Speeding: 42 in a 30 on a test drive
Discussion
Stevoox said:
Yes, you are correct.
1st NIP was sent to MB who then nominated me
2nd NIP was sent to me and I then nominated the salesman at MB.
3rd NIP was sent to MB who have again nominated me but also provided a copy of the sign test drive form
I have spoken with Sussex police again today to raise my points. I have again taken photo copies of everything, filled out the reverse of the NIP naming the salesman and sent a second letter to say:
"Dear Sussex Safer roads team,
Signing the test drive form does not prove who was driving at the time of the offence, it merely states that at some point the nominated individual drove the car. The vehicle is signed out at 12:30, at which time we continued to speak, the salesman then had a look at my car, we then drove my car briefly before the A45 AMG – so instantly an out time of 12:30 is incorrect.
As per the Google location tracking I can see the route around the area of Gatwick road was taken from 12:41 onwards, at which time the salesman () was driving. It is a standard procedure in the motor trade for the dealership to first drive the car, make sure all is in working order, the car has sufficient fuel and talk about the car with the customer.
We then stopped, switched drivers and my route consisted of the M23 (which according to Google location tracking appears to be from 13:01 to 13:15. The 13:15 time also the correlates with the ‘time in’ on the test drive form which is when I had returned to the area/dealership – 17 minutes after the car was caught.
I have therefore once again nominated the salesman () as the named driver, as he drove the car around the area of the dealership at that time.
Might be worth removing his name... N&S rules etc.1st NIP was sent to MB who then nominated me
2nd NIP was sent to me and I then nominated the salesman at MB.
3rd NIP was sent to MB who have again nominated me but also provided a copy of the sign test drive form
I have spoken with Sussex police again today to raise my points. I have again taken photo copies of everything, filled out the reverse of the NIP naming the salesman and sent a second letter to say:
"Dear Sussex Safer roads team,
Signing the test drive form does not prove who was driving at the time of the offence, it merely states that at some point the nominated individual drove the car. The vehicle is signed out at 12:30, at which time we continued to speak, the salesman then had a look at my car, we then drove my car briefly before the A45 AMG – so instantly an out time of 12:30 is incorrect.
As per the Google location tracking I can see the route around the area of Gatwick road was taken from 12:41 onwards, at which time the salesman () was driving. It is a standard procedure in the motor trade for the dealership to first drive the car, make sure all is in working order, the car has sufficient fuel and talk about the car with the customer.
We then stopped, switched drivers and my route consisted of the M23 (which according to Google location tracking appears to be from 13:01 to 13:15. The 13:15 time also the correlates with the ‘time in’ on the test drive form which is when I had returned to the area/dealership – 17 minutes after the car was caught.
I have therefore once again nominated the salesman () as the named driver, as he drove the car around the area of the dealership at that time.
Stevoox said:
1st NIP was sent to MB who then nominated me
2nd NIP was sent to me and I then nominated the salesman at MB.
3rd NIP was sent to MB who have again nominated me but also provided a copy of the sign test drive form
Sounds like a Conspiracy charge against the dealer might be appropriate. 2nd NIP was sent to me and I then nominated the salesman at MB.
3rd NIP was sent to MB who have again nominated me but also provided a copy of the sign test drive form
I would ask the police if the Mercedes dealer has given evidence they have thoroughly investigated the case or only given the time sheet the test drive was for before naming you as the driver.
It would be interesting if the police could give you details of how many times the Mercedes dealer has received a NIP in say the last three years and how many times they have nominated the person taking the test drive as the driver.
It would be interesting if the police could give you details of how many times the Mercedes dealer has received a NIP in say the last three years and how many times they have nominated the person taking the test drive as the driver.
photosnob said:
Macadoodle said:
Did you try getting CCTV footage either from the dealer or from other cameras in the area? This may be the only thing that could irrefutably prove you were not driving at the time of the offence.
Err... - last time I checked it was for the Police to collect evidence and for the CPS to present it to a court to determine guilt or innocence. Speeding is a bit different, as we are legally have to self incriminate ourselves. However if the Police want to work out who was driving they should do the leg work. If someone were accused of murder - you wouldn't expect them to go around collecting evidence of their guilt or innocence. It's the Polices job. If they don't have the time or resources to do, they should not be charging people.
And as someone said a few posts before, if I was accused of murder I'd be doing my utmost to prove my innocence!
photosnob said:
Err... - last time I checked it was for the Police to collect evidence and for the CPS to present it to a court to determine guilt or innocence. Speeding is a bit different, as we are legally have to self incriminate ourselves. However if the Police want to work out who was driving they should do the leg work.
