PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice Support health workers

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

35 in a 30 prosecution, owner not driver, How to appeal
YazzyYazzy
post Sun, 20 Aug 2017 - 19:02
Post #1


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 3
Joined: 20 Aug 2017
Member No.: 93,632



Hi
My mother is 82 and loans her car to several young carers who are insured to drive any car.
(She has had a full licence since 1977 and never any convictions or speeding fines etc)
She has just received a police letter saying "she" was doing 35 in a 30 zone and notice to prosecute.
It wasn't her driving, and in any case, how insane to prosecute at 35 mph!
So what does she do? Just write and deny it was her?
Any photos the police have will show it is not an 82 year old woman driving.

She doesn't particularly want to name her carers, as a prosecution for doing 35 is madness. (The road in question changes from 30 to 40 every few seconds and it's not dangerous to do 35 there. It's like a dual carriageway)

As she has zero previous history of dangerous driving, and 35 is hardly dangerous on that road and the photos will show it couldn't have been her, will she be able to successfully appeal? What is the best way to do this?
Just name three carers and leave to the police to prove it wasn't her?

Many thanks.
(Ps, I'm asking how to appeal and what she should do. Don't want comments on what a horrific crime doing 35 is, or told I'm a troll, or abusive language, as I've just had asking for advice on another forum)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
 
Start new topic
Replies (1 - 17)
Advertisement
post Sun, 20 Aug 2017 - 19:02
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
Jlc
post Sun, 20 Aug 2017 - 19:11
Post #2


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 41,510
Joined: 25 Aug 2011
From: Planet Earth
Member No.: 49,223



Enforcement starts at 35mph.

But as the keeper she is obliged now to use reasonable diligence to identify the driver - she is not being accused of driving.

If she does not name the driver within 28 days then she will be prosecuted for a separate offence of failing to furnish driver details. That's 6 points and a large fine and costs.

There is a statutory defence that if she did not know who was driving and could not identify them after the reasonable diligence.

The best way is to discuss with the potential drivers who was driving and to nominate them. Although in these situations it's not uncommon for mass amnesia to set in. Nominating multiple drivers isn't usually the best idea unless the police are willing to serve everyone a s172 request.

Bear in mind the outcome here is a course (no points) or fixed penalty (3 points £100).


--------------------
RK=Registered Keeper, OP=Original Poster (You!), CoFP=Conditional Offer of Fixed Penalty, NtK=Notice to Keeper, NtD=Notice to Driver
PoFA=Protection of Freedoms Act, SAC=Safety Awareness Course, NIP=Notice of Intended Prosecution, ADR=Alternative Dispute Resolution
PPC=Private Parking Company, LBCCC=Letter Before County Court Claim, PII=Personally Identifiable Information, SAR=Subject Access Request

Private Parking - remember, they just want your money and will say almost anything to get it.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
BaggieBoy
post Sun, 20 Aug 2017 - 19:11
Post #3


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 6,723
Joined: 3 Apr 2006
From: North Hampshire
Member No.: 5,183



You can't appeal, an appeal is only possible when a conviction has occurred, this hasn't got to this stage yet.

Your mother can either name the driver (and let them deal with the consequence, i.e. fixed penalty or speed awareness course) or be prosecuted for failing to name the driver (6 points, large fine and costs). The threshold for prosecution is 10% +2, it has to be set somewhere, so ranting about isn't going to get you anywhere.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
peterguk
post Sun, 20 Aug 2017 - 19:20
Post #4


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 13,735
Joined: 22 Oct 2007
Member No.: 14,720



QUOTE (YazzyYazzy @ Sun, 20 Aug 2017 - 20:02) *
Just name three carers and leave to the police to prove it wasn't her?


The police don't have to prove it wasn't her. Either she names the driver, or as mentioned above, she'll be charged with FtF.

Luckily for her the event will have been in last few days and she has date and time. Presumably her carers visit in an organsied fashion, as opposed to turning up randomly, so she should be able to work out which carer was driving. Each carer will know when they were with her, so even if one won't admit it, the other two will know it can't have been them.

She needs to start asking questions.


