Wanted drivers details, careless driving |
Wanted drivers details, careless driving |
Sat, 11 Aug 2018 - 09:55
Post
#1
|
|
New Member Group: Members Posts: 8 Joined: 11 Aug 2018 Member No.: 99,351 |
Hi
Just received a 172 asking for the drivers details with regard to a careless driving charge it alledges another motorist witnessed careless driving Unfortunatley i have no recollection of this mainly because i drive 3000km a week in a truck the incident time and date location are over 8 miles away from my route on the day in question - my Tacho puts me on Break 10 miles away - with a weigh bridge ticket to prove location - at the time of the incident what are the chances this will be forgotten about ? i sent the 172 back as it is required by law - but i kept the location difference and tacho time to myself 10 miles is up to 20 minutes with traffic and road junctions cheers |
|
|
Advertisement |
Sat, 11 Aug 2018 - 09:55
Post
#
|
Advertise here! |
|
|
|
Sat, 11 Aug 2018 - 23:17
Post
#21
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 4,126 Joined: 31 Jan 2018 Member No.: 96,238 |
i'll send it back as it is and see what plod want - might want a chat before anything else so i will have a chance to raise my location and time concerns - also might find out what the hell its all about too
If the vehicle was somewhere else, that isn't a very good idea You're sure that the vehicle was not at the location at any time that day so say so The police will be very suspicious if you only mention the defence after discovering the nature of the careless driving I assume you've eliminated the obvious that the location was right but the date was wrong |
|
|
Sun, 12 Aug 2018 - 12:05
Post
#22
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 33,610 Joined: 2 Apr 2008 From: Not in the UK Member No.: 18,483 |
The police will be very suspicious if you only mention the defence after discovering the nature of the careless driving They can be as suspicious as they like if he can prove he was elsewhere. -------------------- Moderator
Any comments made do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon. No lawyer/client relationship should be assumed nor should any duty of care be owed. |
|
|
Mon, 13 Aug 2018 - 07:09
Post
#23
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 233 Joined: 28 Jun 2011 Member No.: 47,856 |
|
|
|
Mon, 13 Aug 2018 - 07:31
Post
#24
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 96 Joined: 9 Nov 2016 Member No.: 88,346 |
i sent the 172 back as it is required by law i have the 172 form still here not posted yet Using your own logic, we should discount the validity of what you say due to the discrepancies between your own two statements - this is how easy it is for people to misremember / recall differently / omit or alter details for expediency etc. If I had to recall where an incident happened and at what time (like the guy who cut me up this morning) I could only be accurate to within 10 - 15 minutes I expect, and that's only on a 90 minute journey. In my (unqualified) opinion, the options below would be your best bet. You could reply by letter, including all of the information required by the form. In this letter you could set out that you were the driver at the time mentioned in the s 172 notice but you and your vehicle were not at the location mentioned. this will alert the police at an early stage to the disputed facts and what they do with that is up to them - go back to the witness to clarify, proceed as it may just be a minor error, or bin the matter. Or, you could just name yourself in response the the s 172 and if the police take it further put forward the location discrepancy at that stage. -------------------- I'm not a lawyer or legally trained, my opinion is based on my experience - follow at your own risk.
|
|
|
Mon, 13 Aug 2018 - 08:32
Post
#25
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 28,687 Joined: 27 Nov 2007 Member No.: 15,642 |
I would do exactly as Southpaw has suggested, in the first option
At the time and date you were the driver, but were NOT at the location specified. This post has been edited by nosferatu1001: Mon, 13 Aug 2018 - 08:32 |
|
|
Mon, 13 Aug 2018 - 09:45
Post
#26
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 4,126 Joined: 31 Jan 2018 Member No.: 96,238 |
I would put the "not at location" in play with the reply but wait at least two weeks
This makes sure that, whether the date or location is wrong, they can't send a corrected NIP within the 14 day deadline |
|
|
Mon, 13 Aug 2018 - 10:14
Post
#27
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 2,356 Joined: 30 Jun 2008 From: Landan Member No.: 20,731 |
Agreed with the above. In your letter you must supply all of the relevant information, as clearly and concisely as possible. If the time and location provided on the s.172 notice is correct, and your evidence and recollection is also correct, then you will respond as "any other person" (rather than as "keeper of the vehicle" at the time and place specified), so your burden will be to provide all information in your power to give that might lead to the identification of the driver. In your case, as you were not present at the time and place specified, you cannot identify the driver directly, so all you can do is give the police the information that will allow them to pursue the correct driver by other means.
So don't hold anything back. If you can prove that you/the vehicle was likely elsewhere at the time and place specified, provide that evidence to the police in your reply to their s.172 request. --Churchmouse |
|
|
Mon, 13 Aug 2018 - 10:32
Post
#28
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 13,735 Joined: 22 Oct 2007 Member No.: 14,720 |
then you will respond as "any other person" (rather than as "keeper of the vehicle" Surely he was the keeper of the vehicle mentioned in the S.172 whether he was at the location mentioned or not? -------------------- |
|
|
Mon, 13 Aug 2018 - 12:41
Post
#29
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 33,610 Joined: 2 Apr 2008 From: Not in the UK Member No.: 18,483 |
then you will respond as "any other person" (rather than as "keeper of the vehicle" Surely he was the keeper of the vehicle mentioned in the S.172 whether he was at the location mentioned or not? I don’t think we know enough about the circumstances to be able to answer that question. -------------------- Moderator
Any comments made do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon. No lawyer/client relationship should be assumed nor should any duty of care be owed. |
|
|
Mon, 13 Aug 2018 - 17:07
Post
#30
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 2,356 Joined: 30 Jun 2008 From: Landan Member No.: 20,731 |
then you will respond as "any other person" (rather than as "keeper of the vehicle" Surely he was the keeper of the vehicle mentioned in the S.172 whether he was at the location mentioned or not? He was (apparently) the keeper of a vehicle at the time and date mentioned, but (apparently) not the keeper of the particular vehicle seen at the same time and date at a location far from where his was. The Chief Constable is asking for information about the latter vehicle, not the one he was keeping. That would be the argument, anyway. In any case, the same information would be offered to the police, so the keeper/any other person distinction is only of consequence if they don't accept it. --Churchmouse |
|
|
Wed, 15 Aug 2018 - 20:54
Post
#31
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 720 Joined: 11 May 2014 Member No.: 70,566 |
sorry but i do not believe you even know what you are talking about You come here for advice. Then argue with one of the most experienced and qualified posters on the forum. Why waste your time? And ours. So things are taken as gospel - no one is allowed to say ' hold on thats not right !' i will argue with anyone if i feel i am being stitched up by some mate of a copper who wants to flex his relationship with my license Can you give a realistic reason why anyone would do that, and what they would gain by doing so? At this point in time you don't know whether it is a submitted dashcam video. It might be just that someone feels aggrieved by the manner of your driving and that following interview, the police NFA it. A more sensible course of action might have been to post here before you sent the response. -------------------- I reserve the right to be wrong.
|
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: Friday, 29th March 2024 - 11:59 |