Failing to provide driver identity

Honest John Back Room » Legal matters
What is life like with your car? Let us know and win £500 in John Lewis vouchers | No thanks
View Threaded
Wed 27 Jun 2012 19:01
Failing to provide driver identity - hodsonfour
I am being charged with failing to provide information relating to driver identity (section 172 road traffic act). I returned the NIP although it was a month late due to illness identifying the driver (someone who was working for me), he is denying being the driver so I was contacted again by the camera office and I have since had several telephone conversations with them as well as providing further written confirmation of the driver's identity. I believe I have met my obligations providing the driver's identity and now I'm being charged with failing to provide information! Advice please?
Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Wed 27 Jun 2012 20:10
Failing to provide driver identity - Peter D

I am afraid the charge is valid, you have 28 days to identify the driver and this you failed to do. Was the person you detailed as the driver insured to drive the vehicle. You will need medical proof of your illnes that prevented you from responding in time. Regards Peter

Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Wed 27 Jun 2012 20:55
Failing to provide driver identity - Bobbin Threadbare

Failure to identify the driver is a separate offence all on its own. Peter is right....

Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Thu 28 Jun 2012 13:45
Failing to provide driver identity - hodsonfour
Driver was insured for the vehicle. And I do have medical proof that I was ill at the time and still am.
Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Thu 28 Jun 2012 13:53
Failing to provide driver identity - skidpan

You are going to need a very good solicitor and a lot of luck.

Get a solicitor sorted now, all the advice on this site will be worthles when you are in court.

Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Thu 28 Jun 2012 15:09
Failing to provide driver identity - Dwight Van Driver
Section 172 Road Traffic Act 1988
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.

This is pretty strict in that if one does not name the driver within 28 days then offence committed and Court action taken.

However under Sub Sect 7 of that section is this:

(7)A requirement may be made by written notice served by post; and where it is so made—

(b)the person on whom the notice is served shall not be guilty of an offence under this section if he shows either that he gave the information as soon as reasonably practicable after the end of that period or that it has not been reasonably practicable for him to give it.

It will be up to you (or your brief) to convince the Court that you were too ill to name the driver in 28 days AND that when you did respond you NAMED the driver. This it would seem is being disputed by who was named.

Too many in the past have tried scams to decieve and as a result have left the genuine cases lokked upon with suspicion. One point in your favour is that the person named by you was covered by Insurance.

What about the photo? Who does it show?

dvd
Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Sun 1 Jul 2012 20:58
Failing to provide driver identity - hodsonfour
I have had it clarified by the CPS that the charge is failing to provide information and not the actual speeding offence. I have provided the drivers name and address, followed by work records and invoices that show he was working that day and in that area. I also have a recorded phone conversation with the driver on the day of the offence which confirms he was working. The camera office have also confirmed they have records of my telephone conversations with them.

I have extremely hard medical proof that I was unable to respond within the time frame and did so as soon as reasonably possible.
Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Tue 3 Jul 2012 11:35
Failing to provide driver identity - concrete
Hello hodsonfour, I bet you could do without jumping through all of these hoops while being ill and working. It does seem that you have a good case in mitigation according to the sub section Dwight pointed out and with all the subsequent evidence and documentation you have provided I cannot see any right thinking Magistrate finding you guilty of failing to provide the information required under the act. Just a pity that decent citizens have to go through all this to prove innocence, but it is the price we pay for ultimate justice, and you get your chance in court to clear your good name. Good luck and let us know the outcome of the case. Regards Concrete
Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Tue 3 Jul 2012 12:28
Failing to provide driver identity - RT

In the case of more serious offences, a case for mitigation can be made in the alleged offender's police statement - when CPS review all the evidence in the case they decide if they have a good prospect of conviction and may drop the case so it never goes to court.

Is there any similar review process for S172 charges to prevent this sort of case going to court ?

Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Tue 3 Jul 2012 14:19
Failing to provide driver identity - TeeCee

> but it is the price we pay for ultimate justice

No it isn't, it's the price we pay for laziness and revenue-raising. Had the offender been pulled and served by actual plod on the scene, his identity would have been ascertained then (or an arrest made if not).

But that requires actual Police doing real work and doesn't make as much money in fines.

Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Tue 3 Jul 2012 15:25
Failing to provide driver identity - concrete

> but it is the price we pay for ultimate justice

No it isn't, it's the price we pay for laziness and revenue-raising. Had the offender been pulled and served by actual plod on the scene, his identity would have been ascertained then (or an arrest made if not).

But that requires actual Police doing real work and doesn't make as much money in fines.

I agree with you that more adequate policing would produce better standards on our roads and probably less paperwork too. However my point was that a chance to defend yourself in court or otherwise, and clear your name is better than no chance at all. Cheers Concrete

Reply | Report as offensive | Link