Speeding ticket - unknown driver

[ChrisHGTV]

"Just one more thing ..."

You’ve seen it!! In a W129 as well.

I remember that one - red SL!

 

[roviw1]

You’ve seen it!! In a W129 as well.

No shadow under the nose haha

 

[Trickythemerc]

Has an awareness course not been offered. No points and non declarable to insurer.

 

[poormansporsche]

Be a good husband either way

 

[BTB 500]

Has an awareness course not been offered. No points and non declarable to insurer.

Eligibility for a SAC is based on the driver (you can only do one every 3? years) as well as the amount over the limit. So you'd have to reply to the NIP first, then the person named might get offered a course.

A few insurers do specifically ask about courses. If asked you have to declare it.

 

[Steveml63]

Hi,
To the OP - there is no messing with this NIP.
You need to decide who was most likely the driver at the time of the alleged speeding offence and then unequivocally name them on the NIP.
If you are the registered keeper and you name yourself - then in due course you will either receive a Conditional offer of a fixed penalty or maybe the opportunity to be lectured to for a few hours as if you are a child (normally by a smarmy ex-policeperson).
The latter is a great option to avoid points and increased insurance premiums.
If you name somebody else on the NIP - then they will get their own in due course to complete - and they will then get their own conditional offer or speed awareness course offer.
If you mess about and don’t name somebody properly - you face the chance of receiving a conviction of “‘failing to furnish” which normally has a higher fine, 6 points on your licence and increased insurance premiums for next few years (insurance companies don’t like this particular conviction).
Cheers
Steve

 

[Williamwoo]

Hi all,

Thanks for all the comments.

I too remember the Colombo episode – driver holding a pic of the perp’s face in order to prove they couldn’t have been elsewhere murdering someone. To my shame I’d forgotten it was a Merc though! However, this doesn’t apply to us as the photo was taken from behind. I’m slightly annoyed actually – the rear numberplate was very dirty but obviously not quite dirty enough for the camera not to make out the plate!

I’m also aware of the jailed MP, but I think they were done for lying. We still do not know who was driving at the time. Here in rural Somerset, you have to drive to accomplish anything and we’re forever out and about doing something. Neither of us spent any money (by card at least) that evening, and the fact that it’s not clear from the photo which direction the car was going down the lane doesn’t help either. I’m aware of Google tracking or whatever it’s called but would have no idea how to look at it. However, I imagine the police could/would so for this reason I think we’ll just say it was one of us, rather than be accused of perjury.

N.B. Thanks ToeKneeS for saving me the trouble of finding out how much Jupiter weighs, and Barry Manilow’s shoe size – I feel enlightened!

 

[Benzowner]

I had a similar incident in a works van which could be driven by anyone over 25 we had 7 potential drivers who were all on the same contract. Got a speeding ticket through the post and said we could not identify the driver. We got a £200 fine for not keeping adequate records, no points.

You may not have to keep records, but be aware they can sting you for more than the original fine. Better for one of you to own up, do the awareness course and pay the fine.

 

[Tigger]

This is not legal advice and I am not a legal professional so please perform your own due diligence.

Section 172 of the Road Traffic Act 1988 states the following:
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.

So perhaps write back to the Police partnership that issued the NIP, firstly verbosely listing every item of reasonable diligence that you have performed to ascertain the driver of the vehicle and then reference the above paragraph from s172 of RTA 1988 asking how best to proceed.

The important thing to note is that your reasonable diligence needs to be strong enough to withstand scrutiny. Good luck!

 

[TC350]

This is not legal advice and I am not a legal professional so please perform your own due diligence.

Section 172 of the Road Traffic Act 1988 states the following:
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.

So perhaps write back to the Police partnership that issued the NIP, firstly verbosely listing every item of reasonable diligence that you have performed to ascertain the driver of the vehicle and then reference the above paragraph from s172 of RTA 1988 asking how best to proceed.

The important thing to note is that your reasonable diligence needs to be strong enough to withstand scrutiny. Good luck!

The response could be "Smart ****" and they descend on you like a ton of bricks!

 

[BTB 500]

it’s not clear from the photo which direction the car was going down the lane

Sounds like it was a mobile camera rather than a fixed one?

 

[Scooby_Doo]

£660.00 and 6 points or £90.00 and 3 points - I know which one I'd choose.

 

[Dippo]

I’m aware of Google tracking or whatever it’s called but would have no idea how to look at it.

In Google Maps. click on the three bars for Menu. Then click on My Timeline. Then choose the date of the alleged offence.

 

[BTB 500]

In Google Maps. click on the three bars for Menu. Then click on My Timeline. Then choose the date of the alleged offence.

Assuming you have location history turned on ... not sure what the default is.

 

[Muckypaps]

For £500 I was definitely the driver.

 

[m80]

£660.00 and 6 points or £90.00 and 3 points - I know which one I'd choose.

Ah, but there is a principle here.
There's more of them, and they're bigger.

 

[Fastcar155]

Hi , Mrs Boyband worked for a large construction company.

Had so many issues with speeding tickets that they put in place the following system. Each employee who had a company vehicle was the only person allowed to drive the allocated car / van unless permission was granted by the company secretary who kept complete records.

Allocating a vehicle to a driver worked reduced speeding tickets by over 90% , no exception to the rule.

 

[st13phil]

So perhaps write back to the Police partnership that issued the NIP, firstly verbosely listing every item of reasonable diligence that you have performed to ascertain the driver of the vehicle and then reference the above paragraph from s172 of RTA 1988 asking how best to proceed.

Only go down this route if you are prepared for a day in court and are prepared to take the consequences of a “failure to furnish” conviction - the barrier to a successful defence is very high.

The whole system is set up to give someone a fine and points on their licence. It relies upon threats of major sanctions to ensure that once an allegation is made someone coughs to the offence.

 

[Skd884]

A human i know had 2 speeding tickets from the old bill he fabricated a name and used a empty commercial premises for the address, never heard from the old bill again.

Job done.

Do this ^ to avoid points/fine, all you have to do legally is name any driver once you have done so they can no longer pursue you.

 

[st13phil]

Do this ^ to avoid points/fine, all you have to do legally is name any driver once you have done so they can no longer pursue you.

Advising anyone to commit perjury is not, imo, particularly wise.