PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

S172 - Failure to give notification
Eds
post Thu, 8 Nov 2018 - 14:07
Post #1


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 3
Joined: 8 Nov 2018
Member No.: 100,836



Hi all,

Details with dates first, then extra bits that have gone on since.

Vehicle sold 5/11/17, confirmation received from DVLA of this date
New keeper speeding offence 8/11/17
DVLA records updated 14/11/17 with new registered keeper

I moved house in November 2016

NIP and S172 sent to old address as new address not on V5C, so I did not receive either. Mail redirection in place for 6 months only, so expired by time of offence
Enforcement letter received October 2018 to new address
Stat Dec hearing completed in October 2018, new hearing date set for December 2018

New hearing date for both original speeding offence and S172 failure to give notification

Extra bits

1) I 'believe' I sent V5C with new details but cannot prove it. This would have been two years ago.

I contacted DVLA asking about history of registered keeper, they confirmed on the phone that the vehicle has been registered at my new address at some point. I have completed a V888 form and sent to DVLA (registered post) for written confirmation of registered keeper dates and address changes. I am still awaiting a reply, follow up call will be tomorrow.

Based on this, if the vehicle has been registered at my new address, is there any way this can happen without completing new address details on V5C? If not, then I must have done it and it must have been done before selling the vehicle to the new keeper as all docs were sent back to DVLA or handed over.

2) New address was a new build with a completely new postcode. This caused a whole load of issues with post as companies didnt have the postcode setup. I dont think this is relevant with the DVLA however as they did process my driving licence to new address correctly when I moved, but thought to mention in case anyone thinks otherwise.

3) Two weeks ago I received post from DVLA to my current address. Upon opening I saw it was not addressed to me. It was a V5C document for a vehicle and keeper I have never heard of before, but registered to my address. I immediately called the DVLA asking what to do, and I was told to send it back to them with a covering letter denying all knowledge etc. I was told on the phone that this happens all the time! In my covering letter I have asked for confirmation that this is an address error by the DVLA and nothing to do with me. I am still awaiting a reply, chasing up tomorrow. Coincidence?

I have not yet sought legal advice, I was hoping to receive the V888 feedback first.

From reading many posts a plea to speeding offence is usually recommended, however I cant do this as there is evidence I was not the driver.

So that's the situation, and any advice would be greatly appreciated please.

Many thanks





Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
 
Start new topic
Replies (1 - 11)
Advertisement
post Thu, 8 Nov 2018 - 14:07
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
cp8759
post Thu, 8 Nov 2018 - 14:42
Post #2


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 5,629
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



So it appears the cause of all these problems is that when you moved in November 2016, you didn't update the V5C (or if you did, you cannot remember if or when you did so). At this point it'll be far too late for the police to take any action against the new keeper, so they're not going to be keen on letting you get off. As things stand, at the time of the offence you were the registered keeper but not the person keeping the vehicle, you were therefore "any other person":

(2)Where the driver of a vehicle is alleged to be guilty of an offence to which this section applies—
(a)the person keeping the vehicle shall give such information as to the identity of the driver as he may be required to give by or on behalf of a chief officer of police [F3or the Chief Constable of the British Transport Police Force], and
(b)any other person shall if required as stated above give any information which it is in his power to give and may lead to identification of the driver.


You were therefore required to give information as to the new owner, as this is plainly information which may lead to the identification of the driver.

Section 172(7) provides that:

(7)A requirement under subsection (2) may be made by written notice served by post; and where it is so made—
(a) it shall have effect as a requirement to give the information within the period of 28 days beginning with the day on which the notice is served, and
(b) the person on whom the notice is served shall not be guilty of an offence under this section if he shows either that he gave the information as soon as reasonably practicable after the end of that period or that it has not been reasonably practicable for him to give it.


Therefore the situation is relatively straightforward: If the police sent the s172 to an out of date address, then plainly it wasn't reasonably practicable for you to give the information so you should be acquitted. If the police sent the s172 to the correct address as per the DVLA records (which is almost certainly the case), you would not appear to have a viable defence to the s172 charge.

The V5C of the unknown vehicle appears irrelevant, as is the fact that your new address is a new build.


--------------------
I am not on the "motorists's side", nor am I on the "police/CPS/council's" side, I am simply in favour of the rule of law.
No, I am not a lawyer.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
southpaw82
post Thu, 8 Nov 2018 - 15:14
Post #3


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 28,780
Joined: 2 Apr 2008
From: Not in the UK
Member No.: 18,483



QUOTE (cp8759 @ Thu, 8 Nov 2018 - 14:42) *
If the police sent the s172 to the correct address as per the DVLA records (which is almost certainly the case), you would not appear to have a viable defence to the s172 charge.