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
andy_foster
post Sun, 20 Aug 2017 - 19:32
Post #5


Member
Group Icon

Group: Life Member
Posts: 24,214
Joined: 9 Sep 2004
From: Reading
Member No.: 1,624



QUOTE (YazzyYazzy @ Sun, 20 Aug 2017 - 20:02) *
Hi
My mother is 82 and loans her car to several young carers who are insured to drive any car.
(She has had a full licence since 1977 and never any convictions or speeding fines etc)
She has just received a police letter saying "she" was doing 35 in a 30 zone and notice to prosecute.


Please don't make stuff up.

QUOTE
It wasn't her driving, and in any case, how insane to prosecute at 35 mph!


Your opinions on this are irrelevant.

QUOTE
So what does she do? Just write and deny it was her?


She (or you as you seem to think that you are helping her) could actually read the notice and do what it requires - which as has already been stated is to name the driver.

QUOTE
She doesn't particularly want to name her carers, as a prosecution for doing 35 is madness. (The road in question changes from 30 to 40 every few seconds and it's not dangerous to do 35 there. It's like a dual carriageway)


She has a legal obligation to name the driver. If she chooses not to, and is tried and convicted for that offence, she will face 6 points, a fine of 150% of her relevant weekly income, £85 costs and a surcharge of £20.


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

Some people think that I make them feel stupid. To be fair, they deserve most of the credit.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
NewJudge
post Sun, 20 Aug 2017 - 19:32
Post #6


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 4,746
Joined: 29 Oct 2008
Member No.: 23,623



QUOTE (YazzyYazzy @ Sun, 20 Aug 2017 - 20:02) *
Hi
My mother is 82 and loans her car to several young carers who are insured to drive any car.
(She has had a full licence since 1977 and never any convictions or speeding fines etc)
She has just received a police letter saying "she" was doing 35 in a 30 zone and notice to prosecute.


The notice would not have said she was driving. It would have said the vehicle of which she is the Registered Keeper has been captured exceeding the speed limit. The function of the other document she has been sent is to get her to provide the driver's details.


QUOTE (YazzyYazzy @ Sun, 20 Aug 2017 - 20:02) *
and in any case, how insane to prosecute at 35 mph!


Enforcement of all speed limits normally beings at (Limit +10%+2mph), hence 35mph.

QUOTE (YazzyYazzy @ Sun, 20 Aug 2017 - 20:02) *
So what does she do? Just write and deny it was her?
Any photos the police have will show it is not an 82 year old woman driving.

She doesn't particularly want to name her carers, as a prosecution for doing 35 is madness. (The road in question changes from 30 to 40 every few seconds and it's not dangerous to do 35 there. It's like a dual carriageway)

As she has zero previous history of dangerous driving, and 35 is hardly dangerous on that road and the photos will show it couldn't have been her, will she be able to successfully appeal? What is the best way to do this?
Just name three carers and leave to the police to prove it wasn't her?

Many thanks.
(Ps, I'm asking how to appeal and what she should do. Don't want comments on what a horrific crime doing 35 is, or told I'm a troll, or abusive language, as I've just had asking for advice on another forum)


She has an obligation under Section 172 of the Road Traffic Act to provide the driver's details. If she simply denies she was driving or if she provides a list of three possible drivers she will face a charge of "Failing to Provide Driver's details". This carries a hefty fine and six penalty points. There is a statutory defence to the charge which says if she did not know who was driving and could not, after exercising reasonable diligence, find out who was, then she shall be not guilty. This is not an easy defence to run and it can only be done in court by entering a Not Guilty plea.

Before she makes any reply she needs to make some effort to find out who was driving and I would begin by asking the three carers if any of them can help. If that is unsuccessful you need to help her begin the "reasonable diligence" exercise she has to undertake. She will have to show that she has taken all reasonable efforts to establish who the driver was. She can ask "for photographs which may help identify the driver". Most forces provide them. Most photographs are useless in that task as they are designed to identify the vehicle and the offence, not the driver. Making such a request does not stop the clock on the 28 days she has to respond.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jlc
post Sun, 20 Aug 2017 - 19:55
Post #7


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 41,510
Joined: 25 Aug 2011
From: Planet Earth
Member No.: 49,223



QUOTE (andy_foster @ Sun, 20 Aug 2017 - 20:32) *
If she chooses not to, and is tried and convicted for that offence, she will face 6 points, a fine of 150% of her relevant weekly income, £85 costs and a surcharge of £20.

A not guilty plea could see higher costs. FWIW the minimum surcharge is now £30.


--------------------
RK=Registered Keeper, OP=Original Poster (You!), CoFP=Conditional Offer of Fixed Penalty, NtK=Notice to Keeper, NtD=Notice to Driver
PoFA=Protection of Freedoms Act, SAC=Safety Awareness Course, NIP=Notice of Intended Prosecution, ADR=Alternative Dispute Resolution
PPC=Private Parking Company, LBCCC=Letter Before County Court Claim, PII=Personally Identifiable Information, SAR=Subject Access Request

Private Parking - remember, they just want your money and will say almost anything to get it.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
andy_foster
post Sun, 20 Aug 2017 - 20:06
Post #8


Member
Group Icon

Group: Life Member
Posts: 24,214
Joined: 9 Sep 2004
From: Reading
Member No.: 1,624



I stand corrected.


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

Some people think that I make them feel stupid. To be fair, they deserve most of the credit.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
YazzyYazzy
post Sun, 20 Aug 2017 - 20:09
Post #9


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 3
Joined: 20 Aug 2017
Member No.: 93,632



Andy Foster I am not making things up. TROLL. Do NOT accuse people of being liars.

Thanks for the info the rest of you.

She was NOT driving so the police must be able to see from photos that an old woman wasn't at the wheel.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
BaggieBoy
post Sun, 20 Aug 2017 - 20:16
Post #10


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 6,723
Joined: 3 Apr 2006
From: North Hampshire
Member No.: 5,183



QUOTE (YazzyYazzy @ Sun, 20 Aug 2017 - 21:09) *
Andy Foster I am not making things up. TROLL. Do NOT accuse people of being liars.


I think Andy was referring to this:

QUOTE
She has just received a police letter saying "she" was doing 35 in a 30 zone and notice to prosecute.


Which certainly not what the police letter says, so someone was making things up. The letter will say that a vehicle that she is the RK has been captured speeding, which is quite a different thing.

QUOTE (YazzyYazzy @ Sun, 20 Aug 2017 - 21:09) *
She was NOT driving so the police must be able to see from photos that an old woman wasn't at the wheel.

It may or may not, but that is not relevant, your mother's responsibility as the RK is to name the driver. As we have tried to explain (but you seem not want to listen to), the driver must be named or this will be going to court, but not for speeding
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
andy_foster
post Sun, 20 Aug 2017 - 20:17
Post #11


Member
Group Icon

Group: Life Member
Posts: 24,214
Joined: 9 Sep 2004
From: Reading
Member No.: 1,624



If you don't want to be accused of being a liar (and I didn't, but feel free to take it that way), I would suggest that you refrain from making things up.

Is there anybody more level headed and rational that can 'help' your mother with this case, as your apparent refusal to accept the advice given on this thread is likely to cost her a lot of money?


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

Some people think that I make them feel stupid. To be fair, they deserve most of the credit.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
YazzyYazzy
post Sun, 20 Aug 2017 - 20:23
Post #12


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 3
Joined: 20 Aug 2017
Member No.: 93,632



QUOTE (andy_foster @ Sun, 20 Aug 2017 - 21:17) *
If you don't want to be accused of being a liar (and I didn't, but feel free to take it that way), I would suggest that you refrain from making things up.

Is there anybody more level headed and rational that can 'help' your mother with this case, as your apparent refusal to accept the advice given on this thread is likely to cost her a lot of money?


I HAVE NOT MADE ANYTHING UP.
DO YOU HAVE NOTHING BETTER TO DO WITH YOUR TIME, TROLL.
PISS OFF.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
peterguk
post Sun, 20 Aug 2017 - 20:25
Post #13


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 13,735
Joined: 22 Oct 2007
Member No.: 14,720



QUOTE (YazzyYazzy @ Sun, 20 Aug 2017 - 21:23) *
I HAVE NOT MADE ANYTHING UP.


OK, maybe you have not. Easy to settle.

Please post a copy of the letter from the police advising her she has been caught speeding.

Once you've done that, Andy will, i promise, apologise. He will also buy every poster here a big, fat cream cake. With those little hundreds and thousands on top...


