Quizzes & Puzzles2 mins ago
speeding ticket - driver unknown
14 Answers
my brother works for a parcel company and his manager is in a bit of bother with a speeding ticket for a van that is registered to her.
there are 2 drivers for the van as 1 is learning the route and 1 is changing route, so they both drive at a different point in the day.
1 of them have been flashed by a speed camera and she has to name the driver by friday, the date has been given has she's given the 2 drivers names as she's unsure which 1 was driving.
does anyone know what the most likely outcome to this will be as i will tell my brother to tell her.
cheers..
there are 2 drivers for the van as 1 is learning the route and 1 is changing route, so they both drive at a different point in the day.
1 of them have been flashed by a speed camera and she has to name the driver by friday, the date has been given has she's given the 2 drivers names as she's unsure which 1 was driving.
does anyone know what the most likely outcome to this will be as i will tell my brother to tell her.
cheers..
Answers
1 to 14 of 14
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by neil_loves_marie. 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.
Hi Neil,
Only one of them was driving at the time of the speed cameraflash so the time it occurred has gotta be a clue as to which one was driving. Both names have been given, but they will want to know which one.
I think the law has changed since years ago when you got points on your licence and a fine... and you are offered to go on a speed course if you opt to not take the points, so a days course locally somewhere may be ruled on, to which you will have to pay again, in addition to the fine.
Best to come clean as to which one was driving, as there are ways that they can tell with the camera and its against the law to name someone that wasnt driving, as the driver.
Should be about a £60 fine and another £60-£90 to attend the course.
Only one of them was driving at the time of the speed cameraflash so the time it occurred has gotta be a clue as to which one was driving. Both names have been given, but they will want to know which one.
I think the law has changed since years ago when you got points on your licence and a fine... and you are offered to go on a speed course if you opt to not take the points, so a days course locally somewhere may be ruled on, to which you will have to pay again, in addition to the fine.
Best to come clean as to which one was driving, as there are ways that they can tell with the camera and its against the law to name someone that wasnt driving, as the driver.
Should be about a £60 fine and another £60-£90 to attend the course.
After looking at Fluffpots problem on sunny dave's link. it may be well more than the £60 fine as mentioned.
Cant you say the Ant Hill Mob was driving?
http://
Cant you say the Ant Hill Mob was driving?
http://
Generally its a fine and points on licence unless the speed was below a certain level. eg if it was 36mph in a 30mph zone you might be given the option to attend a one day course.
If the speed was excessively high, like 90mph in a 40mph zone, then its likely to be court and a higher fine.
Just ask the two of them which one it was driving in that street on that day at that time and get them to fess up. If they don't fess up she'll have to pick one of them which isn't much fun, but has to be done. I'd pick the older one as it'll have less affect on the insurance premiums.
If the speed was excessively high, like 90mph in a 40mph zone, then its likely to be court and a higher fine.
Just ask the two of them which one it was driving in that street on that day at that time and get them to fess up. If they don't fess up she'll have to pick one of them which isn't much fun, but has to be done. I'd pick the older one as it'll have less affect on the insurance premiums.
i spoke to my brother earlier who said it wasn't him and the new driver he's been training up says he can't remember driving through the village where it happened.
i was just trying to find out for my brother as he asked due to his gaffer is panicking on he gets on with her really well, so i thought i would see what would happen and when she calls tomoz i will tell her what i found out on here.
i was just trying to find out for my brother as he asked due to his gaffer is panicking on he gets on with her really well, so i thought i would see what would happen and when she calls tomoz i will tell her what i found out on here.
Get a lawyer on this, if it is genuine that the driver can not be identified no prosecution can take place. There have been many cases were a company 'pool' car was caught in a speed trap and the driver could not be identified, the prosecution can not proceed in these cases. Only the driver can be prosecuted for speeding if the driver can not be identified there can be no prosecution. We had a case at a company where I worked , there was a 'pool' car any one of 12 people could drive , the keys were just left on a hook in the office. a speeding ticket was received but no action taken as the driver could not be identified. Just get the manager to say that the driver can not be identified .
My comments only apply if the car is registered to a company not to an individual person. If the car is registered to a person then that person is responsible unless they can name the driver. If it is registered to a company and they genuinely can not name the driver then no one can be prosecuted .
Car hire companies get round this by making hirers sign a document saying that they are responcible for all fines while the car is hired to them.
Car hire companies get round this by making hirers sign a document saying that they are responcible for all fines while the car is hired to them.
Let me put your mind at rest - I've had personal experience with this.
Scenario: Me and a friend working on-site. We drove there in my car. I had to leave and go somewhere in my car. Half an hour later my friend asked to borrow my car and drove along a similar route to mine. A few days later I received a summons for speeding - giving the time, date and location.
My friend and I honestly (!!) couldn't remember who was driving at the time, so I wrote off explaining this, asking them for photographic evidence so we could identify the driver. They sent a copy of the photo and the following attached letter:
"Thank you for your recent communication in connection with the above notice.
As requested, I am enclosing photograph(s) which may assist you in identifying the driver of the vehicle at the time of the alleged offence, together with a further S172/request for information form. Please be advised that under Section 172 of the Road Traffic Act 1988 you have a legal duty to provide information which may lead to the identification of the driver.
If you are unable to provide this information, then the matter may be dealt with by the Magistrates' Court.
Yours faithfully .......... "
How unlucky can you get - the photograph was blurd and did not help one iota. I wrote back, returning the photo, explaining that the photo was too blurd and did not help.
Here's their reply:
"Thank you for your recent communication in connection with the above notice.
To date, you have not provided information which may lead to the identification of the driver of the above vehicle, as you are required to do so under S172 of the Road Traffic Act 1988. The Act states that you must exercise reasonable diligence in providing this information.
In this instance I understand the photograph(s) does not you in identifying the driver and instead of issuing a summons for you to appear before the Magistrates' Court, you are to treat this letter as a warning, on the understanding that this "defence" will not be accepted for any future offences.
Yours faithfully ....... "
Just for the record, it was in April 2010 (I kept the letters for posterity!!)
..... oh and 1 more thing ...... RESULT ...... 1-0 to me :)
Scenario: Me and a friend working on-site. We drove there in my car. I had to leave and go somewhere in my car. Half an hour later my friend asked to borrow my car and drove along a similar route to mine. A few days later I received a summons for speeding - giving the time, date and location.
My friend and I honestly (!!) couldn't remember who was driving at the time, so I wrote off explaining this, asking them for photographic evidence so we could identify the driver. They sent a copy of the photo and the following attached letter:
"Thank you for your recent communication in connection with the above notice.
As requested, I am enclosing photograph(s) which may assist you in identifying the driver of the vehicle at the time of the alleged offence, together with a further S172/request for information form. Please be advised that under Section 172 of the Road Traffic Act 1988 you have a legal duty to provide information which may lead to the identification of the driver.
If you are unable to provide this information, then the matter may be dealt with by the Magistrates' Court.
Yours faithfully .......... "
How unlucky can you get - the photograph was blurd and did not help one iota. I wrote back, returning the photo, explaining that the photo was too blurd and did not help.
Here's their reply:
"Thank you for your recent communication in connection with the above notice.
To date, you have not provided information which may lead to the identification of the driver of the above vehicle, as you are required to do so under S172 of the Road Traffic Act 1988. The Act states that you must exercise reasonable diligence in providing this information.
In this instance I understand the photograph(s) does not you in identifying the driver and instead of issuing a summons for you to appear before the Magistrates' Court, you are to treat this letter as a warning, on the understanding that this "defence" will not be accepted for any future offences.
Yours faithfully ....... "
Just for the record, it was in April 2010 (I kept the letters for posterity!!)
..... oh and 1 more thing ...... RESULT ...... 1-0 to me :)
She may be the 'registered keeper' of the vehicle but she is clearly not 'the keeper' of the vehicle. The keeper of the vehicle is, generally, the one in charge of the keys. As she is not the keeper of the vehicle her requirement under s172 is to give all information she has on the subject ie the names of the 2 possible drivers.
If she wants to ask for photographs do not use the word 'evidence' as she would not be entitled to any 'evidence' until and if a summons was issued.
If she wants to ask for photographs do not use the word 'evidence' as she would not be entitled to any 'evidence' until and if a summons was issued.
Much of the information given in response to this question could be misleading. I don't have time to go into all in details but in particular the idea that providing the names of two possible drivers will avoid prosecution under Section 172 is incorrect. A prosecution will almost certainly ensue and it will be for a court to decide if the RK has exercised all "reasonable diligence" in her attempt to provide the driver's details. Further,there is no distinction between the Registered Keeper and "the keeper".The Registered Keeper has oblligations under Section 172 whether the vehicle is under his/her control or not.
My answers to McFluff's question gives information on the situation where a company is the registered keeper (which seems to apply here).
My answers to McFluff's question gives information on the situation where a company is the registered keeper (which seems to apply here).
There is a big difference between the 'registered keeper' and the 'keeper'.
Under S172 if the registered keeper (RK) is not the keeper then he is required to give all the information in his power to give. The keeper is required to name the driver or use reasonble dilligence to explain why he is unable to do so.
Under S172 if the registered keeper (RK) is not the keeper then he is required to give all the information in his power to give. The keeper is required to name the driver or use reasonble dilligence to explain why he is unable to do so.
1 to 14 of 14
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.