I’m not sure it’s as clear cut as that. If the s 172 notice was sent to the correct address then there seems to have been lawful service and an obligation to reply arises. It’s still open to the court to find that it was not reasonably practicable for the accused to have responded - just as it’s open to the court to find the other way.


--------------------


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
cp8759
post Thu, 8 Nov 2018 - 15:25
Post #4


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 5,629
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



QUOTE (southpaw82 @ Thu, 8 Nov 2018 - 15:14) *
QUOTE (cp8759 @ Thu, 8 Nov 2018 - 14:42) *
If the police sent the s172 to the correct address as per the DVLA records (which is almost certainly the case), you would not appear to have a viable defence to the s172 charge.

I’m not sure it’s as clear cut as that. If the s 172 notice was sent to the correct address then there seems to have been lawful service and an obligation to reply arises. It’s still open to the court to find that it was not reasonably practicable for the accused to have responded - just as it’s open to the court to find the other way.

It may be open to the court but I suspect the OP's chances would be extremely slim if the only explanation given is "I forgot to update the V5C", and I don't think we would normally advice a not guilty plea on that basis.


--------------------
I am not on the "motorists's side", nor am I on the "police/CPS/council's" side, I am simply in favour of the rule of law.
No, I am not a lawyer.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
southpaw82
post Thu, 8 Nov 2018 - 15:41
Post #5


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 28,780
Joined: 2 Apr 2008
From: Not in the UK
Member No.: 18,483



QUOTE (cp8759 @ Thu, 8 Nov 2018 - 15:25) *
QUOTE (southpaw82 @ Thu, 8 Nov 2018 - 15:14) *
QUOTE (cp8759 @ Thu, 8 Nov 2018 - 14:42) *
If the police sent the s172 to the correct address as per the DVLA records (which is almost certainly the case), you would not appear to have a viable defence to the s172 charge.

I’m not sure it’s as clear cut as that. If the s 172 notice was sent to the correct address then there seems to have been lawful service and an obligation to reply arises. It’s still open to the court to find that it was not reasonably practicable for the accused to have responded - just as it’s open to the court to find the other way.

It may be open to the court but I suspect the OP's chances would be extremely slim if the only explanation given is "I forgot to update the V5C", and I don't think we would normally advice a not guilty plea on that basis.

What the OP does is up to him (or her) but it seems rather unjust to be convicted of an offence carrying six points for forgetting to update the vehicle details, for which the punishment is normally just a fine. This case is quite removed from Whiteside, who went away and didn’t have any process in place to deal with the post. I do wonder how the court could find that it was reasonably practicable for the OP to respond, when the key omission seems to have been committed a year before the notice was even served.

The OP needs to make a choice:

Plead not guilty and be acquitted - no penalty.

Plead not guilty and be convicted - 6 points, an income related fine, surcharge of 10% of the fine, and costs of around £600.

Plead guilty - 6 points, an income related fine reduced by 1/3, surcharge of 10% of the fine, costs of around £85.


--------------------


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
The Rookie
post Thu, 8 Nov 2018 - 15:57
Post #6


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 39,969
Joined: 9 Sep 2003
From: Warwickshire
Member No.: 317



Indeed, as there appears to be no options but fold or fight, there seems little point in not putting up a fight were the increased penalty (the 1/3 discount lost plus circa £515 extra costs) is not that large compared to the total penalty (when the increased insurance premiums are factored in).


--------------------
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 8-0 PPC's
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
OUYSINEP
post Thu, 8 Nov 2018 - 16:06
Post #7


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 11
Joined: 6 Nov 2018
Member No.: 100,806



QUOTE (southpaw82 @ Thu, 8 Nov 2018 - 15:41) *
QUOTE (cp8759 @ Thu, 8 Nov 2018 - 15:25) *
QUOTE (southpaw82 @ Thu, 8 Nov 2018 - 15:14) *
QUOTE (cp8759 @ Thu, 8 Nov 2018 - 14:42) *
If the police sent the s172 to the correct address as per the DVLA records (which is almost certainly the case), you would not appear to have a viable defence to the s172 charge.

I’m not sure it’s as clear cut as that. If the s 172 notice was sent to the correct address then there seems to have been lawful service and an obligation to reply arises. It’s still open to the court to find that it was not reasonably practicable for the accused to have responded - just as it’s open to the court to find the other way.

It may be open to the court but I suspect the OP's chances would be extremely slim if the only explanation given is "I forgot to update the V5C", and I don't think we would normally advice a not guilty plea on that basis.

What the OP does is up to him (or her) but it seems rather unjust to be convicted of an offence carrying six points for forgetting to update the vehicle details, for which the punishment is normally just a fine. This case is quite removed from Whiteside, who went away and didn’t have any process in place to deal with the post. I do wonder how the court could find that it was reasonably practicable for the OP to respond, when the key omission seems to have been committed a year before the notice was even served.

The OP needs to make a choice:

Plead not guilty and be acquitted - no penalty.

Plead not guilty and be convicted - 6 points, an income related fine, surcharge of 10% of the fine, and costs of around £600.

Plead guilty - 6 points, an income related fine reduced by 1/3, surcharge of 10% of the fine, costs of around £85.

Im going to go with this, if it were me, I would take the chance and fight this, but its ultimately upto the OP that needs to decide that. I with southpaw on this one it seems more logical Whiteside seems rather detached from this case appart from iii) The defendant does not have a defence under section 172(7)(b) merely by virtue of the fact that he has no knowledge that the Notices were sent. However, in an appropriate case a defendant may be able to show in such circumstances that it was not reasonably practicable for him to have been aware of the Notice, in which case the defence will apply.’
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Eds
post Thu, 8 Nov 2018 - 16:09
Post #8


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 3
Joined: 8 Nov 2018
Member No.: 100,836



Thank you all for your feedback.

I want to fight this rather than plead guilty, and from reading your inputs I need to base my defence on 172(7)b with it being not reasonably practicable for me to give the details.

At this point, any advice on how to proceed would be very welcomed.

Eds (its a he)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
OUYSINEP
post Thu, 8 Nov 2018 - 16:17
Post #9


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 11
Joined: 6 Nov 2018
Member No.: 100,806



QUOTE (Eds @ Thu, 8 Nov 2018 - 16:09) *
Thank you all for your feedback.

I want to fight this rather than plead guilty, and from reading your inputs I need to base my defence on 172(7)b with it being not reasonably practicable for me to give the details.

At this point, any advice on how to proceed would be very welcomed.

Eds (its a he)

I think you would be laying it all on the mercy of the court in this case, and I do think you would have allot of work ahead of you in pulling it off, as the term "reasonably practicable" as far as i'm aware in this case is still at the court discretion of interpretation. So what is reasonable to one magistrate is not to another.
Should you know the gravity of your case before you jump in it.

Im looking at this and think.
Can you get the evidence that you had a postal redirect (I know it expired pre offence but I am thinking of along the lines of you should make yourself look squeaky clean)
How far away do live from old address? I you live only round the corner then it would be reasonable to think that you could pop around now and then and harass the new occupiers for your mail that has been delivered there, but then again, ive moved and only returned to my old property twice and there was no mail for me so I didn't want to look a nut job tot he new occupiers and keep coming back and having to force them to put the kettle on and get on first name terms with them.

I don't think I would go near a passage of time excuse.

I would certainly go down the im so sorry and so silly as to not update my V5C of witch seems to have been the main issues that has brought this case, and if the DVLA wish to fine me for this I would be more than happy rout.

This post has been edited by OUYSINEP: Thu, 8 Nov 2018 - 16:31
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Churchmouse
post Fri, 9 Nov 2018 - 14:58
Post #10


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 2,006
Joined: 30 Jun 2008
From: Landan
Member No.: 20,731



QUOTE (cp8759 @ Thu, 8 Nov 2018 - 14:42) *
So it appears the cause of all these problems is that when you moved in November 2016, you didn't update the V5C (or if you did, you cannot remember if or when you did so).

Does it?

QUOTE
1) I 'believe' I sent V5C with new details but cannot prove it. This would have been two years ago.

I contacted DVLA asking about history of registered keeper, they confirmed on the phone that the vehicle has been registered at my new address at some point. I have completed a V888 form and sent to DVLA (registered post) for written confirmation of registered keeper dates and address changes. I am still awaiting a reply, follow up call will be tomorrow.

Based on this, if the vehicle has been registered at my new address, is there any way this can happen without completing new address details on V5C? If not, then I must have done it and it must have been done before selling the vehicle to the new keeper as all docs were sent back to DVLA or handed over.

We should know more soon...

--Churchmouse
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Eds
post Fri, 9 Nov 2018 - 16:13
Post #11


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 3
Joined: 8 Nov 2018
Member No.: 100,836



Update:

I spoke to DVLA today who said a letter is in the post to me. The letter is asking why I need this information and what court case does it apply to. There will be a direct dial number to avoid back and forth with the post. Monday job!

I also raised this situation with Patterson Law who went through it with me on the phone today, they were quite convinced they could get an acquittal out of court - the cost would be £800+vat. If it still went to court the cost would provide a barrister on the day.

More to follow as and when.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Dwaynedouglas
post Mon, 12 Nov 2018 - 12:36
Post #12


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 80
Joined: 9 Nov 2016
Member No.: 88,346



A bit late to the party here.

Apologies if I've missed it, but do you have a current V5C for your car, registered at your current address?

If so, what's the DOCREF number on it?


--------------------
I'm not a lawyer or legally trained, my opinion is based on my experience - follow at your own risk.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

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: Sunday, 18th November 2018 - 15:23
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.