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
NewJudge
post Sun, 20 Aug 2017 - 20:29
Post #14


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 4,746
Joined: 29 Oct 2008
Member No.: 23,623



QUOTE (YazzyYazzy @ Sun, 20 Aug 2017 - 21:09) *
She was NOT driving so the police must be able to see from photos that an old woman wasn't at the wheel.


That is not how it works. The police do not examine the photographs to establish who was or was not driving. To support the charge of speeding they rely for evidence on the Registered Keeper (or, in some circumstances, some other person but that need not concern us here) to provide them with the driver's details. If the Registered Keeper fails to do so they forget about the speeding and instead charge the RK with "Failing to Provide Driver's Details". It's as simple as that and that is the situation your mother is in.

This post has been edited by NewJudge: Sun, 20 Aug 2017 - 20:30
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jlc
post Sun, 20 Aug 2017 - 20:38
Post #15


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 41,510
Joined: 25 Aug 2011
From: Planet Earth
Member No.: 49,223



As an aside I'd recommend that the actual insurance situation is checked and confirmed to avoid any awkward situations. (Note they will likely only be driving third party)

Proving she wasn't driving is not a defence.

There is the option to ask for a photo to assist in the identification of the driver. They don't have to supply but often will. This does not impact the timeline or the other diligence but may actually assist if there is a frontal shot.


--------------------
RK=Registered Keeper, OP=Original Poster (You!), CoFP=Conditional Offer of Fixed Penalty, NtK=Notice to Keeper, NtD=Notice to Driver
PoFA=Protection of Freedoms Act, SAC=Safety Awareness Course, NIP=Notice of Intended Prosecution, ADR=Alternative Dispute Resolution
PPC=Private Parking Company, LBCCC=Letter Before County Court Claim, PII=Personally Identifiable Information, SAR=Subject Access Request

Private Parking - remember, they just want your money and will say almost anything to get it.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
BaggieBoy
post Sun, 20 Aug 2017 - 20:38
Post #16


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 6,723
Joined: 3 Apr 2006
From: North Hampshire
Member No.: 5,183



QUOTE (YazzyYazzy @ Sun, 20 Aug 2017 - 20:02) *
Don't want comments on what a horrific crime doing 35 is, or told I'm a troll, or abusive language

So you don't want the above but feel it's OK to accuse a respected member of this site and use abusive language. Nice.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jlc
post Sun, 20 Aug 2017 - 20:39
Post #17


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 41,510
Joined: 25 Aug 2011
From: Planet Earth
Member No.: 49,223



Any photo or video evidence is to identify the vehicle and the offence only.


--------------------
RK=Registered Keeper, OP=Original Poster (You!), CoFP=Conditional Offer of Fixed Penalty, NtK=Notice to Keeper, NtD=Notice to Driver
PoFA=Protection of Freedoms Act, SAC=Safety Awareness Course, NIP=Notice of Intended Prosecution, ADR=Alternative Dispute Resolution
PPC=Private Parking Company, LBCCC=Letter Before County Court Claim, PII=Personally Identifiable Information, SAR=Subject Access Request

Private Parking - remember, they just want your money and will say almost anything to get it.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
southpaw82
post Sun, 20 Aug 2017 - 21:44
Post #18


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 33,610
Joined: 2 Apr 2008
From: Not in the UK
Member No.: 18,483



QUOTE (YazzyYazzy @ Sun, 20 Aug 2017 - 21:23) *
QUOTE (andy_foster @ Sun, 20 Aug 2017 - 21:17) *
If you don't want to be accused of being a liar (and I didn't, but feel free to take it that way), I would suggest that you refrain from making things up.

Is there anybody more level headed and rational that can 'help' your mother with this case, as your apparent refusal to accept the advice given on this thread is likely to cost her a lot of money?


I HAVE NOT MADE ANYTHING UP.
DO YOU HAVE NOTHING BETTER TO DO WITH YOUR TIME, TROLL.
PISS OFF.

How about you piss off? Chin chin.


--------------------
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.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

Closed 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, 29th March 2024 - 07:29
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.
IPS Driver Error

IPS Driver Error

There appears to be an error with the database.
You can try to refresh the page by clicking here