Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Possible s172 after submitting NiP
FightBack Forums > Queries > Speeding and other Criminal Offences
Danny67
Hi there

I'm desperately looking for some information after receiving a very worrying notice from the police.

Without going into too much detail, the company pool car I was using at the beginning of July was captured speeding on mobile camera. The NiP took a couple of weeks to get to me as it had to go through the company first and then to me. It arrived while I was on holiday but on my return I still had a week or so to respond.

However, while I'm in the car at various sites (this time Nottingham) there are usually people who take the car out on shopping trips or between site trips etc so I called the ticket office and asked for the photographic evidence to ascertain exactly who the driver was. The lady at the office said I would need to write in requesting the photograph and I explained that I was worried about going over the 28 days. She told me not to worry, she would note on my file that I had made contact and even if you do go over the 28 days you will receive a first reminder anyway.

I wrote requesting the photograph and it arrived after about a week, needless to say there was no image of the driver, only the rear of the car. I made enquiries around site but there is no chance of getting someone to admit to driving the car for the purposes of receiving a ticket. I therefore filled in the original NiP with my details and posted it back with an accompanying letter explaining that the photograph could not help me positively identify the driver of the vehicle, and although there was the chance it was someone else driving, I had no alternative but to admit the offence myself and subsequently included the original- completed - NiP.
This response was posted - I think - last Saturday (04/09).

Today I return home from work to find a letter from the police basically saying I have failed to identify the driver within the statutory period and this is an offence. They go on to say that a prosecution for the original offence cannot proceed and a file is to be raised for failing to provide the driver's identity at the time of the offence etc.

Now I'm panicking like hell and don't understand why this would happen. I intend to call the enquiry number tomorrow (closed at 4pm today) just to make sure they received the NiP and letter I sent back to them.

I guess I'm just asking if this kind of scenario is familiar. I'm not trying to get away with a ticket, as I said in my letter, as I was 'responsible' for the vehicle that day and could not identify the driver, I would accept responsibility and duly filled in the NiP with my details. I hate having any involvment with the police and now just wished I'd sent the original form back admitting the offence :/

Can anyone advise if I have done anything wrong?

Yours worried

Danny67
jobo
yes it is

you appear to be the victim of saying you dont know who it was but are naming yourself anyway or some such and as such you are technically guilty of failing to id the driver

they MAY give you another chance or they may not ?

if not your up against it and are left with wither admiting the offence 6 points and a big fine or defending it on the basis that you gave all the info you had to give

which then begs the question if you did ?
andy_foster
QUOTE (Danny67 @ Mon, 13 Sep 2010 - 18:24) *
I therefore filled in the original NiP with my details and posted it back with an accompanying letter explaining that the photograph could not help me positively identify the driver of the vehicle, and although there was the chance it was someone else driving, I had no alternative but to admit the offence myself and subsequently included the original- completed - NiP.


Presumably when you say that you filled in the s. 172 response form with your details, you mean that you admitted to being the driver on the form?

Including the letter tends to complicate things somewhat. Arguably you have not named the driver if you qualified your confession by saying that it might not have been you after all.

Assuming that you are a person other than the person keeping the vehicle, your legal obligation under s. 172 RTA 1988 is, if so required by or on behalf of the Chief Officer of Police, to provide any information that is in your power to give and that might lead to the identification of the driver. If you had explained the situation and given what information you have about other possible drivers, you'd probably be home free, but if you didn't, it's not looking too good.
Danny67
Yes I did complete the NiP with my details.

The letter that came with the photograph said that if there was a possibility the driver may have been someone else, I should make enquiries, which I did. The company is quite large and most people are allowed to use the pool cars, which they do.

I think the main problem is that it is not 'my site' so to speak, so their car controller would not log cars that are not theirs. I simply visit that site once or twice a week. Now I'm worried even more.

I did explain on the letter that I have now learned my lesson about letting people use the car freely and I now carry a small 'log book' as such to record anyone who takes it, even if it's just for a couple of minutes.

I've been stopped smoking for 4 months and now I've smoked 6 since I got home sad.gif
jobo
what did you say6 in your letter
Danny67
I wrote quite politely (as I always do) thanking them for providing the photographic evidence and then went on to say that as the driver was unidentifiable from the image I had made enquiries with anyone else who may have used it around that time. I think I also made a lighthearted comment that trying to get someone to admit driving the car for the purpose of receiving a fixed penalty was like trying to get Simon Cowell to admit he's wrong!

I then stated that as I was responsible for the vehicle on the day of the offence I would accept responsibilty, and that I now record anyone taking it in my notebook.

The problem is that it was 4 or 5 weeks since the offence that I was asking so I really can't remember who/if anyone else used the car that day. I was kind of just hoping the photograph would clarify, I would hate to have been given points/fp for someone elses stupidity.
I don't know if it makes any difference but it was 40 in a 30 and the last time I had points was circa 5 years ago.

Pack of 10 gone since 5pm :/
Logician
I think you have confused the clerks about what you were actually saying by saying too much, and throwing in lighthearted remarks about Simon Cowell did not help, they probably thought you were trying to nominate him! Try with the enquiry office, simply saying that you now accept that you were driving. If that fails, try with a letter. If they do not accept that, you will be summonsed. With luck that will be both for the speeding and the s172, go not guilty on both and it will be scheduled for a court hearing. At court have a word with the prosecutor before your case is called on, and offer a guilty plea to the speeding if s/he will drop the s172. Prosecutors are often amenable to this, and it will save you 3 points and a large part of the fine.
peterguk
QUOTE (Danny67 @ Mon, 13 Sep 2010 - 19:38) *
I then stated that as I was responsible for the vehicle on the day of the offence I would accept responsibilty


Which could be regarded as an equivocal statement, which are often not accepted.

Have you stated you were driving?
Danny67
QUOTE (peterguk @ Mon, 13 Sep 2010 - 20:53) *
Have you stated you were driving?


I completed the NiP stating I was the driver.

I'm going to call them in the morning and ask politely if they would accept my plea as being the driver, is this a wise move?
AFCNEAL
Where were the keys when you were at the site that day?

If you gave them out to drivers then you may be on the hook ,but if they were passed into the care of someone else (fleet manager, receptionist etc) it could be argued you were not in fact the keeper between the hours of X & Y?
jobo
QUOTE (Danny67 @ Mon, 13 Sep 2010 - 21:01) *
QUOTE (peterguk @ Mon, 13 Sep 2010 - 20:53) *
Have you stated you were driving?


I completed the NiP stating I was the driver.

I'm going to call them in the morning and ask politely if they would accept my plea as being the driver, is this a wise move?



yep say youve made a unequivocal statement it was you and wondered why the 172 charge
andy_foster
QUOTE (AFCNEAL @ Mon, 13 Sep 2010 - 21:38) *
Where were the keys when you were at the site that day?

If you gave them out to drivers then you may be on the hook ,but if they were passed into the care of someone else (fleet manager, receptionist etc) it could be argued you were not in fact the keeper between the hours of X & Y?


How on earth would this help if he has not provided information that was in his power to give and that might have lead to the identification of the driver?
dawmdt
QUOTE (andy_foster @ Mon, 13 Sep 2010 - 21:40) *
QUOTE (AFCNEAL @ Mon, 13 Sep 2010 - 21:38) *
Where were the keys when you were at the site that day?

If you gave them out to drivers then you may be on the hook ,but if they were passed into the care of someone else (fleet manager, receptionist etc) it could be argued you were not in fact the keeper between the hours of X & Y?


How on earth would this help if he has not provided information that was in his power to give and that might have lead to the identification of the driver?


IANAL but presumably if he personally gave the keys out it would be reasonable to assume the "information in his power to give" would include a list of people who took his keys, whereas if it was a fleet manager he doesn't have that information to give (although perhaps arguably he should advise in the letter the name of the fleet manager, who had control of the keys at the time, as this would be information in his power to give). Although I'm just guessing, neither a lawyer or psychic tongue.gif
AFCNEAL
QUOTE (dawmdt @ Tue, 14 Sep 2010 - 13:15) *
QUOTE (andy_foster @ Mon, 13 Sep 2010 - 21:40) *
QUOTE (AFCNEAL @ Mon, 13 Sep 2010 - 21:38) *
Where were the keys when you were at the site that day?

If you gave them out to drivers then you may be on the hook ,but if they were passed into the care of someone else (fleet manager, receptionist etc) it could be argued you were not in fact the keeper between the hours of X & Y?


How on earth would this help if he has not provided information that was in his power to give and that might have lead to the identification of the driver?


IANAL but presumably if he personally gave the keys out it would be reasonable to assume the "information in his power to give" would include a list of people who took his keys, whereas if it was a fleet manager he doesn't have that information to give (although perhaps arguably he should advise in the letter the name of the fleet manager, who had control of the keys at the time, as this would be information in his power to give). Although I'm just guessing, neither a lawyer or psychic tongue.gif


Exactement! Thought it was obvious, but not to all it seems.
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 © 2001-2024 Invision Power Services, Inc.