Speeding fine advice
Discussion
Im sure that this has been covered countless times on here but I'm looking for a little advice. Received two speeding tickets yesterday (may 16th) for two offences committed on April 11th, basically my wife or I have been caught going into and coming out of a local village. We genuinely can't remember which one of us was driving and I'm wondering where we stand on challenging this on the basis of elapsed time. The car is contract hired to my business by VWFS, which would account for some delay in obtaining registered keeper, but this is almost 5 weeks. As always any advice much appreciated, failing which anyone know a decent motoring lawyer in the Midlands?
If you are not stopped at the time for a moving traffic offence then the police will send the registered keeper a Notice of Intended Prosecution. There will also be a form to complete and return.
The Notice warns the recipient that 'you are required to supply the information requested within 28 days of the date of this notice. On conviction for failure to supply the information, the penalty is similar to that of the alleged offence itself. Warning - it is an offence to supply false information.' It is the responsibility of the police to identify the vehicle but your responsibility to identify the driver. The penalty for failing to identify the driver is a fine of up to £1000 and 6 penalty points.
What if the car is shared and it could have been one of two or more drivers? Well, there is a defence in section 172 of the Road Traffic Act. Section 172(2) provides that:
"A person shall not be guilty of an offence if he shows that he did not know and could not with reasonable diligence have ascertained who the driver of the vehicle was."
There is also another potential defence in section 172(7)(b):
"the person on whom the notice is served shall not be guilty of an offence if he shows either that he gave the information as soon as reasonably practicable after the end of that period or that it has not been reasonably practicable for him to give it."
A Notice of Intended Prosecution must be sent to the Registered Keeper within 14 days of the offence. The logic behind this is that the recipient will be informed relatively soon after the offence. However, sometimes the Notice (with form) is not received - in which case it plainly wouldn't be practicable to give information as to the identity of a driver. In other cases, the original notice may have been sent to a lease company, then a company secretary and thereafter to an employee. It may be months before the notice is received - in which case it may no longer be practicable to give the information or otherwise the due diligence defence is easier to prove if records are not kept for many months.
What about a husband and wife? Firstly, do not 'do a Huhne'. Penalty points and a fine are preferable to spending time in prison. There may even be the possibility of a speed awareness course. You are duty bound to investigate your own whereabouts at the time of the alleged offence and also the whereabouts of other possible driver or drivers. Problems may arise where there is shared driving and it cannot be ascertained who was driving at the time of the offence. It is unlikely that a photograph from the camera will assist because they almost always take photographs from the rear. In any event, the photograph should be requested - this does not put on hold the obligation to respond within 28 days.
In short, there is a defence if you have exercised 'reasonable diligence' and/or simply can't give the information requested.
Christine Hamilton was cleared of this offence in November 2003 by a District Judge sitting at Manchester Magistrates Court. The former cabinet minister's wife explained that the couple shared driving duties on their regular long journeys and she couldn't be sure who committed the offence. She told the judge, 'I did not know beyond reasonable doubt who was driving, I thought it would have been reckless to guess or calculate on the balance of probability. I would have had a 50 per cent chance of being wrong.' Mrs Hamilton used the 'reasonable diligence' defence and the judge said that he has 'absolutely no reason to disbelieve her in any respect at all.' Mrs Hamilton, who represented herself, was found not guilty.
The Notice warns the recipient that 'you are required to supply the information requested within 28 days of the date of this notice. On conviction for failure to supply the information, the penalty is similar to that of the alleged offence itself. Warning - it is an offence to supply false information.' It is the responsibility of the police to identify the vehicle but your responsibility to identify the driver. The penalty for failing to identify the driver is a fine of up to £1000 and 6 penalty points.
What if the car is shared and it could have been one of two or more drivers? Well, there is a defence in section 172 of the Road Traffic Act. Section 172(2) provides that:
"A person shall not be guilty of an offence if he shows that he did not know and could not with reasonable diligence have ascertained who the driver of the vehicle was."
There is also another potential defence in section 172(7)(b):
"the person on whom the notice is served shall not be guilty of an offence if he shows either that he gave the information as soon as reasonably practicable after the end of that period or that it has not been reasonably practicable for him to give it."
A Notice of Intended Prosecution must be sent to the Registered Keeper within 14 days of the offence. The logic behind this is that the recipient will be informed relatively soon after the offence. However, sometimes the Notice (with form) is not received - in which case it plainly wouldn't be practicable to give information as to the identity of a driver. In other cases, the original notice may have been sent to a lease company, then a company secretary and thereafter to an employee. It may be months before the notice is received - in which case it may no longer be practicable to give the information or otherwise the due diligence defence is easier to prove if records are not kept for many months.
What about a husband and wife? Firstly, do not 'do a Huhne'. Penalty points and a fine are preferable to spending time in prison. There may even be the possibility of a speed awareness course. You are duty bound to investigate your own whereabouts at the time of the alleged offence and also the whereabouts of other possible driver or drivers. Problems may arise where there is shared driving and it cannot be ascertained who was driving at the time of the offence. It is unlikely that a photograph from the camera will assist because they almost always take photographs from the rear. In any event, the photograph should be requested - this does not put on hold the obligation to respond within 28 days.
In short, there is a defence if you have exercised 'reasonable diligence' and/or simply can't give the information requested.
Christine Hamilton was cleared of this offence in November 2003 by a District Judge sitting at Manchester Magistrates Court. The former cabinet minister's wife explained that the couple shared driving duties on their regular long journeys and she couldn't be sure who committed the offence. She told the judge, 'I did not know beyond reasonable doubt who was driving, I thought it would have been reckless to guess or calculate on the balance of probability. I would have had a 50 per cent chance of being wrong.' Mrs Hamilton used the 'reasonable diligence' defence and the judge said that he has 'absolutely no reason to disbelieve her in any respect at all.' Mrs Hamilton, who represented herself, was found not guilty.
SV8Predator said:
Of course, that's what to put down, but presumably you do know who was driving?
Well, if you read the OP, they state that they genuinely can't remember who was driving. It was over a month ago and they don't have any diary entries. Assuming you're not the only one who drives your car and you both share shopping duties, for example, would you remember who was driving on a specific day 5 weeks ago? I wouldn't.Blue62 said:
Thanks for that, I might just go and see a lawyer on the basis that we share this car an neither of us has any diary entry for the day in question and given the passage of time, cannot with any certainty state who was driving at the time of the offence.
Do you or your wife have an iPhone? agtlaw said:
Do you or your wife have an iPhone?
No, samsung and blackberry. We have two cars in the family, a Golf and a Discovery and we do chop and change depending on the need and nature of the journey, I am not joking when I say that we cannot remember who was driving what on that particular day. Courts rarely believe two grown adults can't remember who drove on a journey of a few weeks prior.
Simply saying "we don't know" will see two lots of 6 points and a potential 6 month ban.
Write and ask for photos to "assist in identifcation of driver". They usually send them, but if they don't, that doesn't stop the 28 day clock ticking.
Simply saying "we don't know" will see two lots of 6 points and a potential 6 month ban.
Write and ask for photos to "assist in identifcation of driver". They usually send them, but if they don't, that doesn't stop the 28 day clock ticking.
Lawyers are just not worth it in this situation.
Go into court and say "we don't remember" and the judge will say "you're adults, of course you can".
What difference is somebody saying "they don't remember" on your behalf?
As suggested, ask for pictures to "help identify the driver" - ask for evidence and you'll get nothing.
Fingers crossed the pictures will help. If they don't, decide on the most likely person and nominate them.
I'm pretty sure a lawyer would love to take some money off you - but unless he's charging "celebrity rates" it's money better put towards your fine.
Go into court and say "we don't remember" and the judge will say "you're adults, of course you can".
What difference is somebody saying "they don't remember" on your behalf?
As suggested, ask for pictures to "help identify the driver" - ask for evidence and you'll get nothing.
Fingers crossed the pictures will help. If they don't, decide on the most likely person and nominate them.
I'm pretty sure a lawyer would love to take some money off you - but unless he's charging "celebrity rates" it's money better put towards your fine.
Remember the NIP goes to the registered keeper, so if I commit a motoring offence (not that I am going to) in my leased company car, they only have to notify the registered keeper (the lease company) within 14 days. They then inform my employer who informs me. Usually 5 to 10 days after the lease company have been told.
Stoofa said:
Lawyers are just not worth it in this situation.
Go into court and say "we don't remember" and the judge will say "you're adults, of course you can".
What difference is somebody saying "they don't remember" on your behalf?
As suggested, ask for pictures to "help identify the driver" - ask for evidence and you'll get nothing.
Fingers crossed the pictures will help. If they don't, decide on the most likely person and nominate them.
I'm pretty sure a lawyer would love to take some money off you - but unless he's charging "celebrity rates" it's money better put towards your fine.
So basically the system is a farce, there's a statutory defence and you're potentially PCoJ if you name a driver, yet if you don't they won't believe you and give you more points and a fine bigger than the standard FPN. Go into court and say "we don't remember" and the judge will say "you're adults, of course you can".
What difference is somebody saying "they don't remember" on your behalf?
As suggested, ask for pictures to "help identify the driver" - ask for evidence and you'll get nothing.
Fingers crossed the pictures will help. If they don't, decide on the most likely person and nominate them.
I'm pretty sure a lawyer would love to take some money off you - but unless he's charging "celebrity rates" it's money better put towards your fine.
Stoofa said:
Lawyers are just not worth it in this situation.
Go into court and say "we don't remember" and the judge will say "you're adults, of course you can".
What difference is somebody saying "they don't remember" on your behalf?
As suggested, ask for pictures to "help identify the driver" - ask for evidence and you'll get nothing.
Fingers crossed the pictures will help. If they don't, decide on the most likely person and nominate them.
I'm pretty sure a lawyer would love to take some money off you - but unless he's charging "celebrity rates" it's money better put towards your fine.
Over 5 weeks have elapsed since the alleged offence and we don't have any calendar or diary entries for the day in question, I think it's reasonable to state that we don't know who was driving on the basis that we both drive that car. Quite where adulthood comes into the argument is anyone's guess, most of the ones I mix with would struggle to remember what they were doing 5 days ago, let alone 5 weeks.Go into court and say "we don't remember" and the judge will say "you're adults, of course you can".
What difference is somebody saying "they don't remember" on your behalf?
As suggested, ask for pictures to "help identify the driver" - ask for evidence and you'll get nothing.
Fingers crossed the pictures will help. If they don't, decide on the most likely person and nominate them.
I'm pretty sure a lawyer would love to take some money off you - but unless he's charging "celebrity rates" it's money better put towards your fine.
Edited by Blue62 on Sunday 18th May 19:30
Blue62 said:
Received two speeding tickets yesterday (may 16th) for two offences committed on April 11th,
The adults bit is because most people on here think that you know who was driving. But anyway, besides that, you know it was either you or your wife. There's two tickets, pay one each.You're not going to get out of it, and why would you need to consult a lawyer (and spend all that money) just for a couple of speeding tickets?
Quote( But anyway, besides that, you know it was either you or your wife. There's two tickets, pay one each.)
And commit perjury?
I was in court once for speeding, I'd initially plead not guilty but the case was dragging on and costing me money in lost time at work so I asked the judge if I could change the plea to guilty. He said no, not if you aren't, as that would be perjury just as much as if you lied the other way.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff