Company van caught speeding - what do i do?
Discussion
I'm currently out of the country but i've been informed by a loyal member of the corporation that our company can has been caught TWICE speeding. I've got the photographic evidence which barely shows a number plate let alone the driver. As company director what are my legal obligations as none of my staff can conveniently remember exactly who was driving!
If you don't have a logbook and good records of who was driving, you're in a spot of bother.
Head over to www.pepipoo.com
Head over to www.pepipoo.com
Quinny said:
Really?
We need to pull our finger out at work then.
I and many others, as in hundreds of employees, just jump into whatever company car is available at the time.
I've never filled a log book out yet.
We need to pull our finger out at work then.
I and many others, as in hundreds of employees, just jump into whatever company car is available at the time.
I've never filled a log book out yet.
I hope the company secretary has a good solicitor then!
There was a recent case where a head of a police force had to go to court over a speeding police car where there was no record of who was driving, it goes as far as that.
If there is no record keeping whatsoever, then the fine historically has been much over what the usual £60 is!
if a logbook system existed then its unlikely to be adhered to 100% of the time. is this really a solution? what do companies like BT, NTL etc do when theres thousands of vans. this must crop up often? I dont understand why the onus falls to the company, surely if they provide every single name in the company to the police then 172 is complied with and its up to them to find the driver? surely this kind of thing would never stand up in court? there would be fleet managers with thousands of points on their licences!
paolow said:
if a logbook system existed then its unlikely to be adhered to 100% of the time. is this really a solution? what do companies like BT, NTL etc do when theres thousands of vans. this must crop up often? I dont understand why the onus falls to the company, surely if they provide every single name in the company to the police then 172 is complied with and its up to them to find the driver? surely this kind of thing would never stand up in court? there would be fleet managers with thousands of points on their licences!
If the company secretary/MD can prove that there was an adequate logbook system in place but for a particular circumstance the procedure was not correctly followed then the company gets fined. However, as no points can be awarded to a company the fine is usually in the hundreds of pounds.
The onus falls on the company as they are the registered keeper. They are also required to keep a logbook of drivers.
Playing devils advocate, what would happen if this was not the case? BT etc would have no responsibility to keep a record and thus their drivers could happilly speed - or even worse could commit 'hit and runs' with the knowledge there is nothing to link them to the crime.
aceparts_com said:
So if I 'simply' write to NIP with a list of all the employees that 'may' have been driving the police will deal with it however they see fit? As they don't investigate mugging and burglaries we should be in with a good change.
They 'may' say this is fine, but if you give them a list of a half a dozen possibilities I would not be surprised if they take this as a lack of diligence to the responsibility to name the driver, and they may get 'pinged' back to you.
justinp1 said:
paolow said:
if a logbook system existed then its unlikely to be adhered to 100% of the time. is this really a solution? what do companies like BT, NTL etc do when theres thousands of vans. this must crop up often? I dont understand why the onus falls to the company, surely if they provide every single name in the company to the police then 172 is complied with and its up to them to find the driver? surely this kind of thing would never stand up in court? there would be fleet managers with thousands of points on their licences!
Playing devils advocate, what would happen if this was not the case? BT etc would have no responsibility to keep a record and thus their drivers could happilly speed - or even worse could commit 'hit and runs' with the knowledge there is nothing to link them to the crime.
yeah - this occurred to me as i wrote it - but surely the angle here is not a carte blanche for company drivers to do as they will but rather an onus on the police to identify offenders rather than withdraw to the lowest common denominator?
Under Sec 172(6), the defence mentioned in Sec 172(4) (registered keeper showing that he did not know and could not with reasonable diligence have ascertained who the driver of the vehicle was) is not available to a corporate body unless in addition to the matters there mentioned, the alleged offender shows that no record was kept of the persons who drove the vehicle and that the failure to keep a record was reasonable.
Where the corporate body then fails to identify the driver then they commit the offence. Where that offence is proved to have been committed with the consent or connivance of, or to be attributable to neglect on the part of, a director, manager, secretary or other similar officer of the body corporate, or a person who was purporting to act in any such capacity, he, as well as the body corporate, is guilty of that offence and liable to be proceeded against and punished accordingly as stated in Sec 172(5).
The corporate body can't be given points, but the director, manager, secretary or other similar officer can, where proven to have consented, connived or to be attributably negligent.
Where the corporate body then fails to identify the driver then they commit the offence. Where that offence is proved to have been committed with the consent or connivance of, or to be attributable to neglect on the part of, a director, manager, secretary or other similar officer of the body corporate, or a person who was purporting to act in any such capacity, he, as well as the body corporate, is guilty of that offence and liable to be proceeded against and punished accordingly as stated in Sec 172(5).
