63 in NSL single carriageway in a Light Commercial
Discussion
The situation:
In one of the company's vans, 9am 24/9/04, in light traffic all doing standard single carriageway speeds. Speed of 63mph recorded by a mobile camera van with front-facing cameras.
NIP goes properly to the leasing company, arrives 04/10/04 and is turned around same day. Second NIP comes addressed to ourlimited company posted 25/10/04, arrives today (27/10/04).
My analysis:
1) the NIP was properly served on the registered keeper.
2) We keep 14 days worth of records of who was in which van - after that, the (PDA) diaries purge old appointments to save on limited storage. With front facing camera, and only two of us in the company, both looking very different however, identifying the driver is unlikely to pose a problem.
Options are therefore to bite the bullet, or attempt one of the 'returning form unsigned' ploys.
Currently clean license. Separate insurance policies for a Fireblade (approx £300), Fabia TDI (approx £330), and a Motor Trader's policy for the company (approx £1400)
I assume that the circs would mean an offer of fixed penalty is extremely likely.
So, £60, 3 points, and increases in 3 insurance premiums would be the bullet to be bitten. My instinct is to take it on the chin - would anyone advise differently given my current insurance bills? Should I have the form returned unsigned having been filled in on my behalf by my solicitor acting as my agent?
Anatol
In one of the company's vans, 9am 24/9/04, in light traffic all doing standard single carriageway speeds. Speed of 63mph recorded by a mobile camera van with front-facing cameras.
NIP goes properly to the leasing company, arrives 04/10/04 and is turned around same day. Second NIP comes addressed to ourlimited company posted 25/10/04, arrives today (27/10/04).
My analysis:
1) the NIP was properly served on the registered keeper.
2) We keep 14 days worth of records of who was in which van - after that, the (PDA) diaries purge old appointments to save on limited storage. With front facing camera, and only two of us in the company, both looking very different however, identifying the driver is unlikely to pose a problem.
Options are therefore to bite the bullet, or attempt one of the 'returning form unsigned' ploys.
Currently clean license. Separate insurance policies for a Fireblade (approx £300), Fabia TDI (approx £330), and a Motor Trader's policy for the company (approx £1400)
I assume that the circs would mean an offer of fixed penalty is extremely likely.
So, £60, 3 points, and increases in 3 insurance premiums would be the bullet to be bitten. My instinct is to take it on the chin - would anyone advise differently given my current insurance bills? Should I have the form returned unsigned having been filled in on my behalf by my solicitor acting as my agent?
Anatol
If you CANNOT show who was driving thru your standard records, which would appear, on the surface, to satisfy due diligence, then you can legitimately state that you have no knowledge of who was driving at the time of the alledged offence. You have satisfied the requirement to try and identify the driver, and provided both of you would normally use the van in the course of your business and have insurance cover to rpove it, then this is a legitimate defence and should result in a "get out of jail free" card.
Get more at www.pepipoo.co.uk
Fight it all the way - its worth it
Get more at www.pepipoo.co.uk
Fight it all the way - its worth it
The constabulary have 'invited' me to view the footage, stating it is extremely helpful in identifying the driver... in the circumstances, I would imagine that due diligence would involve doing so...?
I am aware that companies need to show that they failed to keep records of who was driving AND that the failure was reasonable - which I think I can; but if the footage itself is likely to be conclusive, it's a moot point, isn't it?
Anatol
I am aware that companies need to show that they failed to keep records of who was driving AND that the failure was reasonable - which I think I can; but if the footage itself is likely to be conclusive, it's a moot point, isn't it?
Anatol
I presume that the speed limit for the vehicle you were driving was 50mph?
3mph over the limit would be ridiculous! You could explain that one away by saying you sneezed!
13mph is different, of course, it shows intent.
If they have footage which clearly shows the driver its not going to help your case any if they decide to take it to court.
Go view it, since they've invited you. It may call their bluff - in which case you can go down whatever route you decide. Or it may be conclusive. Whereupon you've been helpful and should get away with taking it on the chin via the £60/3pts business.
3mph over the limit would be ridiculous! You could explain that one away by saying you sneezed!
13mph is different, of course, it shows intent.
If they have footage which clearly shows the driver its not going to help your case any if they decide to take it to court.
Go view it, since they've invited you. It may call their bluff - in which case you can go down whatever route you decide. Or it may be conclusive. Whereupon you've been helpful and should get away with taking it on the chin via the £60/3pts business.
definitely go view the tape - if it shows the driver clearly then own-up. If not then you've got a good argument that you've done all you can. IMHO this is not a case of avoidance, and is simply the process all of these tickets should go through - if you can't easily identify the driver then it is the court's duty to prove who was driving or dismiss the case.
Appointment made to view the footage... Amusingly, on the day in question, I'll be in the area of the police HQ, as I'm repainting the bumper of the Chief Constable's merc, where his highly-trained ex-traffic driver drove it into a stationary object.
Less amusingly, I'd agreed to do the repaint for nothing, as a public-spirited gesture towards the Constabulary, and a nice PR exercise. Now feel inclined to invoice them for £60...
Less amusingly, I'd agreed to do the repaint for nothing, as a public-spirited gesture towards the Constabulary, and a nice PR exercise. Now feel inclined to invoice them for £60...
Anatol said:
Appointment made to view the footage... Amusingly, on the day in question, I'll be in the area of the police HQ, as I'm repainting the bumper of the Chief Constable's merc, where his highly-trained ex-traffic driver drove it into a stationary object.
Less amusingly, I'd agreed to do the repaint for nothing, as a public-spirited gesture towards the Constabulary, and a nice PR exercise. Now feel inclined to invoice them for £60...
...and ask for the Driver to be investigated for careless driving.
Anatol said:
Appointment made to view the footage... Amusingly, on the day in question, I'll be in the area of the police HQ, as I'm repainting the bumper of the Chief Constable's merc, where his highly-trained ex-traffic driver drove it into a stationary object.
Less amusingly, I'd agreed to do the repaint for nothing, as a public-spirited gesture towards the Constabulary, and a nice PR exercise. Now feel inclined to invoice them for £60...
LOL! Ironic
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff