S172 requests email and telephone number - can we ignore?

[RSTurboPaul]

Hello all wise owls of PH,

A friend has received a NIP and the S172 request includes boxes for driver name, address, licence number, DoB... and also email address and telephone number.

Said friend would rather not provide the latter two pieces of information, considering them irrelevant to the process of being potentially prosecuted for the given heinous crime (although said friend also notes that a Teams meeting invite link would need to be communicated somehow in any offer of a re-education course in lieu of any penalty points, which presumably is possible in a paper format...).


So, the question is...

Are we legally obliged to provide email and telephone details if there is a box requesting them on a S172 form?

Or can those boxes just be left blank?


Said friend notes that the S172 clauses within the RTA 1988 legislation do not specify that information, only that...:

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/52/secti...

S172 in RTA 1988 said:

(2) Where the driver of a vehicle is alleged to be guilty of an offence to which this section applies

(a) the person keeping the vehicle shall give such information as to the identity of the driver as he may be required to give by or on behalf of a chief officer of police [F3or the Chief Constable of the British Transport Police Force], ...

Are the police force issuing the NIP/S172 'requiring' the email and telephone information?

Or is action of identifying the driver discharged with the provision of the rest of the stated information?


Any thoughts gratefully received!

Edited by RSTurboPaul on Friday 19th June 16:24

[MustangGT]

RSTurboPaul said:

Hello all wise owls of PH,

A friend has received a NIP and the S172 request includes boxes for driver name, address, licence number, DoB... and also email address and telephone number.

Said friend would rather not provide the latter two pieces of information, considering them irrelevant to the process of being potentially prosecuted for the given heinous crime (although said friend also notes that a Teams meeting invite link would need to be communicated somehow in any offer of a re-education course in lieu of any penalty points, which presumably is possible in a paper format...).


So, the question is...

Are we legally obliged to provide email and telephone details if there is a box requesting them on a S172 form?

Or can those boxes just be left blank?


Said friend notes that the S172 clauses within the RTA 1988 legislation do not specify that information, only that...:

S172 in RTA 1988 said:

(2) Where the driver of a vehicle is alleged to be guilty of an offence to which this section applies

(a) the person keeping the vehicle shall give such information as to the identity of the driver as he may be required to give by or on behalf of a chief officer of police [F3or the Chief Constable of the British Transport Police Force], ...

Are the police force issuing the NIP/S172 'requiring' the email and telephone information?

Or is action of identifying the driver discharged with the provision of the rest of the stated information?


Any thoughts gratefully received!

Surely email and phone are included in 'information as to the identity of the driver'

[RSTurboPaul]

MustangGT said:

Surely email and phone are included in 'information as to the identity of the driver'

Are telephone numbers and email addresses tied to a specific person in the same manner as a Date of Birth or a Driving Licence number?

It would seem possible to provide any number/address of any other person, perhaps a relative, which would not seem to aid in driver identification at all, merely provide contact details for the service of documents, which the driver's address would seem to provide??

[paul_c123]

The legislation seems deliberately worded to be vague enough for the police to ask for "information as to the identity of the driver", rather than explicitly spelling out (for example) name, address, anything else, etc. I can think of a few examples where it isn't "one size fits all" - for example, say John Smith (senior) lived at home with his family including son John Smith (junior). It would be necessary to give further explicit information (such as age or DOB or senior/junior) than just name and address. So its a question of whether its reasonable in the specific circumstances to be obligated to supply phone and email address - of which many people don't have, so can't really be made compulsory.

My initial thoughts were though, that assuming the police would keep the data secure, it can only help the driver, not hinder them, as the issue of whatever it is progresses through the system.

[2020vision]

The chief officer has “required you to provide” the information under the terms of the S172 requirement.
The chief can set out the requirement as he reasonably seems necessary.
You are unlikely to be prosecuted for not providing the telephone and email. Why not send it back without and let us know what happens?
Quite why you would miss them of is a mystery, but there you go.

[ARH]

Just tell them you don't have phone or email. You don't have to have them (yet????)

[2020vision]

ARH said:

Just tell them you don't have phone or email. You don't have to have them (yet????)

Unless you do have them of course.

[Bigends]

I believe its down the nominated driver to provide phone and email addresses - if they wish to - and not down to a third party to provide those details to the Police.
Mandatory details are name, address date of birth and licence number.
Providing Email and phone numbers isnt a requirement during a roadside stop - not sure why they can be demanded under these circumstances.

Edited by Bigends on Friday 19th June 19:21

[OutInTheShed]

Set yourself up with a throwaway email address?
Maybe get a PAYG eSIM if you're that bothered?

[SS427 Camaro]

OutInTheShed said:

Set yourself up with a throwaway email address?
Maybe get a PAYG eSIM if you're that bothered?

[e-mail]

[reddiesel]

Bigends said:

I believe its down the nominated driver to provide phone and email addresses - if they wish to - and not down to a third party to provide those details to the Police.
Mandatory details are name, address date of birth and licence number.
Providing Email and phone numbers isnt a requirement during a roadside stop - not sure why they can be demanded under these circumstances.

Edited by Bigends on Friday 19th June 19:21

Exactly this . You also don't have to provide the License Number of a third party or indeed his or her date of birth . Anyone trusting the Police with such information as Email addresses is an utter idiot .

[BertBert]

Bigends said:

I believe its down the nominated driver to provide phone and email addresses - if they wish to - and not down to a third party to provide those details to the Police.
Mandatory details are name, address date of birth and licence number.
Providing Email and phone numbers isnt a requirement during a roadside stop - not sure why they can be demanded under these circumstances.

Edited by Bigends on Friday 19th June 19:21

It appears in this case that the OPs mate is nominating himself not a third party

[Bigends]

BertBert said:

Bigends said:

I believe its down the nominated driver to provide phone and email addresses - if they wish to - and not down to a third party to provide those details to the Police.
Mandatory details are name, address date of birth and licence number.
Providing Email and phone numbers isnt a requirement during a roadside stop - not sure why they can be demanded under these circumstances.

Edited by Bigends on Friday 19th June 19:21

It appears in this case that the OPs mate is nominating himself not a third party

Good point..same thing goes..even when arrested and booking into custody you're not obliged to give phone and email so don't see any legal obligation to do so here.

[Opapayer]

Why are you so bothered about giving information that’s often given freely on a fairly regular basis when shopping online, or plenty of other circumstances? Are you hoping that you can ignore any subsequent snail mail letter and by not providing other routes to contact you that you’ve created a way out of this? Pretty certain that won’t work and the 14 day limit is already finished so any deal with your postie about saying stuff was delivered later than that is irrelevant. In my experience (albeit about 6 years since I was last caught) everything is done by snail mail anyway and there’s no way to wriggle out of it.

[Bigends]

Opapayer said:

Why are you so bothered about giving information that s often given freely on a fairly regular basis when shopping online, or plenty of other circumstances? Are you hoping that you can ignore any subsequent snail mail letter and by not providing other routes to contact you that you ve created a way out of this? Pretty certain that won t work and the 14 day limit is already finished so any deal with your postie about saying stuff was delivered later than that is irrelevant. In my experience (albeit about 6 years since I was last caught) everything is done by snail mail anyway and there s no way to wriggle out of it.

Exactly - so why do they need email/phone numbers?

[Opapayer]

Bigends said:

Exactly - so why do they need email/phone numbers?

Does it matter? I give my phone number and email address out all the time. Unless you’re some megastar why does it matter? Even then you just give your assistant’s details and that’s that.

[ac.cobra]

Anything you say or give maybe used against you.

[reddiesel]

Opapayer said:

Does it matter? I give my phone number and email address out all the time. Unless you re some megastar why does it matter? Even then you just give your assistant s details and that s that.

To People with any intelligence it should matter . Personal Information is Personal Information . Why should the Police be invading Peoples Privacy when there's neither need nor legal requirement to do so ? Interesting to see your advocating exemption for "megastars" , clearly you must be in favour of two tier Policing . In my experience its People like you that are prepared to simply roll over and take it up the back passage , thats got this Country into the state its in .

[Opapayer]

reddiesel said:

To People with any intelligence it should matter . Personal Information is Personal Information . Why should the Police be invading Peoples Privacy when there's neither need nor legal requirement to do so ? Interesting to see your advocating exemption for "megastars" , clearly you must be in favour of two tier Policing . In my experience its People like you that are prepared to simply roll over and take it up the back passage , thats got this Country into the state its in .

I’m not exempting anyone, I’m suggesting they’re the only ones who might be bothered about giving out a phone number or an email address. It’s got nothing to do with two tier policing, that’s just the cries of someone who is more than a little troubled. I’m going to get bummed becoase I gave the police my phone number? You’ve lost the plot

As for personal information, it’s a bloody phone number or email address. WTF do you think the police are going to do with it? Charge you for being in possession of a phone number without consecutive numbers?

[I am alright Jack]

Opapayer said:

I m not exempting anyone, I m suggesting they re the only ones who might be bothered about giving out a phone number or an email address. It s got nothing to do with two tier policing, that s just the cries of someone who is more than a little troubled. I m going to get bummed becoase I gave the police my phone number? You ve lost the plot

As for personal information, it s a bloody phone number or email address. WTF do you think the police are going to do with it? Charge you for being in possession of a phone number without consecutive numbers?

Maybe he doesn't want special offers from the Safety Camera Partnership, 20% off used Gatso prices or 10% off his next speeding offence if he downloads the app.