From: Clive George on
<dotmoc(a)gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1177002495.685498.72370(a)o5g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...

> no, i'm not worried...just frustrated that I'm pretty sure i have the
> law on my side, to some extent, yet i don't know it THAT well to argue
> my points to the police, and they'll just run over me just like they
> do to other people who just decide to accept the fine and move on.
> I didn't make up the canadian story. It's true, and I think i still
> can specify a different person because i got "form B" which is
> basically a duplicate of the original form where i need to fill in
> details of the driver at the time the offence and "should the
> particulars entered relate to the driver previously named..." to
> provide the insurance details for them. So looking at that, I think
> they're just giving me another chance to give a british driver name so
> they can fine that person instead of having the hassle to contact the
> canadian guy (which they probably wouldn't bother).
> As you can see...playing the law......and those that know it well have
> the upper hand, in this case the police...and it just seems like they
> can play it well because they also have the strong ability to threaten
> you with legal action, even though they might not actually have a
> strong case.

Presumably this wasn't that long ago? How was your mate insured? "Any
driver" on your car's insurance, or some other means? If you don't know,
then you've screwed up - you need to know before letting him drive, and it's
your problem.

Tell us how he was insured, then we can give advice on how to handle this.

cheers,
clive

From: SteveH on
<dotmoc(a)gmail.com> wrote:

> Looking at that, i dont see why i need to go any further in providing
> information. If this was an insurance case where there was a traffic
> accident, it would make sense for me to provide the insurance cover
> information. But in this case insurance is off the table...it's about
> speeding, and since they have the name and address of the driver at
> the time, they can contact them and pursue the issue that way.

Argh!

You may, or may not, have allowed an uninsured driver to drive your car.
That is an offence in UK lawn, hence why they're chasing you for it. If
they secure a prosecution for said offence, it'll attract a penalty
similar to that of driving without insurance yourself. This is not good,
as insurance companies tend not to like people with convictions for
driving without insurance or allowing other people to drive their cars
without it.

You don't have to be very bright to understand this, but it appears
that, in this case, we're dealing with someone who is as dim as a 5W
light bulb.
--
SteveH 'You're not a real petrolhead unless you've owned an Alfa Romeo'
www.italiancar.co.uk - Honda VFR800 - Hongdou GY200 - Alfa 75 TSpark
Alfa 156 TSpark - B6 Passat 2.0TDI SE - COSOC KOTL
BOTAFOT #87 - BOTAFOF #18 - MRO # - UKRMSBC #7 - Apostle #2 - YTC #
From: Adrian on
(dotmoc(a)gmail.com) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying
:

> no, i'm not worried...

You should be.

> I didn't make up the canadian story. It's true

OK, fine.

I'm sure you can see that many people *have* made up similar stories in the
past, though.

Here's just a couple.
http://www.devon-cornwall.police.uk/dcsc/news/News041206.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/cornwall/4191583.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/manchester/6131826.stm

and there's plenty of others.

> and I think i still can specify a different person because i got "form
> B" which is basically a duplicate of the original form where i need to
> fill in details of the driver at the time the offence and "should the
> particulars entered relate to the driver previously named..." to
> provide the insurance details for them. So looking at that, I think
> they're just giving me another chance to give a british driver name so
> they can fine that person instead of having the hassle to contact the
> canadian guy (which they probably wouldn't bother).

But you'd be making the story up.

> As you can see...playing the law......and those that know it well have
> the upper hand, in this case the police...and it just seems like they
> can play it well because they also have the strong ability to threaten
> you with legal action, even though they might not actually have a
> strong case.

It's fairly straightforward...

Your Canadian friend was driving your car. OK, no problem. So - was he
insured to do so or not?

If so, then you just need to provide a copy of the insurance which covers
him. Easy enough, right?

Unless, of course, he wasn't insured.

If that's so, then he can be prosecuted for driving without insurance, and
you can be prosecuted for permitting him to do so.

Still, I'm sure he was insured, right?
From: Adrian on
(dotmoc(a)gmail.com) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying
:

> My arguments are partially based on this statement off a website that
> seems to know enough to give drivers some support in situations like
> this:

And, I'm sure, worth every penny you paid for that legal advice...

> ---
> "My car was being driven by someone else at the time." You should
> provide the police with the details of the driver and they will then
> pursue them for the speeding offence. If the driver was visiting from
> outside of the UK and especially outside of the EU, then experience
> shows that they will not pursue the case outside of the UK.They may
> write to you and try and get you to prove that this other person was
> driving, but you only need to give them the name and address and don't
> need to supply any more info.
> ---
>
> Looking at that, i dont see why i need to go any further in providing
> information. If this was an insurance case where there was a traffic
> accident, it would make sense for me to provide the insurance cover
> information. But in this case insurance is off the table...

No, it isn't.

Remember what used to happen when you got a tug for speeding? You used to
have to turn up at the police station and produce your insurance, MOT,
licence.

They're now on computer, so by the time you receive the NIP, they've
already been checked. But if you claim somebody else was driving, then the
insurance will be requested.

If you think it's as easy as that, you print that page off from that
website, and you send it back with your refusal to provide the insurance
details. If you're correct, then I'm sure they'll back down...
From: dotmoc on
On 19 Apr, 18:21, s...(a)italiancar.co.uk (SteveH) wrote:
> <dot...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> > Looking at that, i dont see why i need to go any further in providing
> > information. If this was an insurance case where there was a traffic
> > accident, it would make sense for me to provide the insurance cover
> > information. But in this case insurance is off the table...it's about
> > speeding, and since they have the name and address of the driver at
> > the time, they can contact them and pursue the issue that way.
>
> Argh!
>
> You may, or may not, have allowed an uninsured driver to drive your car.
> That is an offence in UK lawn, hence why they're chasing you for it. If
> they secure a prosecution for said offence, it'll attract a penalty
> similar to that of driving without insurance yourself. This is not good,
> as insurance companies tend not to like people with convictions for
> driving without insurance or allowing other people to drive their cars
> without it.
>
> You don't have to be very bright to understand this, but it appears
> that, in this case, we're dealing with someone who is as dim as a 5W
> light bulb.
> --
> SteveH 'You're not a real petrolhead unless you've owned an Alfa Romeo'www.italiancar.co.uk- Honda VFR800 - Hongdou GY200 - Alfa 75 TSpark
> Alfa 156 TSpark - B6 Passat 2.0TDI SE - COSOC KOTL
> BOTAFOT #87 - BOTAFOF #18 - MRO # - UKRMSBC #7 - Apostle #2 - YTC #


No need to get offensive like that in this post and your previous one.
Sorry to have frustrated you. Thank you for your input.