The corporate body can't be given points, but the director, manager, secretary or other similar officer can, where proven to have consented, connived or to be attributably negligent.
Edited by vonhosen on Thursday 1st February 07:12
CC Merry Hughes ist not so merry .. he got a fine because he could not name the officer who was caught speeding .. story ist somewhere on this forum 
If van copped twice .. may not be same driver? But .. if this ist a van.. doing repairs or delivery rounds.. then maybe there ist some kind of rosta showing who went where? It may narrow things down.
Nip over to pepipoo.. I think so long as you can prove you have taken every logical step to find out who this "ever so dangerous muppet" ist .. you may escape being fined yourself for it. Ask the company solicitors for some help too.
If van copped twice .. may not be same driver? But .. if this ist a van.. doing repairs or delivery rounds.. then maybe there ist some kind of rosta showing who went where? It may narrow things down.
Nip over to pepipoo.. I think so long as you can prove you have taken every logical step to find out who this "ever so dangerous muppet" ist .. you may escape being fined yourself for it. Ask the company solicitors for some help too.
paolow said:
justinp1 said:
paolow said:
if a logbook system existed then its unlikely to be adhered to 100% of the time. is this really a solution? what do companies like BT, NTL etc do when theres thousands of vans. this must crop up often? I dont understand why the onus falls to the company, surely if they provide every single name in the company to the police then 172 is complied with and its up to them to find the driver? surely this kind of thing would never stand up in court? there would be fleet managers with thousands of points on their licences!
Playing devils advocate, what would happen if this was not the case? BT etc would have no responsibility to keep a record and thus their drivers could happilly speed - or even worse could commit 'hit and runs' with the knowledge there is nothing to link them to the crime.
yeah - this occurred to me as i wrote it - but surely the angle here is not a carte blanche for company drivers to do as they will but rather an onus on the police to identify offenders rather than withdraw to the lowest common denominator?
Of course the onus is on the police to investigate crimes etc, but they have to work with *some* information. After all, how difficult would it be to identify drivers if we didnt have number plates!?
Without a logbook, whoever is investigating will have the job of interviewing each employee? That would be insane. Instead the director/secretary would just be deemed to have been negligent in not putting in place the right processes. Of course, there are exceptions to the rule, for example if the director were to show they had been 100% diligent and for some reason without his reasonable knowledge an employee had gone out of their way to invalidate the record so they wouldnt be traced.
AFAIK, no company officer hsa had points put onto his/her licence, although as has been said, the fine is usually higher. Maybe the reason for this is because a company are likely to pay a fine, whereas if the Company Secretary is threatened with points, the company would be likely to employ a good solicitor to deflect this.Thus the scammers get the fine, but with a court case they get nothing and risk having to pay costs. It's a financial thing for the CPS to consider.I have a client company with a US parent and they regularly have this problem as they send out teams to fix aeroplanes. What the HR Manager does, it landing on his dest, is to name the 'crew' who had the vehicle on that day and offer to provide a room for the Police to carry out the interviews, since none of those using the vehicle will 'fess-up' to the company. A company is not really in a position to force a confession and deducting pay or bonus from 3 innocent individuals (after all, only one can be guilty, the others have simply faiuled to grass-up the driver) is probably illegal.
Could someone point me to the statutory requirement for a company to keep driver log books for hon-HGV vehicles.
Could someone point me to the statutory requirement for a company to keep driver log books for hon-HGV vehicles.
cooperman said:
AFAIK, no company officer hsa had points put onto his/her licence, although as has been said, the fine is usually higher. Maybe the reason for this is because a company are likely to pay a fine, whereas if the Company Secretary is threatened with points, the company would be likely to employ a good solicitor to deflect this.Thus the scammers get the fine, but with a court case they get nothing and risk having to pay costs. It's a financial thing for the CPS to consider.I have a client company with a US parent and they regularly have this problem as they send out teams to fix aeroplanes. What the HR Manager does, it landing on his dest, is to name the 'crew' who had the vehicle on that day and offer to provide a room for the Police to carry out the interviews, since none of those using the vehicle will 'fess-up' to the company. A company is not really in a position to force a confession and deducting pay or bonus from 3 innocent individuals (after all, only one can be guilty, the others have simply faiuled to grass-up the driver) is probably illegal.
Could someone point me to the statutory requirement for a company to keep driver log books for hon-HGV vehicles.
Could someone point me to the statutory requirement for a company to keep driver log books for hon-HGV vehicles.
I think that situation would be one where the compnay has been reasonably diligent.
If they can point to the crew who had the van during the day then I believe that this would be the requirement met. Any further than this would require the log to state, Mr F drove until the McDonalds in Chester, and then Mr D drove from there etc.
In that situation I dont think there would be a case for negligence against the company.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff