speeding and the 14 day rule
speeding and the 14 day rule
Author
Discussion

Lenovo

Original Poster:

330 posts

185 months

Friday 10th May 2019
quotequote all
Can someone please explain to me how the 14 day rule and speeding ‘works’ with lease cars.

Example A:
Bob owns his own car, Mrs Bob drives through a speed trap speeding, 7 days later a letter addressed to Bob arrives, he must name his wife as the driver.

Example B:
Bob owns his own car, Mrs Bob drives through a speed trap speeding, 15 days later a letter addressed to Bob arrives, he writes back saying he’s sorry but he can’t remember who was driving and he doesn’t have to name the driver anyway as it’s over the 14 day limit.

Example C:
Bob leases his car, Mrs Bob drives through a speed trap speeding, 7 days later a letter is sent to the leasing company. 15 days after the offence a letter addressed to Bob arrives, he can’t remember who was driving but he’s legally obliged to fill a name in.

How is example B different from example C, both times Bob was asked to name the driver 14 days after the offence but in example B he could legally say he couldn’t remember.

ScoobyChris

2,307 posts

231 months

Friday 10th May 2019
quotequote all
Iirc it has to be served on the registered keeper within 14 days irrespective of how the car is funded. How that makes its way to the driver is another matter and can obviously take longer...

Chris

Lenovo

Original Poster:

330 posts

185 months

Friday 10th May 2019
quotequote all
I always thought the 14 days was supposed to be so a reasonable person could remember who was driving. It just seems to fall down with lease car ownership, unless of course your David Beckham.

SS2.

14,712 posts

267 months

Friday 10th May 2019
quotequote all
Bob would be lawfully obliged to provide the details of the driver in A, B & C.

Lenovo

Original Poster:

330 posts

185 months

Friday 10th May 2019
quotequote all
SS2. said:
Bob would be lawfully obliged to provide the details of the driver in both B & C.
Why for B?

Cat

3,134 posts

298 months

Friday 10th May 2019
quotequote all
Lenovo said:
Why for B?
Because there is no time limit for a section 172 request.

Cat

SS2.

14,712 posts

267 months

Friday 10th May 2019
quotequote all
Lenovo said:
SS2. said:
Bob would be lawfully obliged to provide the details of the driver in both B & C.
Why for B?
You appear to be confusing two pieces of legislation.

A NIP (s.1 Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988) which was served out of time, whilst barring [any person's] conviction for the alleged speeding offence, would not absolve Bob of his statutory obligation to provide details of the driver (s.172 Road Traffic Act 1988).

douglasb

316 posts

251 months

Friday 10th May 2019
quotequote all
Lenovo said:
I always thought the 14 days was supposed to be so a reasonable person could remember who was driving. It just seems to fall down with lease car ownership, unless of course your David Beckham.
It didn't fall down with David Beckham. Bentley (who owned the car) were able to prove that the initial S172 request arrived with them after 15 days therefore was out of time. Beckham acknowledged that he was the driver and had been speeding but because the S172 was out of time he couldn't be prosecuted for the underlying speeding offence.

He didn't get special treatment. He didn't even need an expensive lawyer. The same defence is open to any registered keeper who receives an S172 out of time. Proving that it arrived out of time is a different matter...

4rephill

5,168 posts

207 months

Friday 10th May 2019
quotequote all
douglasb said:
Lenovo said:
I always thought the 14 days was supposed to be so a reasonable person could remember who was driving. It just seems to fall down with lease car ownership, unless of course your David Beckham.
It didn't fall down with David Beckham. Bentley (who owned the car) were able to prove that the initial S172 request arrived with them after 15 days therefore was out of time. Beckham acknowledged that he was the driver and had been speeding but because the S172 was out of time he couldn't be prosecuted for the underlying speeding offence.

He didn't get special treatment. He didn't even need an expensive lawyer. The same defence is open to any registered keeper who receives an S172 out of time. Proving that it arrived out of time is a different matter...
Care to show us where there is a time limit in Law for receiving an S172? scratchchin

Before you quote: "14 days", that's the time limit for receiving a posted NIP - Not an S172.

Before you quote: "28 day", that's the time limit for responding to an S172 - Not receiving one.

This might help:

Cat said:
Because there is no time limit for a section 172 request.

Cat