What is the fine for...

[poopoo]

Failing to notify police of the driver of the vehicle. Section 172 RTA 1988?

Cheers.

[Dwight Vandriver]

S172 RTA 88 offence

Max fine £1000. Discretionary disqualification. 3 points on Licence.

dvd

[SS2.]

Plus MS90 endorsement code on licence which may see insurers ramp up your premium (more so than just SP30, SP50 etc)..

[lunarscope]

In my case (failing to sign the S172 notice), my penalty was as follows:

3 points
£275 costs
£750 fine

And that was in North Wales, where the Police didn't bother to sign their 'sworn' statements (signature printed automatically), and therefore perverted the course of justice approximately 6000 times.

Absolute tossers !

[softtop]

lunarscope said:

In my case (failing to sign the S172 notice), my penalty was as follows:

Did you identify the driver as first posted? I had an experience where i identified myself as the driver but did not sign the form. They gave up after two letters! South Wales 4 years ago

[Richard C]

No points if a limited co is RK

[cliffe_mafia]

Girlfriend got 3 points + £140 fine for this but it made no difference to car insurance.

[jrwells]

I had one 6 years ago, 3 points, £100 fine. Didn't make any difference either to insurance, but then I had a TT99, so was bad enough anyway.....

[kennyGti]

jrwells said:

I had one 6 years ago, 3 points, £100 fine. Didn't make any difference either to insurance, but then I had a TT99, so was bad enough anyway.....

what's a TT99?

[gilbertd]

lunarscope said:

In my case (failing to sign the S172 notice), my penalty was as follows:

3 points
£275 costs
£750 fine

You accepted that??? Sect 172 states that you must give the information requested, it does not state in what form. You can supply them with the information on their form, in a PACE statement, in a letter or even by phone and you have fully complied with sect 172. Whether they consider it is in a form that they can produce as evidence against you for a related charge ie, speeding, is a different matter entirely. By filling in a NOIP and not signing it, you cannot be guilty of a sect 172 offence.

[jrwells]

kennyGti said:

jrwells said:

I had one 6 years ago, 3 points, £100 fine. Didn't make any difference either to insurance, but then I had a TT99, so was bad enough anyway.....

what's a TT99?

TT99 is when you reach 12 points, and you are disqualified under the 'totting up' procedure.

[kennyGti]

Right thanks. Yes, that would be one of the codes that make the insurers eyes light up with £ signs.

[SS2.]

gilbertd said:

By filling in a NOIP and not signing it, you cannot be guilty of a sect 172 offence.

Not strictly true..

Idris Francis was convicted of a Section 172 offence after submitting a completed yet unsigned form. Unless you are dealing with Scottish scammers, it is likely that a similar fate would befall anyone completing but failing to sign either a NoIP / PACE WS.

www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2004/591.html

[Flat in Fifth]

and remember when / if Road Safety Bill :spit: comes into law it will be 6 pts for an S172 offence, and as I read it :spit: that will be 6 pts even if the actual offence alleged would only attract 3 points or less.

[Plotloss]

Whats the latest on the PACE defence?

Has anyone been sucessfully pinched under S172 for that yet?

[SS2.]

Plotloss said:

Whats the latest on the PACE defence?

Soon to be heard / resolved in Europe. Currently, some PACE respondents hear nothing more, some are bullied or intimidated into 'fessing up' and some ultimately receive a summons. Of the latter, some defendants have been convicted (for speeding) after having their PACE statements deemed as admissible evidence of driver identity in the Mags' Court . They should, however, have recourse to appeal their convictions pending European rulings in favour of the good guys

Plotloss said:

Has anyone been sucessfully pinched under S172 for that yet?

Not as far as I am aware. Hardly surprising though as the Dr Jones judgment provides the authority that a letter response* to a S.172 request is perfectly acceptable.

* - provided it is signed and contains all of the information requested, of course.

[gilbertd]

SS2. said:

Plotloss said:

Whats the latest on the PACE defence?

Soon to be heard / resolved in Europe. Currently, some PACE respondents hear nothing more, some are bullied or intimidated into 'fessing up' and some ultimately receive a summons. Of the latter, some defendants have been convicted (for speeding) after having their PACE statements deemed as admissible evidence of driver identity in the Mags' Court . They should, however, have recourse to appeal their convictions pending European rulings in favour of the good guys

Plotloss said:

Has anyone been sucessfully pinched under S172 for that yet?

Not as far as I am aware. Hardly surprising though as the Dr Jones judgment provides the authority that a letter response* to a S.172 request is perfectly acceptable.

* - provided it is signed and contains all of the information requested, of course.

See here www.pistonheads.co.uk/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&t=278869
summons was for end of last month but as I told them I was pleading not guilty I didn't have to attend as it would be adjourned. Was adjourned until yesterday for witness availability and I attended. Case now set for trial on 8th Sept. So far everyone, including 2 solicitors and a number of full time professional investigators for other enforcement agencies have fallen about laughing at the prosecution evidence bundle.

As far as I know, nobody has actually taken it to it's full course, all have given in to the pressure and folded. I have no intention of doing that so we'll hsve to wait and see what happens on the 8th.....