NIP - speeding ticket when driver is not from UK
in [UK Drivers]
|
From: cupra on 20 Apr 2007 06:37 Alan Holmes wrote: > " cupra" <NOcupra.sSPAM(a)gmail.com> wrote in message > news:58r4laF2hqnvaU1(a)mid.individual.net... >> Alan Holmes wrote: >>> <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. >>>> >>>> it's just frustration...that's all...not worry. >>> >>> Did you ask to see the 'evidence', this is vital. >> >> No it's not. > > Why? Because he's not the driver.
From: cupra on 20 Apr 2007 06:42 Steve Firth wrote: > Alan Holmes <alan_holmes(a)nowhere.com> wrote: > >>> 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 just frustration...that's all...not worry. >> >> Did you ask to see the 'evidence', this is vital. > > He's already said that someone else was driving at the time. So by > what stretch of the imagination do you come to the conclusion that he > has the right to see the evidence that may be used in the prosecution > of someone else? > > Do you regularly write to courts asking to see the evidence of any > prosecutions that your neighbours may be facing, for example? Imagine the chaos if every crime suspect's mate had access to prosecution evidence!
From: Steve Firth on 20 Apr 2007 06:40 Nick Finnigan <nix(a)genie.co.uk> wrote: > Steve Firth wrote: > > PM <pm(a)m_.com.invalid> wrote: > > > > > >>Yes, but where's the legal requirement to produce the insurance > >>documentation? > > > > > > RTA 143(1b) > > No requirement to produce. The owner has a duty to ensure that drivers have adequate insurance. > > RTA 165(1c) > > No reasonable cause to believe the owner committed an offence, but > they may ask the driver to produce. There could well be reasonable cause. The owner has identified that someone else was the driver. Insurance records show that the owner does not have "any driver" cover. > > RTA 165(2a)
From: Conor on 20 Apr 2007 07:08 In article <1177003066.699470.292420(a)p77g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>, says... > 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: > OH for the love of God... > --- > "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...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. > > THAT ARTICLE WAS FOR A SPEEDING FINE. THEY'RE AFTER INSURANCE. -- Conor Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
From: Nick Finnigan on 20 Apr 2007 07:35
Steve Firth wrote: > Nick Finnigan <nix(a)genie.co.uk> wrote: > > >>Steve Firth wrote: >> >>>PM <pm(a)m_.com.invalid> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>>>Yes, but where's the legal requirement to produce the insurance >>>>documentation? >>> >>> >>>RTA 143(1b) >> >> No requirement to produce. > > The owner has a duty to ensure that drivers have adequate insurance. Yes, but no duty to produce. > > >>>RTA 165(1c) >> >>No reasonable cause to believe the owner committed an offence, but >>they may ask the driver to produce. > > > There could well be reasonable cause. The owner has identified that > someone else was the driver. Insurance records show that the owner does > not have "any driver" cover Even if the police could obtain that information, it would still not give reasonable cause - it applies in most cases when someone other than the owner is driving the vehicle in a basically law-abiding fashion. |