Speeding Ticket

crystal ball said:
Pretty sure when I leased my van it was written in the contract that I was responsible for speeding , parking tickets etc
Click to expand...
They don't mean criminally, they mean that if they are enforced for the parking ticket, they will settle it and bill you.
 
I have received penalty points for speeding. The insurance company wasn't terribly bothered. My impression was it depended what the degree of over speed was. In one case which I have mentioned I feel it was entirely contrived and will have caught loads of people. The others well I was speeding. More down to differing blitzing of speed cameras in different areas of the country and relatively traffic free motorway periods when increasing the motorway speed limit was actively being considered.
 
They aren't trying to catch anyone out. The "safety camera" vans are always highly visible and parked in clear sight, to act as a deterrent. Never in a bush, behind a bridge or a horse box or illegally parked... oh wait.

horseboxRFE_468x299.jpg

speed-van---derby-live.jpeg

b25lY21zOjg2MTA2MWQxLTczMTYtNGI4Yi05YTBmLWI2NmRmMGZkMzhhNjoxYmJmY2NmZC1hNjBjLTRmMWItOGNmOC02Y2RmN2NkZjg4YWU=.jpg
 
Have been round one loop of that. Suck it up unless you have exceptionally good evidence that it could have been either of you and you want to go to court with your barrister etc.

AFAI am aware the minimum level of speeding offence is treated the same, regardless whether it was 2mph over or 29. (iirc it's anyting up to 30mph over).

There is no official leeway, you can be done for going 1mph over the limit.

3 points and a fine for 26mph is stupid compared with the same for 85 on a country lane imho.
I'd prefer to see councils sending out small fines, no points, for the 26mph ones.
But that's another matter.
 
motorbiking said:
If the lease company is the registered keeper they will reply to the NIP with the name and address of the customer leasing the vehicle. That person is not under the same obligations.

Sec 2 a) applies to the lease company
Sec 2 b) applies to the customer.

Note the obligations are different.

RK nominates customer, customer denies it and nominates wife. Wife denies it.

I believe it’s called a clarkson (denied being the driver) though the Hamilton is different but similar (blamed each other). Both are well known.
Click to expand...

Very interesting. The distinction seems quite subtle.

(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 [F3 or 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.

(3) Subject to the following provisions, a person who fails to comply with a requirement under subsection (2) above shall be guilty of an offence.

(4) A person shall not be guilty of an offence by virtue of paragraph (a) of subsection (2) above if he shows that he did not know and could not with reasonable diligence have ascertained who the driver of the vehicle was.
Click to expand...

Road Traffic Act 1988

An Act to consolidate certain enactments relating to road traffic with amendments to give effect to recommendations of the Law Commission and the Scottish Law Commission.
www.legislation.gov.uk www.legislation.gov.uk
 
The op could easily say it was him, take the punishment and then have it proved to him that it was his wife and he is therefore guilty of perverting the course if justice.

Just reply with a letter stating it was either him, or his wife but is unable to be certain who it was.

Legal advice (not via this forum) might be sensible. But I wouldn't be stating it was definitely x or y on a legal document unless I was sure
 
Pay the fine, take the points and both be more careful in future. Or keep a diary of when your wife is driving.
 
You used to be able to avoid a ticket by not signing the form. But that has been dealt with.

If it was me, I'd go back to the road (slowly) and check the limit has the correct roundels and the system of street lights is correctly spaced. That can easily make the 20 or 30 limit unenforceable.

If it looked good, and I had a license full of points, I'd really want to be sure it was me or the wife driving.. 110% sure.. not a doubt in my mind. If I wasn't I'd say so and give them reasons why.

They will likely proceed with a prosecution against the first person named by the lease company, because they know few people will be happy to be question in the magistrates court. They are normally so confident of a guilty plea the prosecution team rarely turn up.
 
Doug99 said:
Hi All

Have just received a speeding ticket from police for doing 26mph in a 20mph zone.
The image provided is a night time shot with no driver visible.
The road is frequently driven by both myself and my wife.
The offence is now 6 weeks old as the vehicle is lease and we have been away on holiday so am unable to say (without reasonable doubt) who was driving at the time.
The letter suggests a 'not sure' reply will not be acceptable.
Thoughts everyone?

Cheers

Doug
Click to expand...
“Unable to say” does not amount to the due diligence defence. This isn’t about a right to silence, you are required to carry out a diligent investigation. You could end up in prison if you don’t shop whoever it was.
 
blup said:
“Unable to say” does not amount to the due diligence defence. This isn’t about a right to silence, you are required to carry out a diligent investigation. You could end up in prison if you don’t shop whoever it was.
Click to expand...
He is not the registered keeper.

His burden is to "give any information which it is in his power to give and may lead to identification of the driver." he is under no obligation to carry out any such diligence.
 
blup said:
“Unable to say” does not amount to the due diligence defence. This isn’t about a right to silence, you are required to carry out a diligent investigation. You could end up in prison if you don’t shop whoever it was.
Click to expand...
He has narrowed it down to being 1 of 2 people. Just not sure which 1.

Should he name 1, and possibly be wrong?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top