Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Wanted drivers details
FightBack Forums > Queries > Speeding and other Criminal Offences
greasemonkey99
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
Jlc
So you responded confirming you were at the given location at the time and date?

There's little chance it will be 'forgotten'.

In terms of the time, it's likely to have been reported by a 'member of the public' and the time may not be 100% accurate and 10/20 minutes isn't necessarily an issue as merely directory. Likewise, the weigh bridge etc. may not serve to assist and you definitely cannot hijack any prosecution.

Anyway, you'll have to wait for their next move which likely be a request for a conversation. You may wish to consider duty representation.
greasemonkey99
I have not said i was there there is no option on the form to say that
My concern is that if the accuser cannot be accurate with time or place how reliable is their evidence ?
Wrong time wrong place but yes i was driving that truck from 0430 until 1800
Please advise me how to adjust the 172 form
The Rookie
Not giving that imformation was a mistake, of course there was no option on the form as you were confirming driving that vehicle at that location and time.

Where you ever at that location, a minor time difference is not a get out of jail free card.
Jlc
QUOTE (greasemonkey99 @ Sat, 11 Aug 2018 - 12:14) *
I have not said i was there there is no option on the form to say that
My concern is that if the accuser cannot be accurate with time or place how reliable is their evidence ?
Wrong time wrong place but yes i was driving that truck from 0430 until 1800
Please advise me how to adjust the 172 form

It's too late now.

You'll have to wait and see what happens next.
southpaw82
QUOTE (greasemonkey99 @ Sat, 11 Aug 2018 - 12:14) *
My concern is that if the accuser cannot be accurate with time or place how reliable is their evidence ?

I’m always a bit surprised at the number of people who think that a small detail that is a bit wrong somehow makes all the evidence suspect. Getting the time wrong by 10 minutes or so doesn’t mean they didn’t witness what they say they saw.
greasemonkey99
Okay
i have the 172 form still here not posted yet

nope i was no where near the reported incident - never used that section of road its 8 miles away from the closest part of the route taken on the day in question

how do i adjust the 172 to say i was not at the location because it does not specify this where you sign - it just says the location of the alledged incident

cheers

QUOTE (southpaw82 @ Sat, 11 Aug 2018 - 15:28) *
QUOTE (greasemonkey99 @ Sat, 11 Aug 2018 - 12:14) *
My concern is that if the accuser cannot be accurate with time or place how reliable is their evidence ?

I’m always a bit surprised at the number of people who think that a small detail that is a bit wrong somehow makes all the evidence suspect. Getting the time wrong by 10 minutes or so doesn’t mean they didn’t witness what they say they saw.


so what you are saying is that a fully reliable witness in court can say - oh yes i saw this happen in Luton - but then change their evidence to actually it was in Milton Keynes -
sorry but i do not believe you even know what you are talking about
southpaw82
QUOTE (greasemonkey99 @ Sat, 11 Aug 2018 - 15:33) *
QUOTE (southpaw82 @ Sat, 11 Aug 2018 - 15:28) *
QUOTE (greasemonkey99 @ Sat, 11 Aug 2018 - 12:14) *
My concern is that if the accuser cannot be accurate with time or place how reliable is their evidence ?

I’m always a bit surprised at the number of people who think that a small detail that is a bit wrong somehow makes all the evidence suspect. Getting the time wrong by 10 minutes or so doesn’t mean they didn’t witness what they say they saw.


so what you are saying is that a fully reliable witness in court can say - oh yes i saw this happen in Luton - but then change their evidence to actually it was in Milton Keynes -
sorry but i do not believe you even know what you are talking about

Oh dear... you had best inform all my clients... and the Appointments Commission so I don’t make similar mistakes when assessing the evidence of witnesses when sitting in a tribunal. rolleyes.gif
peterguk
QUOTE (greasemonkey99 @ Sat, 11 Aug 2018 - 15:33) *
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? rolleyes.gif

And ours.
greasemonkey99
QUOTE (southpaw82 @ Sat, 11 Aug 2018 - 15:38) *
QUOTE (greasemonkey99 @ Sat, 11 Aug 2018 - 15:33) *
QUOTE (southpaw82 @ Sat, 11 Aug 2018 - 15:28) *
QUOTE (greasemonkey99 @ Sat, 11 Aug 2018 - 12:14) *
My concern is that if the accuser cannot be accurate with time or place how reliable is their evidence ?

I’m always a bit surprised at the number of people who think that a small detail that is a bit wrong somehow makes all the evidence suspect. Getting the time wrong by 10 minutes or so doesn’t mean they didn’t witness what they say they saw.


so what you are saying is that a fully reliable witness in court can say - oh yes i saw this happen in Luton - but then change their evidence to actually it was in Milton Keynes -
sorry but i do not believe you even know what you are talking about

Oh dear... you had best inform all my clients... and the Appointments Commission so I don’t make similar mistakes when assessing the evidence of witnesses when sitting in a tribunal. rolleyes.gif


So i had just better just say i was there even though i wasn't ?
FFS - really where is common sense gone - how can you accept a statement from a witness - which they sign to say is a true statement of facts - they do don't they ? or are they allowed to say - well it might have been - or was i wrong about the place - maybe i was - but i still say it happen - but it may not have been there - or at that time - or maybe it was i really cannot remember - sorry
no way could this be allowed to happen in a court of law - if it does it needs sorting
southpaw82
QUOTE (greasemonkey99 @ Sat, 11 Aug 2018 - 15:52) *
So i had just better just say i was there even though i wasn't ?

I don’t believe I said that or anything like it. What I said was that a small error does not automatically, or even often, invalidate the rest of the evidence given by the witness.
greasemonkey99
QUOTE (peterguk @ Sat, 11 Aug 2018 - 15:40) *
QUOTE (greasemonkey99 @ Sat, 11 Aug 2018 - 15:33) *
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? rolleyes.gif

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
peterguk
QUOTE (greasemonkey99 @ Sat, 11 Aug 2018 - 15:52) *
So i had just better just say i was there even though i wasn't ?


Absolutely not. If you weren't there, tell them you weren't there. Maybe the witness made it all up.
greasemonkey99
So lets start over
i have been accused by a member of the public of driving without due care -
at a place i was not at
at a time i could not have been there

does this not smell even a bit fishy to anyone ?
southpaw82
QUOTE (greasemonkey99 @ Sat, 11 Aug 2018 - 15:57) *
So lets start over
i have been accused by a member of the public of driving without due care -
at a place i was not at
at a time i could not have been there

does this not smell even a bit fishy to anyone ?

It could be entirely made up as a joke or by some mentally disturbed person.

It could be made up by someone trying to stitch you up.

It could be that the witness is mistaken about your vehicle being involved.

It could be that the witness is mistaken as to the time but is correct that it was your vehicle that was involved.

Some of those possibilities are more likely than the others.

Regardless of how hard done by you feel you need to keep a lid on it if you want to carry on posting here. Nobody here reported you to the police.
greasemonkey99
QUOTE (peterguk @ Sat, 11 Aug 2018 - 15:56) *
QUOTE (greasemonkey99 @ Sat, 11 Aug 2018 - 15:52) *
So i had just better just say i was there even though i wasn't ?


Absolutely not. If you weren't there, tell them you weren't there. Maybe the witness made it all up.


too many times i get accused by others road users of taking too much room whilst i use a roundabout - or straddling the white lines at a junction to stop cars or vans coming up my left or right as i require the room
i have no doubt this is one of those times when a motorist feels agrieved by me taking up alot of room - however my original question has still to answered
what to write on the 172 to let them know yes i was the driver because i was
without admitting to being somewhere i was not ?

QUOTE (southpaw82 @ Sat, 11 Aug 2018 - 16:05) *
QUOTE (greasemonkey99 @ Sat, 11 Aug 2018 - 15:57) *
So lets start over
i have been accused by a member of the public of driving without due care -
at a place i was not at
at a time i could not have been there

does this not smell even a bit fishy to anyone ?

It could be entirely made up as a joke or by some mentally disturbed person.

It could be made up by someone trying to stitch you up.

It could be that the witness is mistaken about your vehicle being involved.

It could be that the witness is mistaken as to the time but is correct that it was your vehicle that was involved.

Some of those possibilities are more likely than the others.

Regardless of how hard done by you feel you need to keep a lid on it if you want to carry on posting here. Nobody here reported you to the police.

This is understood - i realise no one on here reported me - so how or what do i write on the 172 ? or do i just send it back and let them deciede - not much choice i suppose
southpaw82
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.
Jlc
You do not have to use their form. A signed letter will do as long as it provides details.

You can confirm you were driving the vehicle but at the material time you were at a weigh bridge. You also seem to be saying you never went to the given location?

There may be video evidence of course.
greasemonkey99
QUOTE (Jlc @ Sat, 11 Aug 2018 - 16:24) *
You do not have to use their form. A signed letter will do as long as it provides details.

You can confirm you were driving the vehicle but at the material time you were at a weigh bridge. You also seem to be saying you never went to the given location?

There may be video evidence of course.


And i hope there is video because it will show the true location and TBH if i have driven dangerous - but one persons dangerous might not actually be dangerous to another if they are unaware of other circumstances - ie needed more room at junctions for the trailer etc
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
Jlc
A phone call is worth a try but they may not be too talkative at this stage which is to nominate driver.
Redivi
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
southpaw82
QUOTE (Redivi @ Sun, 12 Aug 2018 - 00:17) *
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.
gilan02
QUOTE (greasemonkey99 @ Sat, 11 Aug 2018 - 12:14) *
Wrong time wrong place but yes i was driving that truck from 0430 until 1800

Really?
Dwaynedouglas
QUOTE (greasemonkey99 @ Sat, 11 Aug 2018 - 10:55) *
i sent the 172 back as it is required by law


QUOTE (greasemonkey99 @ Sat, 11 Aug 2018 - 15:33) *
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.

QUOTE (southpaw82 @ Sat, 11 Aug 2018 - 16:18) *
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.


nosferatu1001
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.
Redivi
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
Churchmouse
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
peterguk
QUOTE (Churchmouse @ Mon, 13 Aug 2018 - 11:14) *
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?
southpaw82
QUOTE (peterguk @ Mon, 13 Aug 2018 - 11:32) *
QUOTE (Churchmouse @ Mon, 13 Aug 2018 - 11:14) *
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.
Churchmouse
QUOTE (peterguk @ Mon, 13 Aug 2018 - 11:32) *
QUOTE (Churchmouse @ Mon, 13 Aug 2018 - 11:14) *
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
thisisntme
QUOTE (greasemonkey99 @ Sat, 11 Aug 2018 - 15:55) *
QUOTE (peterguk @ Sat, 11 Aug 2018 - 15:40) *
QUOTE (greasemonkey99 @ Sat, 11 Aug 2018 - 15:33) *
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? rolleyes.gif

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.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2019 Invision Power Services, Inc.