Speeding Ticket

denso13 said:
Of course they do, the driver gets prosecuted, not the car.
The RK only has to identify a possible driver, they probably have no idea who was actually driving.

That's not correct.
Click to expand...
Why don’t you read section 172 as posted rather than make it up based on your opinion?
 
Can't state who was driving. According to this you will end up in court.
 
ajohn said:
According to this you will end up in court.
Click to expand...
Possibly, but he said that not knowing who was driving could be a defence. It is better to be honest and that could be that you simply do not know who was driving.
 
LOL I wonder if they should ask the police to look at mobile phone data assuming both had them and they were on.
Odd subject but some one asked for the data from his service provider and was very surprised about what they had. Mast tracking works surprisingly well.
 
ajohn said:
LOL I wonder if they should ask the police to look at mobile phone data assuming both had them and they were on.
Odd subject but some one asked for the data from his service provider and was very surprised about what they had. Mast tracking works surprisingly well.
Click to expand...
Surely it's up to the police to chase for more detail if the OP has narrowed it down to 2 people
 
denso13 said:
Possibly, but he said that not knowing who was driving could be a defence. It is better to be honest and that could be that you simply do not know who was driving.
Click to expand...
Agreed, but people generally can gather much more information than they realise about others' whereabouts at particular times. The YT chappie uses the phrase due diligence despite it not applying to the non RK's
 
motorbiking said:
"You are required to give me the name and address of the user of the vehicle at the time and date above."
What do you think that means?
Click to expand...
Interesting in that it specifies 'user' rather than 'driver'. I wonder if it's been tested in court? The lessor 'uses' the vehicle as a source of income by hiring it to the lessee. The lessee (the OP) 'uses' the vehicle to provide a means of transport for him and his wife. The wife 'uses' the vehicle (if she were driving) to transport her husband.
 
carmanmemoranda said:
Surely it's up to the police to chase for more detail if the OP has narrowed it down to 2 people
Click to expand...
Every thing I can find says it's not the polices problem at all. That doesn't surprise me. Some photo the back of the vehicle. Some head on. My brother got picked up by some other form. 3 times on the same trip so was given one point short of a ban, He's not blind or anything else but saw no normal form of speed camera. They are rather hard to miss when they are passed through. No super long roads either.

I think the video I posted is correct. The police will book a court hearing and the RK or maybe both people get to explain what due diligence they have carried out to see who had been driving and why this didn't work out. Who ever it is could just say sorry I / we can't tell. The points etc will have to be applied to someone.

;) Pity a digital copy of the photo isn't available. If posted I could see if it can be augmented.

My comment about mobile phones was jocular. I just wonder how much use is made of this data and if all services do it.
 
Any one going to the festival of speed ? Next month ( I am :cool: )

Goes with out saying plod is generally out in force with there speed cameras ;)
North chapel which is en route is a usual haunt for one of there camera vans
 
Talking about Speeding best not get caught in Switzerland

On the radio news 4 British blokes in super cars got caught doing a ton on there motorway
All arrested
Cars confiscated
Spent 2 or 3 days in custody (?)
Cars may get crushed or sold

Also same report some bloke got clocked exceeding the speed limit he was doing 80 in a 50 (?) he had the car taken and fined over 180 grand (£)

Swiss for you bunch of fruit cakes , dodgy bankers and cuckoo clock makers
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top