Discussion
Briefly; friend of a friend got NIPped in his company car. Sent letter saying, truthfully, that more than one person could've been driving as its a pool car and asked for photograph(s).
Last week he got a letter from the Police with photographs (one of them reasonably clear) saying;
I note from your recent letter that you are having problems identifying the driver of the vehicle in question. I must remind you that as the registered keeper/nominated driver of the vehicle you have a lawful duty to supply such information and failure to do so may make you liable to prosecution. I include photographs (blah blah blah).
If you still have difficulty providing the details required in the notice, arrangements will be made for a Police Officer to visit and conduct a brief interview. A decision will then be taken as to what action, if any, is necessary.
I look forward to a response in writing within 7 days of receipt of this letter.
Any suggestions I could pass on?
>>> Edited by neil.b on Monday 20th October 09:29
Last week he got a letter from the Police with photographs (one of them reasonably clear) saying;
I note from your recent letter that you are having problems identifying the driver of the vehicle in question. I must remind you that as the registered keeper/nominated driver of the vehicle you have a lawful duty to supply such information and failure to do so may make you liable to prosecution. I include photographs (blah blah blah).
If you still have difficulty providing the details required in the notice, arrangements will be made for a Police Officer to visit and conduct a brief interview. A decision will then be taken as to what action, if any, is necessary.
I look forward to a response in writing within 7 days of receipt of this letter.
Any suggestions I could pass on?
>>> Edited by neil.b on Monday 20th October 09:29
how clear ?
strange thing ids they have never yet used a photo from a cam to ID the driver.
if it not to clear just give all the names of the posible drivers
and wait for a summons they ushally send one for that then alll go along as all give evedence you cant remember.
you should get off.
ps dont try it if the pic only shows one person.
just incase
ps my guess is there bluffing about sending a plod for an interview.
or the bib would never get anything else done if they were doing that all the time.
just incase one did take place I would make shaw you have a wicness there and get it on tape.
and remember you donot have to answer anything other than name address and date of birth.
and who was driving if you havent filled in the nip
under s172
however if you all realy dont know then you got a good chance of getting off
strange thing ids they have never yet used a photo from a cam to ID the driver.
if it not to clear just give all the names of the posible drivers
and wait for a summons they ushally send one for that then alll go along as all give evedence you cant remember.
you should get off.
ps dont try it if the pic only shows one person.
just incase
ps my guess is there bluffing about sending a plod for an interview.
or the bib would never get anything else done if they were doing that all the time.
just incase one did take place I would make shaw you have a wicness there and get it on tape.
and remember you donot have to answer anything other than name address and date of birth.
and who was driving if you havent filled in the nip
under s172
however if you all realy dont know then you got a good chance of getting off
neil.b said:
Should've added that the registered keeper is in fact the company and not a named individual, and the letter was addressed to the company and not him. Dunno if this matters....
Well it does matter as in your first post you say a mate got NIPped in his company car. On my reading of this it implied that he had got a ticket whilst he was driving and was looking for a way out. The fact that it may not of been him is referred to in the second sentence.
Basically if he can't identify the driver he can't identify the driver, and that is that. However is their any obligation on those responsible for pool cars to keep a record of who drives it when?
I would guess the tax office might require a record of the cars journeys to be kept!
neil.b said:
That's what he's trying to find out - what steps the police would go to (can go to) to find out who the driver was.
My understanding was they would ask the Company Secretary, or other relevant person, to identify the driver. That person then states they can't, the police would either then decide to take no further action, or would commence proceedings for not providing the information. Ultimately that would involve a court hearing for the preson to state their case and be found guilty or innocent.
neil.b said:They might do but would the timesheets actually prove anything about who was not in the car? IE do they list by minute each persons activity or was the car so
Thanks Chris. Apart from asking the questions, would they go far enough to, say, ask for time-sheets which might prove that only he could've been driving as all the other possible drivers were in the office at the time of the offence etc. etc.
far away from the office that someone signed "in the office" could not have been there?
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff