S172 Help needed urgently, Court Summons |
S172 Help needed urgently, Court Summons |
Thu, 22 Jul 2010 - 12:46
Post
#1
|
|
New Member Group: Members Posts: 8 Joined: 22 Jul 2010 Member No.: 39,169 |
I am due in court on the 12/8/10 on the charge of failiure to give information re drivers identity as required s172 Road Traffic Act 1988 10/02/2010=9/03/2010.
I have pleaded not guilty to the offence and have explained the reason why i am unsure who was driving at the time of the alleged offence and the circumstances are briefly as follows:- On the day in question i was driving initially but had to stop due to the fact i was in a lot of pain from sciatica i then handed over driving to my Wife who drives infrequently and rarely drives on dual carriageways or motorways anyway within a couple of miles my Wife who was uncomfortable with the speed of the traffic and was complaining of a migraine pulled over and refused to drive any further. At this point we had no option but to ask our passenger (having established he was insured) to take over the driving although i was reluctant to do this because i don't like anyone driving my car but under the circumstances we had little option. Susequently the passenger drove to the nearest town where i was able to get rest and painkillers and take over the driving. The above circumstances to took place over a distance of 4-5 miles and in the area of the alleged original speeding offence and it is impossible to determine who was driving at the time of the offence. I have a clean licence and have never been in trouble with the law before i have given both the Police and CPS details of all potential drivers and to be honest i am a little preplexed as to why this is going to Court. However i understand if found guilty i could face a fine of up to £1000 plus 6 points on my licence and may have to pay the prosecution costs. There is no way i can afford a Solicitor and my intention was to go to Court explain the circumstances and have the other 2 potential drivers there to verify the facts. However the passenger who took over the driving and to be fair was acting as a good samaritan as refused to get involved and does not want to go to Court and due to the fact he was helping out i have had to respect his wishes. This would have left my Wife as the only witness however i recently became estranged from my Wife and she now refuses to appear as a witness this is alsp partialy due to ill health. I am now very worried as i am left with no witnesses have never appeared in Court previously and have the might of the CPS against me. Can anyone please give me any advice would i be better off saying that on the balance of probability i was the driver at the time of the alleged offence even though i don't think i was the driver at the time? |
|
|
Advertisement |
Thu, 22 Jul 2010 - 12:46
Post
#
|
Advertise here! |
|
|
|
Thu, 22 Jul 2010 - 12:54
Post
#2
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 1,496 Joined: 27 Sep 2006 Member No.: 7,899 |
Would be helpful if you filled out the NIP Wizard first.
You are duty bound to provide any information that is in your power to give to satisfy the S.172 request for driver info. This means at the very least you would need to provide the details of all the possible drivers - yourself, your wife and your passenger. From what you've described (particularly the part about your passenger "refusing to get involved") it sounds as if you didn't give the above information and as such are probably guilty of Failure to Furnish. Others may be able to provide more help once you've filled in the NIP Wizard. |
|
|
Thu, 22 Jul 2010 - 13:03
Post
#3
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 13,506 Joined: 9 Jan 2008 From: manchester Member No.: 16,521 |
just to be clear
you named the other two as potenial drivers on the document you sent to the scammers ? -------------------- jobo
anyone but Murray, Wish granted for another year, |
|
|
Thu, 22 Jul 2010 - 13:14
Post
#4
|
|
New Member Group: Members Posts: 8 Joined: 22 Jul 2010 Member No.: 39,169 |
Would be helpful if you filled out the NIP Wizard first. You are duty bound to provide any information that is in your power to give to satisfy the S.172 request for driver info. This means at the very least you would need to provide the details of all the possible drivers - yourself, your wife and your passenger. From what you've described (particularly the part about your passenger "refusing to get involved") it sounds as if you didn't give the above information and as such are probably guilty of Failure to Furnish. Others may be able to provide more help once you've filled in the NIP Wizard. I furnished the police on request with the names and adresses of the other 2 potential drivers but i can't force either of them to appear as winesses can i??? just to be clear you named the other two as potenial drivers on the document you sent to the scammers ? Yes i named the other 2 potential drivers. |
|
|
Thu, 22 Jul 2010 - 13:14
Post
#5
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 4,748 Joined: 4 Apr 2007 Member No.: 11,456 |
What device caught the vehicle speeding, a fixed or mobile camera unit. Did you enquire as to any photo's that may have been available to help identify the driver. What diligence have you used to identify the driver, it does not sound like much to me. Can you not recall where you changed driver with respect to the loacation of the camera. Pete D
|
|
|
Thu, 22 Jul 2010 - 13:14
Post
#6
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 13,506 Joined: 9 Jan 2008 From: manchester Member No.: 16,521 |
no but yoiu dont need them to attend
as youve passed hurdle one of actually giving names of potential drivers then your in to step 2, which is to undertake reasonable diligence in finding out which was driving at that time this is a silly box ticking exercise at the best of time and involves asking every one if they know getting every one to check CC, moby records etc etc Now in order to show RD you need to ask the question, they have no legal duty to help you or even answer the questions so what you need to take to court is you explanation, can you get medical confirmation of your condition and you attempts to get reasonable answers to your RD investigation -------------------- jobo
anyone but Murray, Wish granted for another year, |
|
|
Thu, 22 Jul 2010 - 13:16
Post
#7
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 1,496 Joined: 27 Sep 2006 Member No.: 7,899 |
Would be helpful if you filled out the NIP Wizard first. You are duty bound to provide any information that is in your power to give to satisfy the S.172 request for driver info. This means at the very least you would need to provide the details of all the possible drivers - yourself, your wife and your passenger. From what you've described (particularly the part about your passenger "refusing to get involved") it sounds as if you didn't give the above information and as such are probably guilty of Failure to Furnish. Others may be able to provide more help once you've filled in the NIP Wizard. I furnished the police on request with the names and adresses of the other 2 potential drivers but i can't force either of them to appear as winesses can i??? They would not appear as witnesses in court and even if they did what would they say? "It wasn't me either guv" Did you name the possible drivers within the 28 day deadline from receiving the NIP? e: Scratch the above, you've said you have now. This post has been edited by Durzel: Thu, 22 Jul 2010 - 13:17 |
|
|
Thu, 22 Jul 2010 - 13:24
Post
#8
|
|
New Member Group: Members Posts: 8 Joined: 22 Jul 2010 Member No.: 39,169 |
NIP Details and Circumstances
What is the name of the Constabulary? - Date of the offence: - February 2010 Date of the NIP: - 5 days after the offence Date you received the NIP: - 7 days after the offence Location of offence (exact location as it appears on the NIP: important): - A40 Pencraig towards Ross on Wye (LC) EC33 Marstow Was the NIP addressed to you? - Yes Was the NIP sent by first class post, second class or recorded delivery? - Not known If your are not the Registered Keeper, what is your relationship to the vehicle? - How many current points do you have? - 0 Provide a description of events (if you know what happened) telling us as much about the incident as possible - some things that may seem trivial to you may be important, so don't leave anything out. Please do not post personal details for obvious reasons - I am due in court on the 12/8/10 on the charge of failiure to give information re drivers identity as required s172 Road Traffic Act 1988 10/02/2010=9/03/2010. I have pleaded not guilty to the offence and have explained the reason why i am unsure who was driving at the time of the alleged offence and the circumstances are briefly as follows:- On the day in question i was driving initially but had to stop due to the fact i was in a lot of pain from sciatica i then handed over driving to my Wife who drives infrequently and rarely drives on dual carriageways or motorways anyway within a couple of miles my Wife who was uncomfortable with the speed of the traffic and was complaining of a migraine pulled over and refused to drive any further. At this point we had no option but to ask our passenger (having established he was insured) to take over the driving although i was reluctant to do this because i don't like anyone driving my car but under the circumstances we had little option. Susequently the passenger drove to the nearest town where i was able to get rest and painkillers and take over the driving. The above circumstances to took place over a distance of 4-5 miles and in the area of the alleged original speeding offence and it is impossible to determine who was driving at the time of the offence. I have a clean licence and have never been in trouble with the law before i have given both the Police and CPS details of all potential drivers and to be honest i am a little preplexed as to why this is going to Court. However i understand if found guilty i could face a fine of up to £1000 plus 6 points on my licence and may have to pay the prosecution costs. There is no way i can afford a Solicitor and my intention was to go to Court explain the circumstances and have the other 2 potential drivers there to verify the facts. However the passenger who took over the driving and to be fair was acting as a good samaritan as refused to get involved and does not want to go to Court and due to the fact he was helping out i have had to respect his wishes. This would have left my Wife as the only witness however i recently became estranged from my Wife and she now refuses to appear as a witness this is alsp partialy due to ill health. I am now very worried as i am left with no witnesses have never appeared in Court previously and have the might of the CPS against me. Can anyone please give me any advice would i be better off saying that on the balance of probability i was the driver at the time of the alleged offence even though i don't think i was the driver at the time? NIP Wizard Responses These were the responses used by the Wizard to arrive at its recommendation: Have you received a NIP? - Yes Are you the Registered Keeper of the vehicle concerned (is your name and address on the V5/V5C)? - Yes Did the first NIP arrive within 14 days? - Yes Although you are the Registered Keeper, were you also the keeper of the vehicle concerned (the person normally responsible for it) at the time of the alleged offence? - Yes Were you driving? - Unsure Do you know who was driving? - Unsure who was driving NIP Wizard Recommendation Based on these responses the Wizard suggested that this course of action should be considered:
Generated by the PePiPoo NIP Wizard v3.3.2: Thu, 22 Jul 2010 13:20:34 +0000 What device caught the vehicle speeding, a fixed or mobile camera unit. Did you enquire as to any photo's that may have been available to help identify the driver. What diligence have you used to identify the driver, it does not sound like much to me. Can you not recall where you changed driver with respect to the loacation of the camera. Pete D Yes requested photos which i received the unit was a mobile unit and as i am unfamiliar with the area i have no idea where it was actually located and therefore i cannot be sure who was driving when the car passed the speed camera? |
|
|
Thu, 22 Jul 2010 - 13:26
Post
#9
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 13,506 Joined: 9 Jan 2008 From: manchester Member No.: 16,521 |
no but yoiu dont need them to attend
as youve passed hurdle one of actually giving names of potential drivers then your in to step 2, which is to undertake reasonable diligence in finding out which was driving at that time this is a silly box ticking exercise at the best of time and involves asking every one if they know getting every one to check CC, moby records etc etc Now in order to show RD you need to ask the question, they have no legal duty to help you or even answer the questions so what you need to take to court is you explanation, can you get medical confirmation of your condition and you attempts to get reasonable answers to your RD investigation -------------------- jobo
anyone but Murray, Wish granted for another year, |
|
|
Thu, 22 Jul 2010 - 13:30
Post
#10
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 13,735 Joined: 22 Oct 2007 Member No.: 14,720 |
Can anyone please give me any advice would i be better off saying that on the balance of probability i was the driver at the time of the alleged offence even though i don't think i was the driver at the time? You can't make an equivocal statement. The most likely outcomes are: 1) You name the driver 2) You fail to name the driver and you are charged with S.172 offence of failing to supply info. The Court decides whether you have used "reasonable diligence" in try to determine who the driver was. This post has been edited by peterguk: Thu, 22 Jul 2010 - 13:30 -------------------- |
|
|
Thu, 22 Jul 2010 - 14:03
Post
#11
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 1,496 Joined: 27 Sep 2006 Member No.: 7,899 |
From the original account the OP is already at step 2...
I am due in court on the 12/8/10 on the charge of failiure to give information re drivers identity as required s172 Road Traffic Act 1988 10/02/2010=9/03/2010. Since the OP doesn't appear to have been dual-charged is the OP likely to get anywhere speaking to the CPS to see if they would drop the S172 charge in favour of prosecuting for the speeding, or is that not an option now? |
|
|
Thu, 22 Jul 2010 - 14:29
Post
#12
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 22,678 Joined: 23 Mar 2009 Member No.: 27,239 |
If they had dual-charged this would be a good option.
As they haven't, and the OP doesn't think he was the driver, this is risking a PCJ. Telling a lie is never a good course of action and not recommended. The OP mentions that he received photos but claims that they don't identify location because he is unfamiliar with the area. Streetview may help. Do the pictures give any help at all ? His wife should be the most easily identified and her seating position in the car may jog a memory. |
|
|
Thu, 22 Jul 2010 - 14:33
Post
#13
|
|
New Member Group: Members Posts: 8 Joined: 22 Jul 2010 Member No.: 39,169 |
If they had dual-charged this would be a good option. As they haven't, and the OP doesn't think he was the driver, this is risking a PCJ. Telling a lie is never a good course of action and not recommended. The OP mentions that he received photos but claims that they don't identify location because he is unfamiliar with the area. Streetview may help. Do the pictures give any help at all ? His wife should be the most easily identified and her seating position in the car may jog a memory. The photo shows the rear of the car and it is absolutely impossible to identify who was driving from the photos if the photos were fronm the front and showed the driver i would not be going to court??? |
|
|
Thu, 22 Jul 2010 - 15:16
Post
#14
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 56,265 Joined: 9 Sep 2003 From: Warwickshire Member No.: 317 |
The point Gan was making (although a little late for it now) was that you don't need to see the drivers face for rear facing photo's to help, I sit 6" taller than my wife in a car for example, also the majority of front photo's are no good either due to refelections from the screen.
That notwithstanding, your only defence is proving that you could not, with reasonable dillignece, ID the driver. You need to present your case in court, explain all you have done, take the wife as witness, you need the other possible driver as witness (he only as to say you asked and he didn't know who was driving, he is not on trial, and even if he says he was driving its too late for him to be charged with anything). Simon This post has been edited by The Rookie: Thu, 22 Jul 2010 - 15:17 -------------------- There is no such thing as a law abiding motorist, just those who have been scammed and those yet to be scammed!
S172's Rookies 1-0 Kent Council PCN's Rookies 1-0 Warwick Rookies 1-0 Birmingham PPC PCN's Rookies 10-0 PPC's |
|
|
Thu, 22 Jul 2010 - 19:50
Post
#15
|
|
New Member Group: Members Posts: 8 Joined: 22 Jul 2010 Member No.: 39,169 |
The point Gan was making (although a little late for it now) was that you don't need to see the drivers face for rear facing photo's to help, I sit 6" taller than my wife in a car for example, also the majority of front photo's are no good either due to refelections from the screen. That notwithstanding, your only defence is proving that you could not, with reasonable dillignece, ID the driver. You need to present your case in court, explain all you have done, take the wife as witness, you need the other possible driver as witness (he only as to say you asked and he didn't know who was driving, he is not on trial, and even if he says he was driving its too late for him to be charged with anything). Simon Thanks for the information much appreciated but i have 2 problems with the witnesses which are that i have recently become estranged from my Wife and she will not now help me and secondly the passenger is a Civil servant who does not want to get involved at all and refuses point blank to go to court!!! |
|
|
Thu, 22 Jul 2010 - 20:22
Post
#16
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 57 Joined: 29 May 2010 From: Leeds, UK Member No.: 37,878 |
Just state the facts. It's the prosecution's job to prove you've failed to supply information regarding the driver's identity.
You have given all the information you can. |
|
|
Thu, 22 Jul 2010 - 21:47
Post
#17
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 13,735 Joined: 22 Oct 2007 Member No.: 14,720 |
It's the prosecution's job to prove you've failed to supply information regarding the driver's identity. That's easy. And then the more difficult bit is for the OP to convince the court he gave all the info. he had to give and that he used "reasonable diligence" in trying to identify the driver. -------------------- |
|
|
Thu, 22 Jul 2010 - 22:10
Post
#18
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 56,265 Joined: 9 Sep 2003 From: Warwickshire Member No.: 317 |
Not sure what the cicvil servant thinks is the issue, he is a witness, all he has to say is he doesn't know who was driving, you could point out that by refusing to be a witness he's indicating he may have something to hide, same for your ex.
Simon -------------------- There is no such thing as a law abiding motorist, just those who have been scammed and those yet to be scammed!
S172's Rookies 1-0 Kent Council PCN's Rookies 1-0 Warwick Rookies 1-0 Birmingham PPC PCN's Rookies 10-0 PPC's |
|
|
Thu, 22 Jul 2010 - 22:53
Post
#19
|
|
New Member Group: Members Posts: 8 Joined: 22 Jul 2010 Member No.: 39,169 |
Not sure what the cicvil servant thinks is the issue, he is a witness, all he has to say is he doesn't know who was driving, you could point out that by refusing to be a witness he's indicating he may have something to hide, same for your ex. Simon Thanks again do you know if there is anyway i can force my witnesses tpo appear in court?? |
|
|
Fri, 23 Jul 2010 - 05:09
Post
#20
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 56,265 Joined: 9 Sep 2003 From: Warwickshire Member No.: 317 |
Sorry, I don't, not an expert in that area. Hopefully someone else will know one way or another.
Simon -------------------- There is no such thing as a law abiding motorist, just those who have been scammed and those yet to be scammed!
S172's Rookies 1-0 Kent Council PCN's Rookies 1-0 Warwick Rookies 1-0 Birmingham PPC PCN's Rookies 10-0 PPC's |
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: Wednesday, 17th April 2024 - 15:40 |