If someone were accused of murder - you wouldn't expect them to go around collecting evidence of their guilt or innocence. It's the Polices job. If they don't have the time or resources to do, they should not be charging people.
Come on. Comparing this to a murder charge? I bet you were one of those who was up in arms when Brunstrom suggested "there is no more excuse for accidentally drifting over a speed limit, than there is for someone accidentally drifting a knife into another" or words to that effect. If someone were accused of murder - you wouldn't expect them to go around collecting evidence of their guilt or innocence. It's the Polices job. If they don't have the time or resources to do, they should not be charging people.
LoonR1 said:
Come on. Comparing this to a murder charge? I bet you were one of those who was up in arms when Brunstrom suggested "there is no more excuse for accidentally drifting over a speed limit, than there is for someone accidentally drifting a knife into another" or words to that effect.
Speeding has absolutely nothing to do with murder. However it is not for an accused to prove their innocence for any offense... And I believe that. For a start - those who in good faith have said they would be collecting evidence in the more serious case, would almost certainly be getting themselves further arrested for attempting to pervert the course of justice, or obstructing the police.
What's more - as things stand AGT has said this won't go anywhere... That would be enough for me. What if he collects the evidence and by some miracle it shows it's him who is speeding? Suddenly his defence is gone - and if he ran it and it ever came out he'd be looking at a world of grief.
So personally I don't think going around collecting evidence in this way is a smart idea. The OP is free to do what he wants. But I've never felt the need to do the Polices job.
photosnob said:
Speeding has absolutely nothing to do with murder. However it is not for an accused to prove their innocence for any offense... And I believe that.
For a start - those who in good faith have said they would be collecting evidence in the more serious case, would almost certainly be getting themselves further arrested for attempting to pervert the course of justice, or obstructing the police.
What's more - as things stand AGT has said this won't go anywhere... That would be enough for me. What if he collects the evidence and by some miracle it shows it's him who is speeding? Suddenly his defence is gone - and if he ran it and it ever came out he'd be looking at a world of grief.
So personally I don't think going around collecting evidence in this way is a smart idea. The OP is free to do what he wants. But I've never felt the need to do the Polices job.
If it has nothing to do with murder (which I agree it hasn't). Why did you choose to compare a speeding charge to a murder charge?For a start - those who in good faith have said they would be collecting evidence in the more serious case, would almost certainly be getting themselves further arrested for attempting to pervert the course of justice, or obstructing the police.
What's more - as things stand AGT has said this won't go anywhere... That would be enough for me. What if he collects the evidence and by some miracle it shows it's him who is speeding? Suddenly his defence is gone - and if he ran it and it ever came out he'd be looking at a world of grief.
So personally I don't think going around collecting evidence in this way is a smart idea. The OP is free to do what he wants. But I've never felt the need to do the Polices job.
LoonR1 said:
If it has nothing to do with murder (which I agree it hasn't). Why did you choose to compare a speeding charge to a murder charge?
Because the juxtaposition of the two criminal offences worked to convey the message that I was trying to give. My bombastic choice of language seems to have confused you, but that was not my intention. photosnob said:
Because the juxtaposition of the two criminal offences worked to convey the message that I was trying to give. My bombastic choice of language seems to have confused you, but that was not my intention.
It hasn't confused me. I queried it as you can't use it one way and then object if someone else uses the same comparison to make their point. Stevoox said:
Fastra said:
Depends on whether he's attended a course in the last 3 years, if he has then its points.
No points, completely clean licence Will hopefully hear more this week as I am waiting for a call from Sussex Police about the situation
POORCARDEALER said:
Stevoox said:
Fastra said:
Depends on whether he's attended a course in the last 3 years, if he has then its points.
No points, completely clean licence Will hopefully hear more this week as I am waiting for a call from Sussex Police about the situation
I returned the NIP again naming Merc so she (girl from Sussex Police) said it will now all be assessed by senior people and she will call me with an update this week.
Stevoox said:
Hopefully this will just fizzle into nothing then but we shall see
I returned the NIP again naming Merc so she (girl from Sussex Police) said it will now all be assessed by senior people and she will call me with an update this week.
I'm fairly sure they will have drop the matter as both you and the salesman deny being the driver and they can't prove either way.I returned the NIP again naming Merc so she (girl from Sussex Police) said it will now all be assessed by senior people and she will call me with an update this week.
bad company said:
I'm fairly sure they will have drop the matter as both you and the salesman deny being the driver and they can't prove either way.
They may go after "someone" for failing to provide just to try and make the point that garages ought to know who is driving at all times.However in a dealership, likely owned by a parent group, even identifying who that "someone" is could be complicated.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff