Speed Ticket - Can't identify driver
Discussion
Got our new car on 8th January and on Thursday last week I get a NIP through the door for an offence on 14th January. Very likely to have been sent to previous owner first and eventually made it's way to me so NIP 14 day thing not my focus.
My issue is however, I have no idea who was driving. I was at work so definitely not me but wife / FIL / BIL all used the car at various points between 10th / 17th Jan. This was over two months ago and none of them can be sure who was driving. I've asked for a photo so i can identify the driver but they've basically responded via email to advise there is no photo available. That strikes me as strange and I've no idea what to do next?
Do one of them have to just take it on the chin? Can I contest and reiterate I need further information so I can identify who was actually driving?
Any help / advice would be very much appreciated.
My issue is however, I have no idea who was driving. I was at work so definitely not me but wife / FIL / BIL all used the car at various points between 10th / 17th Jan. This was over two months ago and none of them can be sure who was driving. I've asked for a photo so i can identify the driver but they've basically responded via email to advise there is no photo available. That strikes me as strange and I've no idea what to do next?
Do one of them have to just take it on the chin? Can I contest and reiterate I need further information so I can identify who was actually driving?
Any help / advice would be very much appreciated.
Teddy Picker said:
Got our new car on 8th January and on Thursday last week I get a NIP through the door for an offence on 14th January. Very likely to have been sent to previous owner first and eventually made it's way to me so NIP 14 day thing not my focus.
My issue is however, I have no idea who was driving. I was at work so definitely not me but wife / FIL / BIL all used the car at various points between 10th / 17th Jan. This was over two months ago and none of them can be sure who was driving. I've asked for a photo so i can identify the driver but they've basically responded via email to advise there is no photo available. That strikes me as strange and I've no idea what to do next?
Do one of them have to just take it on the chin? Can I contest and reiterate I need further information so I can identify who was actually driving?
Any help / advice would be very much appreciated.
It's the responsibility of the registered keeper to know who was driving the car. If you can't get to the bottom of it, you'll have to take it on the chin. Ignorance is no defence.My issue is however, I have no idea who was driving. I was at work so definitely not me but wife / FIL / BIL all used the car at various points between 10th / 17th Jan. This was over two months ago and none of them can be sure who was driving. I've asked for a photo so i can identify the driver but they've basically responded via email to advise there is no photo available. That strikes me as strange and I've no idea what to do next?
Do one of them have to just take it on the chin? Can I contest and reiterate I need further information so I can identify who was actually driving?
Any help / advice would be very much appreciated.
If you genuinely cannot work out who was driving, then your only real option is to go to court and defend it.
The only problem at this stage is that you need to convince a very sceptical bench that a group of adults have not been able to work out who was driving at the time. So you need to show that you've used all available tools at your disposal and have still reach this conclusion.
The alternative is to the name the most likely driver at the time. You must name them unequivocally, so don't be tempted to write on the document "We think it is probably......" or "Most likely to be....." - just name a driver.
Although you've not been supplied with a photo at this stage doesn't mean they don't exist and you'd be amazed just how quickly they will become evidence if it goes to court.
Unable to identify driver charges can be defended and have been defended. Failure to defend will see 6pts on your license compared to the punishment for speeding. You haven't mentioned the alleged speed or limit.
The only problem at this stage is that you need to convince a very sceptical bench that a group of adults have not been able to work out who was driving at the time. So you need to show that you've used all available tools at your disposal and have still reach this conclusion.
The alternative is to the name the most likely driver at the time. You must name them unequivocally, so don't be tempted to write on the document "We think it is probably......" or "Most likely to be....." - just name a driver.
Although you've not been supplied with a photo at this stage doesn't mean they don't exist and you'd be amazed just how quickly they will become evidence if it goes to court.
Unable to identify driver charges can be defended and have been defended. Failure to defend will see 6pts on your license compared to the punishment for speeding. You haven't mentioned the alleged speed or limit.
cbmotorsport said:
It's the responsibility of the registered keeper to know who was driving the car. If you can't get to the bottom of it, you'll have to take it on the chin. Ignorance is no defence.
I thought that is only the legal position for companies - not privately owned carse.g. my car is insured for any driver fully comp - it is often driven by other people and I have zero knowledge on some of those occasions as to who is driving it - all I would be able to do is give them a list of people - they would then have to enquire further... to realistically expect me to know who out of several people has swapped into driving at any specific time would be ridiculous - yes, where there are very few insured on a car, then it might be reasonable - e.g. husband and wife - if one is not driving, it is the other - but not in all situations
Teddy Picker said:
Got our new car on 8th January and on Thursday last week I get a NIP through the door for an offence on 14th January. Very likely to have been sent to previous owner first and eventually made it's way to me so NIP 14 day thing not my focus.
Do you NOW have the V5 in your name? If so, and the registerd keeper date on it is before the 14th. then I suspect you will have a case to have it thrown out.akirk said:
cbmotorsport said:
It's the responsibility of the registered keeper to know who was driving the car. If you can't get to the bottom of it, you'll have to take it on the chin. Ignorance is no defence.
I thought that is only the legal position for companies - not privately owned carse.g. my car is insured for any driver fully comp - it is often driven by other people and I have zero knowledge on some of those occasions as to who is driving it - all I would be able to do is give them a list of people - they would then have to enquire further... to realistically expect me to know who out of several people has swapped into driving at any specific time would be ridiculous - yes, where there are very few insured on a car, then it might be reasonable - e.g. husband and wife - if one is not driving, it is the other - but not in all situations
The agency drivers didn't keep a driver log (despite being told to), and I had to provide a witness statement and evidence of how our process should run, and what details we had for the day.
In this case the speeding offence was dropped, but we were advised to keep a better control of our processes as the registered keeper is ultimately liable for what happens whilst the vehicle is in use. I could prove from tacho records that it wasn't me driving, but I had some difficult answers to find for the business leadership team.
The agency didn't take on those drivers again.
Cliftonite said:
cbmotorsport said:
It's the responsibility of the registered keeper to know who was driving the car. If you can't get to the bottom of it, you'll have to take it on the chin. Ignorance is no defence.
Not sure whether serious.It's his wife, FIL and BIL that could have been the drivers here....not a bunch of strangers.
It is his responsibility to know whos driving his car, because the buck kinda stops with him, and they're asking him to give them the drivers details....unless he wants to go to court they either pick one of the three or he takes the rap..
akirk said:
I thought that is only the legal position for companies - not privately owned cars
Your legal obligation is to identify the driver, the assumption being that you know who was driving the vehicle at all times. If you cannot be sure, then the Police have the option to prosecute for failing to identify the driver. If there is a genuine reason why you cannot provide this information (and you may have an entirely justifiable explanation), then you should advise the Police accordingly.If there has been no attempt on your part to with–hold information deliberately or negligently, you may have a defence. However, such circumstances are rare as you are required to make reasonable and diligent enquiries regarding identification.
cbmotorsport said:
Why?
It's his wife, FIL and BIL that could have been the drivers here....not a bunch of strangers.
It is his responsibility to know whos driving his car, because the buck kinda stops with him, and they're asking him to give them the drivers details....unless he wants to go to court they either pick one of the three or he takes the rap..
He does know who, it was either his wife, FiL or BiL. It's his wife, FIL and BIL that could have been the drivers here....not a bunch of strangers.
It is his responsibility to know whos driving his car, because the buck kinda stops with him, and they're asking him to give them the drivers details....unless he wants to go to court they either pick one of the three or he takes the rap..
cbmotorsport said:
Cliftonite said:
cbmotorsport said:
It's the responsibility of the registered keeper to know who was driving the car. If you can't get to the bottom of it, you'll have to take it on the chin. Ignorance is no defence.
Not sure whether serious.It's his wife, FIL and BIL that could have been the drivers here....not a bunch of strangers.
It is his responsibility to know whos driving his car, because the buck kinda stops with him, and they're asking him to give them the drivers details....unless he wants to go to court they either pick one of the three or he takes the rap..
The OP should name the most likely person driving as he knows he wasn't (and telling lies is not recommended), that person in turn should either admit to driving, or if sure they weren't name the person they think was driving.
The OP must return the forms, best to unequivocally name one person. There is no advantage in returning the forms early.
cbmotorsport said:
Your legal obligation is to identify the driver, the assumption being that you know who was driving the vehicle at all times. If you cannot be sure, then the Police have the option to prosecute for failing to identify the driver. If there is a genuine reason why you cannot provide this information (and you may have an entirely justifiable explanation), then you should advise the Police accordingly.
If there has been no attempt on your part to with–hold information deliberately or negligently, you may have a defence. However, such circumstances are rare as you are required to make reasonable and diligent enquiries regarding identification.
This is nonsense.If there has been no attempt on your part to with–hold information deliberately or negligently, you may have a defence. However, such circumstances are rare as you are required to make reasonable and diligent enquiries regarding identification.
Your legal obligation as RK is to say what you know on the subject and with diligence you can find out.
So if the best you can do is that there are three possible drivers you say why that's the case and name them.
Then they will have to tell what they know.
Obviously the law is unhelpful here as in all likelihood you may not be believed. However if you have been diligent in your enquiries and told what you know and could find out, then you have complied with the law.
You cannot be prosecuted for failing to name the driver, only for failing to give the information you know our could find out using appropriate diligence.
Bert
BertBert said:
This is nonsense.
Your legal obligation as RK is to say what you know on the subject and with diligence you can find out.
So if the best you can do is that there are three possible drivers you say why that's the case and name them.
Then they will have to tell what they know.
Obviously the law is unhelpful here as in all likelihood you may not be believed. However if you have been diligent in your enquiries and told what you know and could find out, then you have complied with the law.
You cannot be prosecuted for failing to name the driver, only for failing to give the information you know our could find out using appropriate diligence.
Bert
From experience, it is possible that a prosecution could be brought against the RK, but whether it sticks or not under those circumstances, is probably based on how well the argument is presented.Your legal obligation as RK is to say what you know on the subject and with diligence you can find out.
So if the best you can do is that there are three possible drivers you say why that's the case and name them.
Then they will have to tell what they know.
Obviously the law is unhelpful here as in all likelihood you may not be believed. However if you have been diligent in your enquiries and told what you know and could find out, then you have complied with the law.
You cannot be prosecuted for failing to name the driver, only for failing to give the information you know our could find out using appropriate diligence.
Bert
I was lucky to a degree that a failing to furnish charge wasn't brought against me - it was only that I could prove we had a process that had not been adhered to that I "Got away" with it.
Thank you for all of the swift and helpful responses.
To clarify, I will add that the reason I do not know exactly who was driving is that during this 7 day period (10th to 17th) they all used the car frequently whilst I was at work. Both BIL & FIL's cars were out of action (accident repairs for one and some aftermarket work for the other). So whilst my wife is on maternity and often visits FIL & MIL with my youngest, they both had access to the car as well as my wife. Any one of them could've just jumped in it to do the school run for my eldest and my nephew as it would most likely have been at the drive entrance blocking my MIL's car in.
NONE of them can specifically remember who did the school run on that day (it was around school run time). It was from a 70mph dual carriageway dropping into a 40mph zone. Vehicle not slowing down swiftly enough and clocked at 57mph in the 40 zone.
I will reiterate, I am not trying to suggest the driver of the car is NOT guilty or trying to get out of it, I just genuinely don't know what to do if they can't show me a photo of the car at the time of the offence and I'm very surprised that isn't available considering one of the forms tells us to go online to check the photo but we've not got a PIN to login and have now been told there is no photo.
To clarify, I will add that the reason I do not know exactly who was driving is that during this 7 day period (10th to 17th) they all used the car frequently whilst I was at work. Both BIL & FIL's cars were out of action (accident repairs for one and some aftermarket work for the other). So whilst my wife is on maternity and often visits FIL & MIL with my youngest, they both had access to the car as well as my wife. Any one of them could've just jumped in it to do the school run for my eldest and my nephew as it would most likely have been at the drive entrance blocking my MIL's car in.
NONE of them can specifically remember who did the school run on that day (it was around school run time). It was from a 70mph dual carriageway dropping into a 40mph zone. Vehicle not slowing down swiftly enough and clocked at 57mph in the 40 zone.
I will reiterate, I am not trying to suggest the driver of the car is NOT guilty or trying to get out of it, I just genuinely don't know what to do if they can't show me a photo of the car at the time of the offence and I'm very surprised that isn't available considering one of the forms tells us to go online to check the photo but we've not got a PIN to login and have now been told there is no photo.
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff