NIP 110mph+ in a 50mph zone - non disclosure
Discussion
Fellow Phers after opinions/thoughts please.
Scenario: a person I know has been photographed by static camera at over 110mph on a 50mph limited road. I don’t know what type of road (single/dual/motorway) but overarching factor is it’s a 50mph limit.
They have chosen to ignore the NIP and effectively have said they don’t know who was driving. This vehicle is owned by said person who is sole user.
There is a no bail warrant out for them - from what I can determine they have been tried in their absence and have a fine of £800+ and six points for non disclosure of driver.
They intend to hand themselves in in the not to distant future and negotiate on paying (obviously arrested and trip to court).
Now forgive my ignorance, but if it is that easy to get out of admitting a high speed speeding offence surely everyone would do this to limit liability (yep up to £1k and 6 Points bad enough but for example if you had been doing a lot worse you’d take it)?
To my mind the no bail warrant would suggest they will go to court and be told that you are the RK and this driving in light of no evidence to suggest otherwise (or reasonable attempt etc) and this have more punishment.
Thoughts?
I should add it’s not me; also you do need to be a very special cockwomble to be done by fixed camera at those sort of speeds..
Scenario: a person I know has been photographed by static camera at over 110mph on a 50mph limited road. I don’t know what type of road (single/dual/motorway) but overarching factor is it’s a 50mph limit.
They have chosen to ignore the NIP and effectively have said they don’t know who was driving. This vehicle is owned by said person who is sole user.
There is a no bail warrant out for them - from what I can determine they have been tried in their absence and have a fine of £800+ and six points for non disclosure of driver.
They intend to hand themselves in in the not to distant future and negotiate on paying (obviously arrested and trip to court).
Now forgive my ignorance, but if it is that easy to get out of admitting a high speed speeding offence surely everyone would do this to limit liability (yep up to £1k and 6 Points bad enough but for example if you had been doing a lot worse you’d take it)?
To my mind the no bail warrant would suggest they will go to court and be told that you are the RK and this driving in light of no evidence to suggest otherwise (or reasonable attempt etc) and this have more punishment.
Thoughts?
I should add it’s not me; also you do need to be a very special cockwomble to be done by fixed camera at those sort of speeds..
zarjaz1991 said:
Hold on. If you fail to identify on a NIP then you get prosecuted and will receive a similar punishment to what you would have received had the actual offence gone to court.
You don’t then face the speeding charge separately. They don’t get two bites at the cherry.
I would have thought this, but the penalty for this sort of offence is signicantly more than the non disclosure one - 6pts and up to £1k fine for non disclosure. 2.x times over the speed limit would in my view lead to a ban. You don’t then face the speeding charge separately. They don’t get two bites at the cherry.
Distilling the facts still further - if they can’t idnetofy the driver through indisputable evidence then you could in theory be caught at 160mph on rear taking camera, non disclose and only suffer 6pts and £1k - I would suggest one wouldn’t want to repeat too often.
As I am told they haven’t been dual charged - purely for failing to name driver.
In my view - and perhaps somewhat draconian (and accept for pool cars company secretary picks up points if don’t know who was driving) The penalty for speeding offence falls back to RK if no effort made to suggest different or plausible evidence to show they weren’t the driver, parallel in many ways that if a drunk driver refuses to give a sample they are automatically assumed to be over limit and charged accordingly.
In my view - and perhaps somewhat draconian (and accept for pool cars company secretary picks up points if don’t know who was driving) The penalty for speeding offence falls back to RK if no effort made to suggest different or plausible evidence to show they weren’t the driver, parallel in many ways that if a drunk driver refuses to give a sample they are automatically assumed to be over limit and charged accordingly.
Well from what I hear today only issue was the failure to name driver.
Speed offence was 122mph in a 50mph limit, in a van...
To my mind make a farce of the system, on the flip side still 6pts and £750 fine...
Some people are idiots/chancers and just getaway with it.
On a purely technical note seems a workable way to mitigate against a really high penalty...
I will leave it there... thank you for all thoughts/discussions though!
Speed offence was 122mph in a 50mph limit, in a van...
To my mind make a farce of the system, on the flip side still 6pts and £750 fine...
Some people are idiots/chancers and just getaway with it.
On a purely technical note seems a workable way to mitigate against a really high penalty...
I will leave it there... thank you for all thoughts/discussions though!
I don't know what type of 50 it is - i am surmising on a motorway with 'smart' motorway section - probably around Bristol. The only reason I think this, is like other have said, where else can you wind a van up to that sort of speed. It does beg the question why the 50 limit in place though as it will take some miles to get to those heady heights (which is why i myself questioned the validity of the recorded speed..)..
Not much more I can add I'm afraid.
Not much more I can add I'm afraid.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff