Another “got caught speeding” thread
Discussion
My gardener (not me honest!) got pinged by a speed van on 30/07/20 and received the notice of intended prosecution in the post on or around the 4th November. The letter is dated 2nd November.
The vehicle is registered to him, at his home address and has been for years so no obvious reason for it to be delayed. The vehicle isn’t a hire car etc. As far as I can see, S1 Road Traffic Offenders Act has not been complied with by D&C Police. I do wander if they are allowing themselves some more time due to COVID but 12 weeks seems a bit of a stretch. I’m thinking he should just identify himself as the driver and plead not guilty stating the above failure. Any thoughts?
The vehicle is registered to him, at his home address and has been for years so no obvious reason for it to be delayed. The vehicle isn’t a hire car etc. As far as I can see, S1 Road Traffic Offenders Act has not been complied with by D&C Police. I do wander if they are allowing themselves some more time due to COVID but 12 weeks seems a bit of a stretch. I’m thinking he should just identify himself as the driver and plead not guilty stating the above failure. Any thoughts?
chunkyjh said:
My gardener (not me honest!) got pinged by a speed van on 30/07/20 and received the notice of intended prosecution in the post on or around the 4th November. The letter is dated 2nd November.
The vehicle is registered to him, at his home address and has been for years so no obvious reason for it to be delayed. The vehicle isn’t a hire car etc. As far as I can see, S1 Road Traffic Offenders Act has not been complied with by D&C Police. I do wander if they are allowing themselves some more time due to COVID but 12 weeks seems a bit of a stretch. I’m thinking he should just identify himself as the driver and plead not guilty stating the above failure. Any thoughts?
They cannot just allow themselves more time, the 14 days allowed for service of the NIP is set in law. The most important thing is that he completes the S172 part with the drivers details, if he fails to do this he could be prosecuted for the separate offence of failing to furnish information and whether the NIP is late or not will not matter. He can attach a letter when he returns it explaing the late arrival, AGT Law on here has a template, it maybe worth messaging him.The vehicle is registered to him, at his home address and has been for years so no obvious reason for it to be delayed. The vehicle isn’t a hire car etc. As far as I can see, S1 Road Traffic Offenders Act has not been complied with by D&C Police. I do wander if they are allowing themselves some more time due to COVID but 12 weeks seems a bit of a stretch. I’m thinking he should just identify himself as the driver and plead not guilty stating the above failure. Any thoughts?
Beware though they may well not back down and say it's a copy, previous ones have not been responded to etc, It is worth asking for a copy of the original NIP to see when it was dated, it does seem a long time from the offence for them not to have already given up and started proceedings for failing to furnish. It will be your gardener's choice whether to fight the late service in court, which is notoriously difficult. If the speed is within a course or fixed penalty territory the pragmatic approach maybe to suck it up, but no harm in trying the template letter first, you may come up trumps
May I just say that I welcome the Downton Abbey spirit of this thread. Noblesse oblige! I think that we should have a specialist sub forum dedicated to discussing the problems of our staff. OK, maybe not "the scullery maid appears to be putting on a lot of weight around her middle, and my eldest son has been looking rather sheepish just lately".
There’s probably an explanation. The driver details form must be returned within 28 days as there isn’t a time limit for that. However, the first step is to query the apparent lateness of the Notice.
Dear Sirs,
I refer to the attached Notice of Intended Prosecution dated [DATE] that I received on [DATE2]. I am the Registered Keeper of the vehicle specified in the Notice and have been the Registered Keeper since [DATE3]. I have completed the Request for Driver Details form as requested.
As you know, section 1 of the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988 requires a Notice of Intended Prosecution to be served on the Registered Keeper within 14 days of the commission of the offence. Exceptions to the rule are set out in section 2 of the 1988 Act; none of which apply to my case. I first became aware of the alleged offence when I received your letter.
The Notice of Intended Prosecution was not sent in time and could not be regarded as having been properly served in accordance with the 1988 Act. Failure to comply with the aforementioned provisions is a bar to prosecution; see Gidden v Chief Constable of Humberside [2009] EWHC 2924 (Admin).
Please confirm that no further action will be taken.
Yours, etc.
Dear Sirs,
I refer to the attached Notice of Intended Prosecution dated [DATE] that I received on [DATE2]. I am the Registered Keeper of the vehicle specified in the Notice and have been the Registered Keeper since [DATE3]. I have completed the Request for Driver Details form as requested.
As you know, section 1 of the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988 requires a Notice of Intended Prosecution to be served on the Registered Keeper within 14 days of the commission of the offence. Exceptions to the rule are set out in section 2 of the 1988 Act; none of which apply to my case. I first became aware of the alleged offence when I received your letter.
The Notice of Intended Prosecution was not sent in time and could not be regarded as having been properly served in accordance with the 1988 Act. Failure to comply with the aforementioned provisions is a bar to prosecution; see Gidden v Chief Constable of Humberside [2009] EWHC 2924 (Admin).
Please confirm that no further action will be taken.
Yours, etc.
Are you expected to be able to identify the driver of a private vehicle at a specific time 4 months later? As a family, we have three cars and I use all of them on a weekly basis, as does my wife. Our routes overlap to some extent.
What stops everyone claiming that the first letter didn’t arrive and by the time the second is received a long time later, the driver cannot be identified? I can probably remember within 14 days with a good deal of certainty, but not 4 months later.
What stops everyone claiming that the first letter didn’t arrive and by the time the second is received a long time later, the driver cannot be identified? I can probably remember within 14 days with a good deal of certainty, but not 4 months later.
syl said:
Are you expected to be able to identify the driver of a private vehicle at a specific time 4 months later? As a family, we have three cars and I use all of them on a weekly basis, as does my wife. Our routes overlap to some extent.
What stops everyone claiming that the first letter didn’t arrive and by the time the second is received a long time later, the driver cannot be identified? I can probably remember within 14 days with a good deal of certainty, but not 4 months later.
Reasonable diligence to ascertain identity fell to be assessed at the time the request from the police was received; see Atkinson (2011).What stops everyone claiming that the first letter didn’t arrive and by the time the second is received a long time later, the driver cannot be identified? I can probably remember within 14 days with a good deal of certainty, but not 4 months later.
http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2011/336...
agtlaw said:
syl said:
Are you expected to be able to identify the driver of a private vehicle at a specific time 4 months later? As a family, we have three cars and I use all of them on a weekly basis, as does my wife. Our routes overlap to some extent.
What stops everyone claiming that the first letter didn’t arrive and by the time the second is received a long time later, the driver cannot be identified? I can probably remember within 14 days with a good deal of certainty, but not 4 months later.
Reasonable diligence to ascertain identity fell to be assessed at the time the request from the police was received; see Atkinson (2011).What stops everyone claiming that the first letter didn’t arrive and by the time the second is received a long time later, the driver cannot be identified? I can probably remember within 14 days with a good deal of certainty, but not 4 months later.
http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2011/336...
If in all honesty it did happen, and there was no defence, is it illegal to accept responsibility if you don’t know you were the driver - or should you state that, and then take the punishment for not supplying info instead? I.e. is it illegal, and/or immoral, to plead guilty when you are, or might, be innocent?
syl said:
agtlaw said:
syl said:
Are you expected to be able to identify the driver of a private vehicle at a specific time 4 months later? As a family, we have three cars and I use all of them on a weekly basis, as does my wife. Our routes overlap to some extent.
What stops everyone claiming that the first letter didn’t arrive and by the time the second is received a long time later, the driver cannot be identified? I can probably remember within 14 days with a good deal of certainty, but not 4 months later.
Reasonable diligence to ascertain identity fell to be assessed at the time the request from the police was received; see Atkinson (2011).What stops everyone claiming that the first letter didn’t arrive and by the time the second is received a long time later, the driver cannot be identified? I can probably remember within 14 days with a good deal of certainty, but not 4 months later.
http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2011/336...
If in all honesty it did happen, and there was no defence, is it illegal to accept responsibility if you don’t know you were the driver - or should you state that, and then take the punishment for not supplying info instead? I.e. is it illegal, and/or immoral, to plead guilty when you are, or might, be innocent?
1. I advertise my crusty old Rover 75 on facebook marketplace, a free listing service which will time stamp my advert thus proving the vechicle is for sale.
2. However I list the car at £3500 (when it's worth about tuppence) so it'll never really sell.
3. I commit a motoring offence.
4. I draw up a piece of paper which states that on the date of the offence, Mr John Smith who lives at 20 Made Up Street, telephone 123456 and false signature; took the Rover for a test drive and I took his details (alternatively I set up a gmail account and send myself some false emails)
5. I await the NIP
6. I respond setting out everything above...
Probably best not to lie and create a fake evidence trail.
Random links from internet that I haven't read properly:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3054114/S...
https://www.bracknellnews.co.uk/news/13454556.man-...
https://www.inyourarea.co.uk/news/liar-sentenced-a...
“It is a myth that avoidance of such penalties is easy if a foreign national is put forward as the driver instead of accepting what is right."
IANAL.
Random links from internet that I haven't read properly:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3054114/S...
https://www.bracknellnews.co.uk/news/13454556.man-...
https://www.inyourarea.co.uk/news/liar-sentenced-a...
“It is a myth that avoidance of such penalties is easy if a foreign national is put forward as the driver instead of accepting what is right."
IANAL.
Breadvan72 said:
If you get found out you go to prison. Next?
Well exactly, however, how are they going to find out?(Columbo photographic driving evidence aside)
I guess track phone records, check other CCTV enroute etc.
What about if you explained that you're not sure, it might have been you, however on or around the time in question you also let Mr. Madeup take his test drive?
dundarach said:
Breadvan72 said:
If you get found out you go to prison. Next?
Well exactly, however, how are they going to find out?(Columbo photographic driving evidence aside)
I guess track phone records, check other CCTV enroute etc.
What about if you explained that you're not sure, it might have been you, however on or around the time in question you also let Mr. Madeup take his test drive?
dundarach said:
A question then for the legal bods...
1. I advertise my crusty old Rover 75 on facebook marketplace, a free listing service which will time stamp my advert thus proving the vechicle is for sale.
2. However I list the car at £3500 (when it's worth about tuppence) so it'll never really sell.
3. I commit a motoring offence.
4. I draw up a piece of paper which states that on the date of the offence, Mr John Smith who lives at 20 Made Up Street, telephone 123456 and false signature; took the Rover for a test drive and I took his details (alternatively I set up a gmail account and send myself some false emails)
5. I await the NIP
6. I respond setting out everything above...
Jeeez if a lot people really do think like this, then it really is no surprise the amount that are doing time for PCOJ over a minor traffic offence1. I advertise my crusty old Rover 75 on facebook marketplace, a free listing service which will time stamp my advert thus proving the vechicle is for sale.
2. However I list the car at £3500 (when it's worth about tuppence) so it'll never really sell.
3. I commit a motoring offence.
4. I draw up a piece of paper which states that on the date of the offence, Mr John Smith who lives at 20 Made Up Street, telephone 123456 and false signature; took the Rover for a test drive and I took his details (alternatively I set up a gmail account and send myself some false emails)
5. I await the NIP
6. I respond setting out everything above...
Breadvan72 said:
The last paragraph of what?
Pleading guilty when innocent in order to protect someone else would be perverting the course of justice. That would be illegal and immoral.
Absent that, pleading guilty when innocent would be daft, but neither illegal nor immoral.
I'd suggest pleading guilty when innocent is immoral. Perhaps only slightly so for a minor issue such as speeding, but for more serious crimes it means the real perpetrator would not be prosecuted and frees them to commit more crimes. Pleading guilty when innocent in order to protect someone else would be perverting the course of justice. That would be illegal and immoral.
Absent that, pleading guilty when innocent would be daft, but neither illegal nor immoral.
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff