Failure to disclose driver vs very excessive speeding NIP?
Discussion
LocoCoco said:
TooMany2cvs said:
LocoCoco said:
On your second point, I could honestly nominate another driver but not be able to prove that they were driving, they deny all responsibility and I end up getting done for the original offence.
You gave the keys to somebody. They get named.If they gave the keys to somebody else, then they can bloody well name them.
LocoCoco said:
JNW1 said:
I agree it doesn't really matter whether or not the OP knows who was driving but the issue here is more whether the owner of the vehicle knew who was driving. I get the impression they do and they're just trying to work out whether it might be better to claim they don't rather than give the name of the driver....
I get that impression too tbh but I'm not 100% sure, not sure beyond reasonable doubt. I'd like to see some actual proof before I'd punish somebody for something they might not have done. If however the owner genuinely doesn't know who was behind the wheel they can presumably respond to the NIP saying that and invite the police to supply some photographic evidence which may help determine the identity of the driver? If there's nothing that can confirm the identity of the driver - and the owner really doesn't know who was driving - I'm not sure what happens then; presumably case dropped unless it's an offence to not know who was driving your car?!
TooMany2cvs said:
LocoCoco said:
TooMany2cvs said:
LocoCoco said:
On your second point, I could honestly nominate another driver but not be able to prove that they were driving, they deny all responsibility and I end up getting done for the original offence.
You gave the keys to somebody. They get named.If they gave the keys to somebody else, then they can bloody well name them.
I've been in a similar position myself on two occasions. First was that my car was caught on a Gatso at 48 in 30. On that day I could prove that I was elsewhere, but I also identified two possible drivers who had access to the car on the day to use for vehicle deliveries and collections.
Normally they did fill out driver sheets, but on this occasion it was two agency drivers who used my car to collect a truck from a customer, and didn't complete the logs.
I provided the information to Cheshire Police, and after discussion between them, me, the driver agency and I believe, the two drivers, the police dropped it.
The second was a very high profile incident where a cyclist was deliberately knocked off his bike. My company was the RK of the vehicle, but it had been sublet through various hire companies and accident management agencies to a driver who had been in a third party accident.
Two people were insured/authorised to drive the vehicle, but both could prove they were elsewhere at the time, and neither would not disclose who may have had access to the keys. One of the two authorised drivers was given 6 points, and a means tested fine of £150. The cyclist went to the press, and as far as I know, nothing has changed since.
So will the police follow the speeding case up, rather than settling on the failing to furnish? Possibly not, based on my own experience. I'm sure there are legal reasons behind the decision that Agtlaw may know more about, or maybe practical reasons like the police don't want to use their finite resources investigating it.
Normally they did fill out driver sheets, but on this occasion it was two agency drivers who used my car to collect a truck from a customer, and didn't complete the logs.
I provided the information to Cheshire Police, and after discussion between them, me, the driver agency and I believe, the two drivers, the police dropped it.
The second was a very high profile incident where a cyclist was deliberately knocked off his bike. My company was the RK of the vehicle, but it had been sublet through various hire companies and accident management agencies to a driver who had been in a third party accident.
Two people were insured/authorised to drive the vehicle, but both could prove they were elsewhere at the time, and neither would not disclose who may have had access to the keys. One of the two authorised drivers was given 6 points, and a means tested fine of £150. The cyclist went to the press, and as far as I know, nothing has changed since.
So will the police follow the speeding case up, rather than settling on the failing to furnish? Possibly not, based on my own experience. I'm sure there are legal reasons behind the decision that Agtlaw may know more about, or maybe practical reasons like the police don't want to use their finite resources investigating it.
LocoCoco said:
They denied it again and got an alibi from a dodgy friend saying that they were with them at the time of the offence. I feel pretty screwed now, can't prove that I wasn't driving. Police now charging me with PCOJ too. Would have been much better off just keeping my mouth shut from the start.
What was the previous offence you mentioned which you were unfairly found guilty of? Are there any more?Having seen the news about this 'little' incident I wondered if this story was a cover for the real story ie knowledge of who was driving a lorry near Manchester.........
M62 'road rage' driver attacks lorry with shovel
29 November 2016 Last updated at 22:26 GMT
A truck driver reversed at speed into a lorry then smashed its cab with a shovel in a terrifying "road rage" attack captured on camera.
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-manchester-3814...
Pip
M62 'road rage' driver attacks lorry with shovel
29 November 2016 Last updated at 22:26 GMT
A truck driver reversed at speed into a lorry then smashed its cab with a shovel in a terrifying "road rage" attack captured on camera.
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-manchester-3814...
Pip
RWD cossie wil said:
So, bit of thread closure due...
Offender coughed, 108mph in a 50....
56 day ban, £200 fine plus usual add ons & a fairly hefty legal bill to offset the low fine... all in all not a bad result for the offender?
I presume his attempts to duck responsibility didn't come up in court?Offender coughed, 108mph in a 50....
56 day ban, £200 fine plus usual add ons & a fairly hefty legal bill to offset the low fine... all in all not a bad result for the offender?
TooMany2cvs said:
RWD cossie wil said:
So, bit of thread closure due...
Offender coughed, 108mph in a 50....
56 day ban, £200 fine plus usual add ons & a fairly hefty legal bill to offset the low fine... all in all not a bad result for the offender?
I presume his attempts to duck responsibility didn't come up in court?Offender coughed, 108mph in a 50....
56 day ban, £200 fine plus usual add ons & a fairly hefty legal bill to offset the low fine... all in all not a bad result for the offender?
RWD cossie wil said:
So, bit of thread closure due...
Offender coughed, 108mph in a 50....
56 day ban, £200 fine plus usual add ons & a fairly hefty legal bill to offset the low fine... all in all not a bad result for the offender?
Could have been slightly worse. I would have said to expect 1-3 months but most likely 2-3 months. Looks like he declared a fairly low income for his fine.Offender coughed, 108mph in a 50....
56 day ban, £200 fine plus usual add ons & a fairly hefty legal bill to offset the low fine... all in all not a bad result for the offender?
How much was his "hefty legal bill?"
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff