Retrobike Forum Index

It is currently Thu Dec 08, 2016 3:36 am

* Login   * Register * Search  * FAQ



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 35 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jan 22, 2009 9:33 am 
Retro Guru

Joined: Wed Dec 10, 2008 9:19 am
Posts: 2095
Location: Sheffield, top city
i thought about this last nite. There may be the possibility that the paperwork that came from the police, which appear to be hounding daj arent really any more than standard issue letters where the adressee details are changed by computer and mailed out. The problem might be that they simply havent read the details of this particular case and are treating it with the thousands of other "not me, Guv" letters. No defence, I know, but there is the possibility of it not being an actual witch hunt of daj.

Further, should they resort to asking who was possibly driving, I'd answer with a firm "dont know, could have been anyone". If they are hounding, they might try the "taking without owners consent" to get a
"confession"


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jan 22, 2009 9:45 am 
retrobike rider
retrobike rider
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 11, 2005 10:58 am
Posts: 972
A friend at work did a similar thing. Him and his wife had been driving up and down the A1 looking at wedding venues.

They didn't know who was driving at the time, he asked for proof, the police couldn't give it. He got a few letters and kept repeating, these are the people in the car but we're not sure who was driving, if you could let us know and will pay the fine etc. Then he got a letter saying they're off to court.

It was either day before or on the day of the court date, he got another letter saying the case was been dropped, but if caught in future the fine would more severe.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jan 22, 2009 10:25 am 
Retro Guru
User avatar

Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2008 7:43 pm
Posts: 557
My father in law got a speeding ticket after he died as well. Well he was speeding before he died, and got the ticket afterwards.

Just ignored it all. They soon gave up.

Let them take a dead person to court, they won't get far.

Of course if someone living were driving the car and they actually had evidence of who that was....

Shouldn't have answered the first letter.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jan 25, 2009 11:34 pm 
Gold Trader
Gold Trader
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 01, 2008 10:38 am
Posts: 2014
Location: South Wales
Hi sorry to hear and my sincere condolences.

I'm a cop (Boooooooo!!!! but only in my spare time!!) and this is my take on it

The registered keeper of the vehicle, has a legal obligation, under Section 172 of the Road Traffic Act, to provide the name of the person who was driving their vehicle at the time of the alleged motoring offence.

This legal obligation is not restricted to just the registered keeper. If any person has it within their power to give information that may lead to the drivers identification, then they are bound by the same requirement

HOWEVER Section 172 also states

A person shall not be guilty of an offence ....... if he shows that he did not know and could not with reasonable diligence have ascertained who the driver of the vehicle was.

My take on it is, if they is no photographic evidence and no currently registered keeper and as long as you can say truthfully and honestly that you or any other family members are not aware of who was driving at the time of the offence. Then the summons will simply fail. The Ticket Office will need a name to Summons to Court if one isn't produced then no one goes to Court.

The only problem I can see arising is OWNERSHIP. With the death of your father-in-law the ownership of his estate may be passed directly to his next of kin / spouse or through will. I believe that there will be an obligation on the OWNER to provide details of who was driving. The owner of the vehicle will be wife, daughter, son, etc. The police look at ownership as somebody who has control over the vehicle

But I think this will simply be in the 'too hard' box and knocked on the head. What I would suggest is that co-operate with the Central Ticket Office fully and give them all the information they need. Be warned though that wilfully lying to Pervert the Course of Justice is a very serious offence and could go to Crown Court


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jan 26, 2009 11:25 pm 
Retro Guru

Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2008 2:11 pm
Posts: 303
Nothing to do with speeding laws this, but the point about the registered keeper and or owner is significant. Until such time as the will is settled the car has no legal owner as such and no registered keeper. Until the ownership of the car is settled then, as I read it, all corespondence with regard to the car should be dealt with by the executor. If daj is the executor then he should deal with the correspondence, if not then he should pass it on to the executor. Whoever does deal with it needs to make it clear in all correspondence that they are acting as executor, NOT the legal owner or registered keeper of the car.

BTW you can be fined for not naming the driver at the time of the offence, but as has been pointed out if it's too much like hard work they'll give up and drop it. Although you may end up with a caution on your record.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 35 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: xerxes and 43 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  

About Us

Follow Retrobike

Other cool stuff

All content © 2005-2015 Retrobike unless otherwise stated.
Cookies Policy.
bikedeals - the best bike deals in one place
FatCOGS - Fat Chance Owner's Group

Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group