Section 172, even I was not the registere keeper at the time
Discussion
Hi
Come home from work today to find a Section 172 charge in my mailbox. It relates to the previous owner of my car doing 38 in a 30 according to the summons.
How the hell does that work? I do recall receiving a letter about 6 weeks ago asking for information relating to who was driving it... when i didnt f
king own the car! I binned it, of course!
Do they expect to do a magnum PI, track down and beat the previous owner into a confession?
Come home from work today to find a Section 172 charge in my mailbox. It relates to the previous owner of my car doing 38 in a 30 according to the summons.
How the hell does that work? I do recall receiving a letter about 6 weeks ago asking for information relating to who was driving it... when i didnt f
king own the car! I binned it, of course!Do they expect to do a magnum PI, track down and beat the previous owner into a confession?
esselte said:
Tykey said:
How the hell does that work? I do recall receiving a letter about 6 weeks ago asking for information relating to who was driving it... when i didnt fking own the car! I binned it, of course!
Oooops...should have let them know about the change of ownership,I think.king own the car! I binned it, of course!king wkers! Been reading up... apparently they can summons anyone who is the registered keeper OR they think may be able to give the driver at the time:
"Section 172 Road Traffic Act 1988 puts an obligation on the registered keeper (or anybody else who can provide the information) to supply the identity of... "
... so watch this space boys n girls! you are supposed to have knowledge of who what where was driving your vehicle BEFORE you owned it! Be careful of who you buy from LOL
Big brother state here we come! I am looking forward to contesting this in court... yes really
.Edited by Tykey on Friday 2nd October 16:58
Tykey,
You were sent the S172 because you are the current registered keeper, that is standard procedure. Your response should have been to return it saying you only bought the car on XXX date therefore cannot know who was driving it before that date. This would have gone away, now you have been summonsed for not doing that, thus breaking the law.
You were sent the S172 because you are the current registered keeper, that is standard procedure. Your response should have been to return it saying you only bought the car on XXX date therefore cannot know who was driving it before that date. This would have gone away, now you have been summonsed for not doing that, thus breaking the law.
Kevin VRs said:
Tykey,
You were sent the S172 because you are the current registered keeper, that is standard procedure. Your response should have been to return it saying you only bought the car on XXX date therefore cannot know who was driving it before that date. This would have gone away, now you have been summonsed for not doing that, thus breaking the law.
Fair point. But the letter i got asking for the drivers identity was idiotic. How am I supposed to know who was driving my car before I owned it You were sent the S172 because you are the current registered keeper, that is standard procedure. Your response should have been to return it saying you only bought the car on XXX date therefore cannot know who was driving it before that date. This would have gone away, now you have been summonsed for not doing that, thus breaking the law.
?I did not know such a ridiculous, draconian law existed.
Tykey said:
Kevin VRs said:
Tykey,
You were sent the S172 because you are the current registered keeper, that is standard procedure. Your response should have been to return it saying you only bought the car on XXX date therefore cannot know who was driving it before that date. This would have gone away, now you have been summonsed for not doing that, thus breaking the law.
Fair point. But the letter i got asking for the drivers identity was idiotic. How am I supposed to know who was driving my car before I owned it You were sent the S172 because you are the current registered keeper, that is standard procedure. Your response should have been to return it saying you only bought the car on XXX date therefore cannot know who was driving it before that date. This would have gone away, now you have been summonsed for not doing that, thus breaking the law.
?I did not know such a ridiculous, draconian law existed.
But now you know the law exists you'll be the wiser if it ever happens again.
Tough luck, but you simply cannot go around ignoring official requests for information without one day it coming back to bite yo'ass.
Still think its a bit much to expect you to know who the previous keeper had driving the car.
They must know the date the car changed keepers, if the date of offence was during the time kept by previous keeper they should have written to the previous keeper.
In my book anyway
What was I saying yesterday about the law being reasonable and what a reasonable person would expect.
Or is there a book of how to deal without this? Tell me its in the new highway code?
They must know the date the car changed keepers, if the date of offence was during the time kept by previous keeper they should have written to the previous keeper.
In my book anyway
What was I saying yesterday about the law being reasonable and what a reasonable person would expect.
Or is there a book of how to deal without this? Tell me its in the new highway code?
Tykey said:
Kevin VRs said:
Tykey,
You were sent the S172 because you are the current registered keeper, that is standard procedure. Your response should have been to return it saying you only bought the car on XXX date therefore cannot know who was driving it before that date. This would have gone away, now you have been summonsed for not doing that, thus breaking the law.
Fair point. But the letter i got asking for the drivers identity was idiotic. How am I supposed to know who was driving my car before I owned it You were sent the S172 because you are the current registered keeper, that is standard procedure. Your response should have been to return it saying you only bought the car on XXX date therefore cannot know who was driving it before that date. This would have gone away, now you have been summonsed for not doing that, thus breaking the law.
?I did not know such a ridiculous, draconian law existed.
saaby93 said:
Still think its a bit much to expect you to know who the previous keeper had driving the car.
They must know the date the car changed keepers, if the date of offence was during the time kept by previous keeper they should have written to the previous keeper.
In my book anyway
What was I saying yesterday about the law being reasonable and what a reasonable person would expect.
Or is there a book of how to deal without this? Tell me its in the new highway code?
That's just it...THEY DON'T all they want is for you to tell them who the driver was at a particular time/date and place...Obviously the OP cannot do that...so all they will expect in those circumstances is for him to tell them that so they can waste no more time in discovering who WAS the driver and look deeper. They must know the date the car changed keepers, if the date of offence was during the time kept by previous keeper they should have written to the previous keeper.
In my book anyway
What was I saying yesterday about the law being reasonable and what a reasonable person would expect.
Or is there a book of how to deal without this? Tell me its in the new highway code?
The OP didn't bother to respond at all..that is the offence he has committed failing to comply with the S 172 notice. He's not being done for not knowing who the driver was.
saaby93 said:
Why didnt they check the dates and write to the relevant previous keeper? Its just laziness
Not at all lazy, they request details of the Reg Keeper from the DVLA...the DVLA respond with the details of the latest keeper they have on record. You then get the S172 to either confirm you were the driver or tell them who was if you possibly can. Only when it is confirmed by the latest keeper recorded that he wasn't the owner at the date of the offence and so couldn't possibly know who the driver was can they delve deeper.saaby93 said:
Well why dont they ask for the details of the registered keeper on so and so date
Whats the point of having the biggest computer in the country if it cant even be asked the right question
It knows the answer it just needs to be asked!
But no-one knows that until the latest keeper tells them they need to look deeper do they?Whats the point of having the biggest computer in the country if it cant even be asked the right question
It knows the answer it just needs to be asked!
As with anything you have to start at the beginning and the beginning in this case is the registered keeper...not the previous registered keeper or his mate or his mates Mum...but the person who is on record of being in charge of the vehicle NOW.
TBH I'm surprised the DVLA got the details updated so quickly as to cause this problem. I've known S172's being sent to the old keeper when it is in fact the new keeper who is alleged to have committed an offence, never this way around...
Edit for spooling ewwors
Edited by oldsoak on Friday 2nd October 18:38
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff