed --
I'll tell you why Docspock, because the fine thread of gold that hopefully continues to run through our judicial system is that every man (and woman) is innocent until proven guilty. Since neither of us can be proven guilty we must be found innocent. Yes, it was one of us but it is for the court to decide who. If it cannot how would you justify a 50:50 chance of finding guilt. Forget the relative insignificance of the crime - think about the point of law. Why should either of us incriminate ourselves just to give the court a perpetrator?
[Two Part Post]
The latest posts raise a couple of interesting points, sparkie.
Firstly, you are quite correct in that no prosecution for speeding will succeed (or even be attempted) if the driver of the vehicle is not known to the authorities. As a result, if this information is not forthcoming the allegation of speeding will not be pursued.
Instead they will concentrate on the S.172 offence of failing to provide driver�s details. This section of the Road Traffic Act says that the RK has a duty to provide such details. If he fails to do so he is guilty of an offence unless:
�...he shows to the satisfaction of the court that he did not know and could not with reasonable diligence have ascertained who the driver of the vehicle was�.
So if she does nothing, your wife (as the RK) will be convicted of an offence under S.172. The only way she can show that she has �exercised reasonable diligence� is to go to court when summonsed and plead Not Guilty. It is not something she can do by post or any other means. The burden of proof then shifts to her to convince the court.
[Continued]
The latest posts raise a couple of interesting points, sparkie.
Firstly, you are quite correct in that no prosecution for speeding will succeed (or even be attempted) if the driver of the vehicle is not known to the authorities. As a result, if this information is not forthcoming the allegation of speeding will not be pursued.
Instead they will concentrate on the S.172 offence of failing to provide driver�s details. This section of the Road Traffic Act says that the RK has a duty to provide such details. If he fails to do so he is guilty of an offence unless:
�...he shows to the satisfaction of the court that he did not know and could not with reasonable diligence have ascertained who the driver of the vehicle was�.
So if she does nothing, your wife (as the RK) will be convicted of an offence under S.172. The only way she can show that she has �exercised reasonable diligence� is to go to court when summonsed and plead Not Guilty. It is not something she can do by post or any other means. The burden of proof then shifts to her to convince the court.
[Continued]
Just stick to the story, it will go away in the end, you'll get no end of sh1tty letters but there is nowt they can do. Same thing happenned to Alex Ferguson a few years back. Just stick to your guns keep saying the same thing. If they try and prosecute just plead not guilty. They'll soon lose interest and go after a softer target.
[Part Two]
It is true that the Hamiltons succeeded with this defence (I believe they said they were sharing the driving on a long journey). But success is not confined to the rich and famous. The law is the same for everybody and the argument is successfully used regularly, as oldhamfan�s link suggests. But as I said earlier, it needs to be properly put and a solicitor is the best person to do this.
Your point about self-incrimination has been covered many times by appeal. It finally went to the European Court of Human Rights in June 2007. In the case of O�Halloran vs the UK it was ruled that Registered Keepers of motor vehicles could lawfully be compelled to tell the police who was driving it on a particular occasion and that this �...did not destroy their right to remain silent and their privilege against self-incrimination.�
From your description of the situation, I believe you have a good chance of success, especially bearing in mind the delay in receiving the notification (to which the court will give a good bit of weight). The downside is that if you are not successful your wife will be awarded six points, be fined about one and a half week�s net income, pay prosecution costs of about �400, and pay a Victim Surcharge of �15. If one of you owns up to speeding it�s �60 and three points (provided that whoever owns up does not already have nine or more points and that the speed was not so excessive to be outside the fixed penalty guidelines � which is over 49 mph in a 30 zone).
My advice is to consult a solicitor (unfortunately you will not get Legal Aid), explain all the facts, and do whatever she or he recommends.
Hope all this helps.
It is true that the Hamiltons succeeded with this defence (I believe they said they were sharing the driving on a long journey). But success is not confined to the rich and famous. The law is the same for everybody and the argument is successfully used regularly, as oldhamfan�s link suggests. But as I said earlier, it needs to be properly put and a solicitor is the best person to do this.
Your point about self-incrimination has been covered many times by appeal. It finally went to the European Court of Human Rights in June 2007. In the case of O�Halloran vs the UK it was ruled that Registered Keepers of motor vehicles could lawfully be compelled to tell the police who was driving it on a particular occasion and that this �...did not destroy their right to remain silent and their privilege against self-incrimination.�
From your description of the situation, I believe you have a good chance of success, especially bearing in mind the delay in receiving the notification (to which the court will give a good bit of weight). The downside is that if you are not successful your wife will be awarded six points, be fined about one and a half week�s net income, pay prosecution costs of about �400, and pay a Victim Surcharge of �15. If one of you owns up to speeding it�s �60 and three points (provided that whoever owns up does not already have nine or more points and that the speed was not so excessive to be outside the fixed penalty guidelines � which is over 49 mph in a 30 zone).
My advice is to consult a solicitor (unfortunately you will not get Legal Aid), explain all the facts, and do whatever she or he recommends.
Hope all this helps.
And I would be very surprised if it simply goes away, as Geezer suggests.
The authorities have six months to lay information before the court. This is probably almost up now, but it is not wise to ignore correspondence (sh1tty or otherwise) as there is a very good chance that the matter will be listed in court and heard in your absence.
The authorities have six months to lay information before the court. This is probably almost up now, but it is not wise to ignore correspondence (sh1tty or otherwise) as there is a very good chance that the matter will be listed in court and heard in your absence.
1 to 19 of 19
Latest Posts
Film, Media & TV6 mins ago
News11 mins ago
Hezbollah Vows To Continue Resistance...
News19 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles20 mins ago