Speeding: 42 in a 30 on a test drive
Discussion
Is there a number to call on the notice? If so, ring the SCP and explain your situation, asking to see the photo or video to help you work out which one was driving. If you genuinely don't know and have done everything within reason to find out who was driving, you have a defence against failing to furnish. I would also be asking for the cctv from the dealership before it gets deleted (if it hasn't been already).
All this for a poxy speeding ticket.
All this for a poxy speeding ticket.
Just used the google location thingy that someone gave the link to (thanks).
It shows:
First went off in the car (sales guy driving): 12:41-12:58
brief stop
Second trip in the car (me driving): 13:01-13:15
Time the camera caught us: 12:58 so it must have been when the sales guy was returning. I'll phone the police now and explain.
It shows:
First went off in the car (sales guy driving): 12:41-12:58
brief stop
Second trip in the car (me driving): 13:01-13:15
Time the camera caught us: 12:58 so it must have been when the sales guy was returning. I'll phone the police now and explain.
Stevoox said:
Just used the google location thingy that someone gave the link to (thanks).
It shows:
First went off in the car (sales guy driving): 12:41-12:58
brief stop
Second trip in the car (me driving): 13:01-13:15
Time the camera caught us: 12:58 so it must have been when the sales guy was returning. I'll phone the police now and explain.
Yesterday, you mentioned another journey - in which you were the driver. ETA: I appreciate that the notice concerns the Mercedes but I'm not clear whether there are 3 relevant drives - one in your car, two in the mercedes?It shows:
First went off in the car (sales guy driving): 12:41-12:58
brief stop
Second trip in the car (me driving): 13:01-13:15
Time the camera caught us: 12:58 so it must have been when the sales guy was returning. I'll phone the police now and explain.
Stevoox said:
No pic has been provided with the paperwork, i recall where the van was though and a mate who worked for BMW nearby said its there every 2/3 weeks, from where its located the picture will be of the rear of the car (if there even is a pic..).
I signed the test drive paperwork, then he had a nose at my car, he wanted me to take him in it (which i did), then we came back, jumped in the merc and he drove for some time.
So there is a good chance the time i signed the paperwork is a fair bit before the camera caught us
Your obligation to nominate the driver is not discharged by making a telephone call. You must return the completed form. I advise doing this by Signed For post. You should also include a cover letter explaining. If the phone data is relevant then preserve that 'evidence' as you may need it later.I signed the test drive paperwork, then he had a nose at my car, he wanted me to take him in it (which i did), then we came back, jumped in the merc and he drove for some time.
So there is a good chance the time i signed the paperwork is a fair bit before the camera caught us
Edited by agtlaw on Wednesday 11th March 09:46
martinbiz said:
Stevoox said:
jith said:
Dear god, what is wrong with you people? Can't you read!
The person who could likely face a PCJ charge would be the salesman. He has named the OP as the RK and he didn't even buy the car! He clearly did it to get himself off the hook. The OP has a first class defence in the respect that this was a road test of a vehicle he showed an interest in. BOTH himself and the salesman were driving. That means it is up to the SCP to prove who was driving.
Both drivers in a situation like this can hold their hands up and say they don't know who was driving; this is completely reasonable and is not a cop out. If the photo or video doesn't show the driver they will have a hard job proving who it was.
Send the NIP back OP and make it crystal clear you are NOT the RK.
J
Thank you for a clear, helpful answer!The person who could likely face a PCJ charge would be the salesman. He has named the OP as the RK and he didn't even buy the car! He clearly did it to get himself off the hook. The OP has a first class defence in the respect that this was a road test of a vehicle he showed an interest in. BOTH himself and the salesman were driving. That means it is up to the SCP to prove who was driving.
Both drivers in a situation like this can hold their hands up and say they don't know who was driving; this is completely reasonable and is not a cop out. If the photo or video doesn't show the driver they will have a hard job proving who it was.
Send the NIP back OP and make it crystal clear you are NOT the RK.
J
They will have sent the NIP to the dealer who is deemed to be the person 'keeping' the vehicle at the time of the offence, as such his responsibility to name the correct driver at the time is far greater than yours, in this instance you will be classed as any other person and your responsibility ends with supplying any information you may have that that may help identify the driver, be that you or someone else. If, as mentioned earlier, you can ascertain it was not you driving by checking the direction of travel etc then write back explain the situation that you were on a test drive but you were not driving at the time of the offence and refer them back to the dealer who by the very nature of his business in the eyes of the law is expected to keep records about who is driving what at any given time, so they will probably fall at the first hurdle.
Also consider that the speed is just inside the guidelines for SAC if the driver is eligible.
Edited by martinbiz on Wednesday 11th March 00:29
Edited by martinbiz on Wednesday 11th March 00:32
OP to clear this up and go into it in a bit more detail. The responsibility to respond to the initial NIP, whether it be to name the driver or indeed any other appropriate response lies with the registered keeper. In the case of a car dealer or agent this does not have to be the one who is named in the registration document. If the dealer's company owns or has custody of the vehicle for sale purposes they are deemed to be the registered owners and keepers of the vehicle.
It is clear that if the dealer received the NIP and sent it back, he is indeed the registered keeper. If he was unsure, and under these circumstances it is wholly reasonable to assume he must have been, of who was actually driving at the time he should have stated this on the NIP. Without consulting the other driver he sent it back in an obvious attempt to keep his licence clean.
The OP has every right to question this completely within the law and state his case using the above facts. It is absolutely up to the crown to prove who was driving in a case where there is a dispute about the driver and the evidence is inconclusive. If it is shown that the dealer was the driver at the time and deliberately lied to avoid the points he could be charged with PCJ.
My own Motor Traders Policy makes it absolutely crystal clear that I am in control and in charge of any vehicle when on a road test; NOT the customer. It was the responsibility of the dealer to ensure the road test was carried out correctly and within the terms of the law, not the OPs.
OP you have to respond and explain exactly the circumstances and put the ball back to the feet of the SCP and the dealer. If the photograpic evidence is inconclusive and the SCP want to pursue this it will be up to a court to decide who was driving, but they can't just assume it, they have to prove it.
J
Stevoox said:
Just checked my phone as i recall sending a text just after driving it. Text was sent at 14:15 to say "Just test drove the A45 AMG".
Hmmm...that now doesn't fit in with your other timings?It's a bit rich for the salesman to just finger you without any contact with you first. And if the speed trap is well known he ought to have warned you.
I'd be minded to simply send it back with his name on it. I've seen these ping-pong and then go away. Or the dealer might get done for failing to provide the driver's name - but it'll probably be too difficult to figure out who the legally responsible person is, so likely nothing will happen as they tend to go for easy targets.
Sheepshanks said:
Hmmm...that now doesn't fit in with your other timings?
It's a bit rich for the salesman to just finger you without any contact with you first. And if the speed trap is well known he ought to have warned you.
I'd be minded to simply send it back with his name on it. I've seen these ping-pong and then go away. Or the dealer might get done for failing to provide the driver's name - but it'll probably be too difficult to figure out who the legally responsible person is, so likely nothing will happen as they tend to go for easy targets.
I first found the one at 14:15 but then found further texts which along with the google location has helped to piece it together as 14:15 was as i was leaving the dealerIt's a bit rich for the salesman to just finger you without any contact with you first. And if the speed trap is well known he ought to have warned you.
I'd be minded to simply send it back with his name on it. I've seen these ping-pong and then go away. Or the dealer might get done for failing to provide the driver's name - but it'll probably be too difficult to figure out who the legally responsible person is, so likely nothing will happen as they tend to go for easy targets.
11:42 - i arrived
12:41 to 12:58 - started with a brief two minute drive up the A23 and back in my car. From then the sales man drove the test car around the area of the dealership and returned along Gatwick road at 12:58 (time and location of being caught).
3 minute pause outside the dealer which is when I then hop in the drivers seat, adjust the seat, mirrors etc and get comfy.
13:01 to 13:15 - i test drive the car and can see on Google location this is the route I had taken (down the M23)
From 13:15 to 14:13 the location stays at the dealership, clearly because we just returned and were talking figures etc. I then leave at around quarter past two, just after sending the text.
This morning I have completed the reverse of the NIP, naming the salesman and will return via recorded delivery. I have also included a letter to state all that went on, provided a copy of his business card and also with a print out of Google location with certain times etc highlighted.
Have taken a photocopy of it all for my record.
andburg said:
I would be sending a copy to the dealership's manager as they have wrongly implicated you in this.!
Well i did wonder if it was worth calling and speaking to the manager about it, but perhaps easier to just let the police now make contact with them and do what they need to do?Stevoox said:
Well i did wonder if it was worth calling and speaking to the manager about it, but perhaps easier to just let the police now make contact with them and do what they need to do?
you're obviously less vindictive than me, I'd be fuming that the garage had incorrectly provided my details and be after someones head! I'd in no uncertain terms be telling the manager why I will now not be purchasing the a car from them. andburg said:
Stevoox said:
Well i did wonder if it was worth calling and speaking to the manager about it, but perhaps easier to just let the police now make contact with them and do what they need to do?
you're obviously less vindictive than me, I'd be fuming that the garage had incorrectly provided my details and be after someones head! I'd in no uncertain terms be telling the manager why I will now not be purchasing the a car from them. hornetrider said:
I think this KFC chap needs to step away from the keyboard 
I can't be bothered explaining this again. The OP said he doesn't know who's driving. He's also suggesting saying he definitely wasn't driving. One of those is a lie. There are examples of people posting stuff on forums, and then getting in a huge amount of legal trouble over it. The bloke who posted about his mrs taking points, etc. Its not that complicated is it. If you're going to lie or perjure yourself, try not to post a detailed account of it online first.
KFC said:
I can't be bothered explaining this again. The OP said he doesn't know who's driving. He's also suggesting saying he definitely wasn't driving. One of those is a lie. There are examples of people posting stuff on forums, and then getting in a huge amount of legal trouble over it. The bloke who posted about his mrs taking points, etc.
Its not that complicated is it. If you're going to lie or perjure yourself, try not to post a detailed account of it online first.
No I didn't say i definitely wasn't driving, I began by stating I feel it is unlikely to be me...UNLIKELY not IT WAS NOT me. Based on times, routes, how i drove etc.Its not that complicated is it. If you're going to lie or perjure yourself, try not to post a detailed account of it online first.
Now that I have seen a time log with routes, am confident it was the salesman upon returning to the dealership.
Yes, you do have a valid point regarding posting online and landing in trouble as a result, but I have not lied. What I have mentioned is exactly how it all is and I have said the same to the Police this morning over the phone and in a letter.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff