PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Gatso camera, not sure of driver., 40 in a 30 not sure of driver.
ted1234
post Mon, 26 Oct 2009 - 00:03
Post #1


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 20
Joined: 25 Oct 2009
Member No.: 33,141



Our car was photographed by a Gatso camera doing 40mph in a 30mph. One of the ones stuck in the middle of a 40mph zone down to 30mph then surprise surprise up to 40 again.

The car is supplied by my partners company who lease it from a leasing company. Both my partner and I are insured to drive the car.

The alleged offence is said to of taken place on 21.06.2009
Head office of the company my partner works for received Notice of Intended Prosecution on 14 Jul 2009 and it was then forwarded to my partners workplace a week or so later.

On receiving the NIP we did not fill it out but instead wrote a letter to the Camera Processing Unit asking if they had sent out the NIP in the required time (hoping this would be an end to it as we genuinely could not remember who was driving at the time) to which they responded explaining they had sent the NIP to the Registered Owner of the car in time, which after checking we found to be correct.

We sent another letter stating that my partner was unsure who was driving at that time on that day and could we have a photograph to try and help identify who was driving. I must say at this point that in our correspondence with the CPU so far my partner has not named me as the other driver entitled to drive and who might of been driving at the time IS THIS NOW AGAINST US? As I say we still have the three pages of the NIP with us and have as yet not returned it.

We received a photo. A single photo of rear shot with no one in the car in view, no passenger, no driver. On seeing this my partner again wrote to CPU telling them that from the photo she was still unable to tell who was driving, on which we received another letter from the CPU and you all know what it says.......It is up to my partner to tell them who was driving at the time or go to court and proove you are unable to name driver (or some sort of legal jargon I think means that)! But very nicely of them they have given us ANOTHER 28 days to remember who the driver was......but we cannot, and we only have a week or so left!

Any advice on this one please. I find it sad that we are law abiding citizens or have been up till now and we are (or at least my partner) are being treated as a liar and if the government get their way as criminals! What has this country come to, are they really so desperate for money here now? If there was a 'back of a head' in the photo we would be able to identify who was driving from that, but nothing. This is stupid are we supposed to fill out a log sheet now every time we use a car just incase we get caught by a camera strategically placed inbetween a 40mph zone!
I know it is a law broken but I'm pis**d over the way we are getting caught out.......40 in a 30 that is inbetween a 40 zone ..........rant over

Thanks.

This post has been edited by ted1234: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 - 00:07
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
2 Pages V   1 2 >  
Start new topic
Replies (1 - 19)
Advertisement
post Mon, 26 Oct 2009 - 00:03
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
andy_foster
post Mon, 26 Oct 2009 - 06:28
Post #2


Member
Group Icon

Group: Life Member
Posts: 20,810
Joined: 9 Sep 2004
From: Reading
Member No.: 1,624



You seem to have managed to avoid telling us when your partner received her NIP/s. 172.
As you seem to have twigged, if she is unable to name the driver, as well as proving (on the balance of probabilities) that she does not know who was driving, and could not with reasonable diligence determine the driver's identity, she would have needed to provide any information that was in her power to give and the might lead to the identification of the driver within the original 28 days (beginning with the date of service of her first NIP/s. 172).
If she has not done this, she potentially has no defence to an s. 172 charge.

Ignoring that point, a 'subsection (4)' defence relies on credibility at least as much as diligence. The initial letter, which appears to be an attempt to 'get off on a technicality' is perhaps unhelpful. Not that we have anything against getting off on technicalities, but being seen to be attempting to do so can damage your credibility.

Technically, there is nothing in the relevant statute that gives effect to extensions to the 28 days, given by the scammers - but if you comply with the requirements of any 'reminders', it would be an abuse of process to prosecute you for an original failure to provide information. However, if the reminder requires you to name the driver, rather than merely provide any information that is in your power to give, etc., it would seem that you would either have to name a driver or get an almost certain 6 points for failing to provide information.

If you were to knowingly and wilfully name the wrong driver, that would be a serious offence - either s. 5 Perjury Act 1911, or perverting the course of public justice. However, if you were to simply guess which one of you was driving and name them, that would not be an offence, other than possibly under s. 172 if you named the wrong driver - which would seem to be somewhat difficult to prove as the evidence does not show who was driving.

How long does your partner have left of the new 28 days?


--------------------
Andy

"Whatever the intention of Parliament was, or was not, the law is quite clear." - The Rookie
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
V70owner
post Mon, 26 Oct 2009 - 08:46
Post #3


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 77
Joined: 25 Aug 2009
From: Birmingham
Member No.: 31,474



QUOTE (ted1234 @ Mon, 26 Oct 2009 - 00:03) *
This is stupid are we supposed to fill out a log sheet now every time we use a car just incase we get caught by a camera strategically placed inbetween a 40mph zone!


My company do. We have a log book in security and whenever someone uses one of the company pool cars their driving license is checked. The car is also checked over by the driver signing the car out and security staff and a note of any damage recorded and signed for. The time the driver takes the car out and back in are also logged.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ted1234
post Mon, 26 Oct 2009 - 09:05
Post #4


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 20
Joined: 25 Oct 2009
Member No.: 33,141



First NIP notice issue date 08/07/2009
Second NIP notice issue date 01/10/2009. EEEk just realised only two days left!

Looks like one of us will have to take the points.

Its funny, long before all this speeding issue came along we (my partner and I) have on many occasions discussed leaving this country (to the point we have been making enquiries about working, schooling, housing etc in the country we intend moving to.)

Amongst everything else wrong with this country and the addition of unjust things like this makes our desicion so much easier. Who losses in the end? The two proffessional people who pay more tax than the average 'Joe' (no offence to Joe) leaving a country for a better life elsewhere because they no longer feel their birth country is fair to its own people, or the government who loose two proffessional law abiding people contributing to their country. Ahhh well good luck Britain rolleyes.gif Something tells me your gonna need it!

I have checked the two NIP and it turns out the camera was MANUAL DETECTION not Gatso. That damn van must of been well hidden!! It's all trickery here biggrin.gif

This post has been edited by ted1234: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 - 09:10
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
C.T.C
post Mon, 26 Oct 2009 - 09:17
Post #5


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 75
Joined: 1 Oct 2009
Member No.: 32,459



QUOTE (ted1234 @ Mon, 26 Oct 2009 - 10:05) *
or the government who loose two proffessional law abiding people contributing to their country. Ahhh well good luck Britain rolleyes.gif Something tells me your gonna need it!


Without going too far off topic, just don't break the laws of the country you live in.... not rocket science.

My mate shipped out to Dubai, he loves it, no Tax to pay, but if he gets caught speeding there, the Cops seize your car and you get it back after you pay the fine... he says he'd much rather deal with UK traffic laws.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ted1234
post Mon, 26 Oct 2009 - 09:28
Post #6


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 20
Joined: 25 Oct 2009
Member No.: 33,141



QUOTE (andy_foster @ Mon, 26 Oct 2009 - 06:28) *
If you were to knowingly and wilfully name the wrong driver, that would be a serious offence - either s. 5 Perjury Act 1911, or perverting the course of public justice. However, if you were to simply guess which one of you was driving and name them, that would not be an offence, other than possibly under s. 172 if you named the wrong driver - which would seem to be somewhat difficult to prove as the evidence does not show who was driving.

How long does your partner have left of the new 28 days?



Thanks for the info.

So if my partner named me as the driver and after this I respond that I am not confident I was the driver because we cannot remember. Where would that leave us? Back at square one! But what would be the procedure then?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ted1234
post Mon, 26 Oct 2009 - 09:39
Post #7


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 20
Joined: 25 Oct 2009
Member No.: 33,141



QUOTE (C.T.C @ Mon, 26 Oct 2009 - 09:17) *
Without going too far off topic, just don't break the laws of the country you live in.... not rocket science.

My mate shipped out to Dubai, he loves it, no Tax to pay, but if he gets caught speeding there, the Cops seize your car and you get it back after you pay the fine... he says he'd much rather deal with UK traffic laws.


I wonder if in Dubai the insurance companies then hold you to boot for five years and add rediculous amounts of money to the cost of your policy because of the offence even if there is a possibility you did not commit the offence in the first place!

Without going off topic
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
C.T.C
post Mon, 26 Oct 2009 - 09:44
Post #8


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 75
Joined: 1 Oct 2009
Member No.: 32,459



QUOTE (ted1234 @ Mon, 26 Oct 2009 - 10:39) *
I wonder if in Dubai the insurance companies then hold you to boot for five years and add rediculous amounts of money to the cost of your policy because of the offence even if there is a possibility you did not commit the offence in the first place!


Yes, unless you are a 'local'.

In an Collision, the Ex-pat is always at fault regardless of circumstances, apparently.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ted1234
post Mon, 26 Oct 2009 - 09:50
Post #9


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 20
Joined: 25 Oct 2009
Member No.: 33,141



Nice to see a country looking after its 'own'! Wish it was like that here, wouldn't have the urge to leave then biggrin.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
7159keith
post Mon, 26 Oct 2009 - 09:53
Post #10


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 948
Joined: 5 Jan 2007
Member No.: 9,913



Fist of all can you clarify that the 1/10 NIP was the first you partner got in her own name? Your information as presented is confusing.

If you are genuinely unsure who was driving you will need to stand in front of a magistrate and your partner will have to demonstrate reasonable diligence in trying to ascertain the driver.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
andy_foster
post Mon, 26 Oct 2009 - 09:59
Post #11


Member
Group Icon

Group: Life Member
Posts: 20,810
Joined: 9 Sep 2004
From: Reading
Member No.: 1,624



QUOTE (ted1234 @ Mon, 26 Oct 2009 - 09:28) *
So if my partner named me as the driver and after this I respond that I am not confident I was the driver because we cannot remember. Where would that leave us? Back at square one! But what would be the procedure then?


Tricky one.
As you are not the person keeping the vehicle, your obligations under s. 172 would be far less onerous than that of your partner. If you simply told them what you know, you'd be pretty safe both from s. 172 and the substantive speeding allegation. However, your partner might well be summoned for s. 172, and your response (with her earlier responses) would probably constitute sufficient evidence that she did not unequivocally name the actual driver for the court to find that there is a case to answer. It is very possible that your partner could get 6 points (endorsement code MS90) and ~£300 fine.

If you were to be named as the driver, and 'admitted' to being the driver in response to your own s. 172 notice, you would normally be offered a COFP for that speed. If the COFP was issued less than 28 days before the 6 months from the date of the alleged speeding offence expired, it would be too late to prosecute you if you ignored the COFP.
It is possible that they might not issue a COFP at that point, but IMHO unlikely.

As you and your partner have failed to provide the details of the possible drivers within your original 28 days, that is potentially a slam dunk for the prosecution under s. 172. To safely avoid that, either she 'admits' to being the driver and gets 3 points and a £60 fine, or you 'admit' to being the driver and probably time out, but might get the 3 points and £60 fine.
Any attempt to backtrack after naming the driver risks your partner getting done under s. 172. It is not absolutely certain that she would be convicted, but I don't like her chances.


QUOTE
First NIP notice issue date 08/07/2009


First NIP to who?


--------------------
Andy

"Whatever the intention of Parliament was, or was not, the law is quite clear." - The Rookie
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ted1234
post Mon, 26 Oct 2009 - 10:14
Post #12


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 20
Joined: 25 Oct 2009
Member No.: 33,141



First Nip issued went to: (We assumed this was because it is a company car leased by the company my partner works for)

Company secretary
******** UK Ltd
Sheffield ***
****** ******* *******
*******
*****

It was forwarded from the above address to my partners office In Newport Gwent (she works for company the first NIP was sent to.) The office in Sheffield have stamped NIP with [RECEIVED 14 JUL 2009]

The first NIP with my partners name and address was sent to our home 29/09/2009. I have got the date 1/10/2009 wrong! I am having to ring my partner to ask about dates etc as I am away at the moment so I think she is getting confussed. Issued 29/09/2009. Received by us on the 1/10/2009.

Sorry for confusion. Today looks like our last day!!!!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
andy_foster
post Mon, 26 Oct 2009 - 10:25
Post #13


Member
Group Icon

Group: Life Member
Posts: 20,810
Joined: 9 Sep 2004
From: Reading
Member No.: 1,624



QUOTE
********


I am not familiar with this company...

Is ******** your partner's employers, or the lease company?

What makes you think that this was the first NIP issued?

If the first NIP issued in your partner's name was issued on 29/09/2009 and served on 01/10/2009, when was she sent another NIP giving her another 28 days?


Is there any reason why your partner can't give us the correct details, rather than you playing chinese whispers and at best giving us half the story?


--------------------
Andy

"Whatever the intention of Parliament was, or was not, the law is quite clear." - The Rookie
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
7159keith
post Mon, 26 Oct 2009 - 10:43
Post #14


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 948
Joined: 5 Jan 2007
Member No.: 9,913



Your most pressing need is for your partner to respond to her S172 request asap as in a couple of days she will have committed an offence that will prove hard to defend.

At the very least she needs to respond naming both of you as possible drivers giving names and DoB, the letter must be signed to be compliant. She will still get a S172 summons but the case will then turn on reasonable diligence rather than a valid response within the 28 days.

On the other hand if she thinks you were driving then she needs to fill the NIP in naming you, suggest responding by registered post.

As Andy says, can she not come on and give the direct info?

This post has been edited by 7159keith: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 - 10:44
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ted1234
post Mon, 26 Oct 2009 - 11:36
Post #15


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 20
Joined: 25 Oct 2009
Member No.: 33,141



Ok I now have faxes of NIP/s.

My partner is currently busy with something so I am doing my best not to distract her her too much.

Anyways

I really would not like placing company names we are associated with in public forums so I will give it an alias if you all do not mind.

If you do require such info I would gladly e-mail or PM you.

The first NIP was sent to my partners HEAD OFFICE: GOTDONE SHEFFIELD

COMPANY SECRETARY
GOTDONE UK LTD
SHEFFIELD
(Address)
(Address)
(POSTCODE)

GOTDONE is the company my partner works for. The GOTDONE Sheffield office organised the lease of the car they are NOT the leasing company. The leasing company is ARWELL. If the car needs new tyres etc, it is the GOTDONE Sheffield office that sorts things out concerning the car with ARWELL.

The first NIP sent out went to GOTDONE Sheffield.
The NIP lists alleged offence took place on 21/06/2009
It has a NOTICE ISSUE DATE: 08/07/2009
GOTDONE Sheffield
received NIP (with the GOTDONE Sheffield name and address on NIP) on 14 JUL 2009.
GOTDONE Sheffield then forwarded by post the NIP they had received on 14 JUL 2009 to my partner in GOTDONE Newport Gwent (some 180 miles away.) Simply hand writting F.A.O (partners name) at the top of the NIP

Because there was quite a time delay from alleged offence date to us receiving NIP (and we genuinely could not say for sure who had been driving) we queried the time delay, to which the CPU advised that because the car was leased they were within the time limits.

Because we could not remember driver we then requested a photograph to try and help us identify driver.

On the 29/09/2009 we received a photograph from Avon and Somerset Constabulary CPU
With the photo was another NIP (although it was the second NIP it was the first one we had received with my partners name and address on it)

NOTICE ISSUE DATE: 29/09/2009

The photo did not show who was driving so we responded by letter (NOT BY NIP) that we were unable to work out who was driving at the time of the alleged offence.

On the 20/10/2009 we received a letter from the Avon and Somerset Constabulary:

Dear ,

I refer to your recent correspondence and must advise you that the photographic evidence is used only to identify the vehicle registration mark and details of the vehicle.

The law requires the owner/keeper of a vehicle to supply details of the driver at the time of the alleged offence. Failure to do so could result in the owner/keeper being fined, having their licence endorsed or being disqualified from driving unless they can satisfy the Court that they have taken all reasonable steps to identify the driver.

Only a single unequivocal nomination can be accepted as a valid reply to the Notice.

The deadline on the Notice will expire twenty eight days from the Notice issue date. Please note that the Camera Processing Unit is not permitted to consider any mitigation. As you have informed us that you are unable to nominate the driver of the vehicle the case will be prepared for a Court hearing for the offence of Failure to Supply driver details which will supersede speeding fine.

In the case of a Court hearing, you will receive a plea and mitigation form in which you can explain your circumstances as set out in your letter.

Please note that the time limit indicated on the Notice is not extended by correspondence.

Yours sincerely

Clerical officer ****
Camera Processing Unit
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
andy_foster
post Mon, 26 Oct 2009 - 11:52
Post #16


Member
Group Icon

Group: Life Member
Posts: 20,810
Joined: 9 Sep 2004
From: Reading
Member No.: 1,624



As the car was leased, the NIP to GOTDONE would not have been the first NIP.

The NIP to GOTDONE did not impose any personal legal obligation on your partner. The 28 days for her to provide the required information began with the date on which the notice addressed to her was served (not issued). The date of service is deemed to be 2 business days after posting, unless the contrary is proved.
In other words, her response must be with them by Wednesday 28th.

As her 28 days have not yet expired, it is not too late to provide any information that is in [her] power to give and that might lead to the identification of the driver.
It is perhaps arguable that as the scammers have indicated that they have already decided to summons her for failing to provide the information, that the requirement to provide information in her power to give is now moot, but that is an argument she won't need to rely on if she does provide that information.

What has she (and/or you) done to try to determine who was driving, other than requesting the photos? Can you demonstrate that you exhausted reasonable diligence?


--------------------
Andy

"Whatever the intention of Parliament was, or was not, the law is quite clear." - The Rookie
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
7159keith
post Mon, 26 Oct 2009 - 11:55
Post #17


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 948
Joined: 5 Jan 2007
Member No.: 9,913



If this is her regular vehicle she will be considered as the person keeping the vehicle so will be required to show reasonable diligence in her efforts to identify the driver.

This post has been edited by 7159keith: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 - 11:59
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ted1234
post Mon, 26 Oct 2009 - 12:10
Post #18


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 20
Joined: 25 Oct 2009
Member No.: 33,141



We were in Bristol that weekend , both driving seperately as well as together and we passed the place where the alleged offence took place quite a few times that day. What do we have to do? If we cannot remember? This is not an issue about being caught breaking the law but about the correct person being 'punished' if you like.
The money and points really do not bother me or my partner, it is the presumption we are liars and basically the law of the land supports this and wants 'blood' ooooops 'MONEY' no matter what and is now no longer sympathetic to individuals and just tars everyone with the same brush.
Ok an offence has been committed and both of us are prepared to put our hands up for it but in reality why should we when one of us is innocent?

I am starting to feel just like they want us to and just take the wrap myself. That is against my principals and it really p***es me off!

I have read that if we go the mitigation route we can ask if/ when camera was last calibrated and where van was parked etc and try that route? What are peoples thoughts on that?

This post has been edited by ted1234: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 - 13:42
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
7159keith
post Mon, 26 Oct 2009 - 12:36
Post #19


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 948
Joined: 5 Jan 2007
Member No.: 9,913



As others have said reasonable diligence is an issue as much about credibility as information.

Whatever happens unless you remember who was driving and one of you takes the penalty this will end up with a visit to the mags court and and asking questions about calibration, van parking etc will get you nowhere and may damage your credibility.

There is much info on the forum on reasonable diligence, read it and you will see what is needed.

What is sure is that if your partner does not send her reply in pretty sharp she will end up on the wrong end of a S172 six pointer.

Do not understand your "mitigation" comment mitigation is usually related to trying to reduce the penalty on a guilty plea.

This post has been edited by 7159keith: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 - 12:38
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ted1234
post Mon, 26 Oct 2009 - 13:03
Post #20


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 20
Joined: 25 Oct 2009
Member No.: 33,141



Thanks Keith,

My head is scrammbled at the moment.....as you can no doubt tell biggrin.gif

Will tell her to get the form off today and just name me as the driver I think.

I will take the wrap for something I may not of done.......British justice served yet again!

Am I able to express our opinions and our concerns over this process to anyone in authority?(not that anyone really cares!)

I still cannot get my head around having to admit to something I may not of done, but will take the blame anyway to save my partner the bully-boy tactics these w*****s have now employed.

Paul
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

2 Pages V   1 2 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



Advertisement

Advertise here!

RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: Friday, 24th January 2020 - 13:12
Pepipoo uses cookies. You can find details of the cookies we use here along with links to information on how to manage them.
Please click the button to accept our cookies and hide this message. We’ll also assume that you’re happy to accept them if you continue to use the site.