NIP - Who was driving?

[razbox]

My wife and I share a car and recently got a NIP in the post - doing 36 in a 30 zone.

We honestly didn't know who was driving so asked for a photo. The trouble is, we can't tell (at all) who is driving from the photo.

Any advice as to what we should do? I suppose I could take the hit on my licence as I have company insurance but it seems a bit unfair as it may not have been me driving.

thanks

[FortJefferson]

You should both get points, for having such bad memories

[razbox]

FortJefferson said:

You should both get points, for having such bad memories

I am serious...but I know it sounds a bit odd.

[shuvitupya]

razbox said:

recently got a NIP in the post - doing 36 in a 30 zone.

If you have been driving at 36 in a 30 then it must have been you! If not, then it was your wife!

Or maybe you both always break 30 speed limits, in which case you can expect another NIP soon

[razbox]

shuvitupya said:

razbox said:

recently got a NIP in the post - doing 36 in a 30 zone.

If you have been driving at 36 in a 30 then it must have been you! If not, then it was your wife!

Or maybe you both always break 30 speed limits, in which case you can expect another NIP soon

Very helpful, thank you.

[7db]

NIP should have a date and time on it for the offence. Where were you both that day?

[razbox]

7db said:

NIP should have a date and time on it for the offence. Where were you both that day?

We were together that morning but don't remember who was driving.

I think I will have to take the hit...

[Polarbert]

If you go to court, there will be no way either of you can prove who was driving, so they will not be able to charge either of you with the offence of speeding. Its written in the law somewhere that a husband and/or wife cannot incrimate their spouse.


Check out www.pepipoo.com for a wealth of information.

[littlegreenfairy]

Take it like a man. It'll save a lot of future arguements and you'll be her hero for a bit. Domestic bliss will be restored.

[bond-007]

I would complete the NIP naming your spouse as driver. When she gets the new NIP she can name you as driver. The case will be dropped as spouses cannot be compelled to give evidence against each other.

[razbox]

bond-007 said:

I would complete the NIP naming your spouse as driver. When she gets the new NIP she can name you as driver. The case will be dropped as spouses cannot be compelled to give evidence against each other.

Really? If that was the case then surely "unsavoury" types would always do this whenever a photo wasn't clear...

[shuvitupya]

And respraying your car a different colour, and saying your plates have been cloned does not work either

[gopher]

If you can not genuinely remember who was driving, and you show due diligence in ascertaining who was driving and are still unable then you have a valid defence, do not listen to the scammers who are only after your money.

Remember if you own up to the offence and it was not you then you could be guilty of perverting the course of justice, which is very nasty.

You’ve asked for the photo’s – I suggest you check if you have any petrol receipts or the such like which may help ascertain who was driving, anything at all that may point at who was driving.

If you cannot work it out, write back to the scammers explain what you have done to find out who was driving, and ask their advice on what to do next – they will then take you to court for deeming yourself above them.

You then repeat to the judge everything you have done to find out who was driving and he throws the case out. (As what happened to the Hamiltons) or he charges you a bigger fine some costs but you go to bed knowing that you have not contributed to the parasitic scammers coffers and so sleep well.

[bond-007]

razbox said:

bond-007 said:

I would complete the NIP naming your spouse as driver. When she gets the new NIP she can name you as driver. The case will be dropped as spouses cannot be compelled to give evidence against each other.

Really? If that was the case then surely "unsavoury" types would always do this whenever a photo wasn't clear...

There is a high court precedent for this. I shall look it up.

www.cps.gov.uk/legal/section13/chapter_i.html

[quote]Spouses

Section 80 Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 <Archbold 8-46> is the statutory provision which governs the competence and compellability of spouses in criminal proceedings.

Spouses are generally competent to give evidence against their partners. The only exception is if the spouses are jointly charged. If they are, neither is competent or compellable to give evidence, on behalf of the prosecution, against the other, unless the spouse witness has already pleaded guilty, or the proceedings in respect of the spouse witness have been discontinued.

Spouses are competent and compellable to give evidence on behalf of the defendant or the defendant's co-accused.

The prosecution can only compel a spouse to give evidence for the prosecution in cases which involve:

* an allegation of violence against the spouse;
* an allegation of violence against a person under the age of sixteen years;
* an alleged sexual offence against a victim under the age of sixteen years; or
* attempting, conspiring or aiding and abetting, counselling and procuring to commit the offences in the categories above.

Unmarried partners are competent and compellable witnesses: see Section 97 Magistrates' Courts Act 1980.

If a spouse witness has become divorced before s/he gives evidence, the spouse becomes a compellable witness in all circumstances.

The decision to compel a witness to attend court against his or her expressed wish is one that should be exercised with sensitivity and discretion.

When making the decision to compel a witness to attend court to give evidence against a spouse you should bear in mind that the witness will probably be distressed.

You will not know how the witness will react. He or she:

* may become a "hostile witness";
* may give good evidence; or
* may refuse to give evidence and be in contempt of court.

You should bear in mind that the refusal of a witness to attend court may be brought about through fear. If you consider that this may be a possibility, you should ask for further information from the police and consider the use of Section 23 Criminal Justice Act 1988. <Archbold 9-127>.

The provision of appropriate support from Victim Support, the police and other agencies may be very important to witnesses in these circumstances.

For further guidance on cases involving domestic violence, see <Care and Treatment of Victims and Witnesses> and <Domestic Violence>, elsewhere in this guidance.[/quote]

Edited by bond-007 on Tuesday 22 August 23:46

[deeps]

If you don't know then you don't know, why should you be forced to lie?

Tell it like it is. When it goes to court you will need to show that you've made reasonable efforts to establish who was driving.
As far as I am aware, if you can prove that you really dont know then that's the end of the matter. On the other hand if the Mag doesn't believe you, you will get done for failing to name the driver, which is 3 points + fine.

So do you want the hassle? I hope so! Dont just roll over.

[deeps]

shuvitupya said:

And respraying your car a different colour, and saying your plates have been cloned does not work either

Not even if they have been cloned?

[shuvitupya]

deeps said:

shuvitupya said:

And respraying your car a different colour, and saying your plates have been cloned does not work either

Not even if they have been cloned?

If they had been cloned, then you could prove where you were at the time, couldn't you ?

[WildCat]

razbox said:

My wife and I share a car and recently got a NIP in the post - doing 36 in a 30 zone.

We honestly didn't know who was driving so asked for a photo. The trouble is, we can't tell (at all) who is driving from the photo.

Any advice as to what we should do? I suppose I could take the hit on my licence as I have company insurance but it seems a bit unfair as it may not have been me driving.

thanks

Hamilton... they did "not know" either

[WildCat]

razbox said:

My wife and I share a car and recently got a NIP in the post - doing 36 in a 30 zone.

We honestly didn't know who was driving so asked for a photo. The trouble is, we can't tell (at all) who is driving from the photo.

Any advice as to what we should do? I suppose I could take the hit on my licence as I have company insurance but it seems a bit unfair as it may not have been me driving.

thanks

Hamilton... they did "not know" either

[Dwight Vandriver]

I would suggest Bond that the spouse thingy in the case of 172 has no validity.

RK, once served with 172, has a statutory duty to name the driver, with the defence at (4).

If spouse named then 172 sent to that person and again has the statutoy duty, if the driver to sign said form as being so, or again use the (4) defence.

Evidence isn't involved as such.

Failing to declare driver attracts offence and court.

dvd