Jump to content
  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hi everyone. We purchased a new bed from dreams 26/12/2017 which was delivered 01/02/2018.  We also purchased their delivery, assembly, take the old one away, tv, mattress, mattress protector, pillows and their 'bed cover' 8 years extended warranty.  We paid by 30 monthly interest free instalments and so just made the final payment.   It is a heavy duty king size lift up storage bed with a built in tv at the end.  It has always been a struggle to lift, my wife cannot do it on her own and it rarely stays up by itself.   At the beginning of this year, we noticed it had started to dip considerably in the middle.  Not the mattress, but the wooden base the mattress is on.  So on 09/02/2020 I emailed them about the issue.  They started by saying the mattress is not covered only the base, until I pointed out it is the base at fault not the mattress.  So they sent out Homeserve on the 25/02/2020 to come and repair.  He did what he called a temporary repair, said that the bed had failed due to a manufacturing or design fault (the metal bolts holding the wooden base to the lift up supports have pulled out of the wood) and that dreams would be in touch to arrange a replacement.  His temporary repair barely lasted a day, the bed was still dipping and he took plenty of photos for himself but seemed in a mad rush to leave.   Of course they didn't contact us, so on 30/03/2020 I emailed them back.  01/04/2020 they emailed back confirming in writing that it is a manufacturing fault and their sales team would contact me, however as expected due to Covid-19 this may take a while.   30/06/2020 I asked for an update.  03/07/2020 they replied saying their claims department would contact me within 5 working days.  They didn't. 15/07/2020 I emailed back asking them to escalate my complaint as well as providing a refund and compensation as we are now struggling to sleep and experiencing back ache due to the bed's extreme dipping, plus I am worried about the mattress getting damaged. 23/07/2020 They replied saying we are not entitled to a refund as it is a guarantee claim and they have passed it once again this time to their guarantee company to contact us. I have still not heard back.   This is now getting beyond a joke and I wanted some guidance on how I should proceed.  We are struggling to sleep in the bed and cannot now even open the bed to access our belongings inside as as soon as you try and lift you hear the sound of breaking wood.   Many thanks  
    • bit obv really... don't eat yellow snow either.   dx  
    • I know you are trivialising this as, 'Ambulance Chasing Lawyers', because they are perceived to be involved. You mention BMW (other brands as well). Counterfeit car and truck parts have been implicated, and proven to be the cause, of accidents where fatalities have occurred.   There is some considerable difference between a set of counterfeit brake pads and a fake SD Card.   The trademark infringement though, is the same.   H
    • One hope in this growing mess is that local authorities, mainly in the north west so far, like Liverpool, are developing their own systems to test and trace, filling in the gaps of what Serco et al are missing.   But they're doing it with precious little in the way of funding. In the meantime it looks as if Serco [I think it's them] will be given more hundreds of millions on top of the £100 million that hasn't been effective so far in a couple of weeks. Given that the PM has swanned off to Scotland for a couple of weeks this isn't looking good.
    • i've known 10yrs of DD's to be refunded. the company must prove a valid contract for the period. no proof the DD's all get refunded   dx  
  • Our picks

    • Curry’s cancelled my order but took the money anyway. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/423055-curry%E2%80%99s-cancelled-my-order-but-took-the-money-anyway/
      • 11 replies
    • Father passed away - Ardent Credit Services (Vodafone) now claiming he owes money. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/423040-father-passed-away-ardent-credit-services-vodafone-now-claiming-he-owes-money/
      • 9 replies
    • Currys Refuse Refund F/Freezer 5day old. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/422656-currys-refuse-refund-ffreezer-5day-old/
      • 6 replies
    • Hi,  
      I was in Sainsbury’s today and did scan and shop.
      I arrived in after a busy day at work and immediately got distracted by the clothes.
       
      I put a few things in my trolley and then did a shop.
      I paid and was about to get into my car when the security guard stopped me and asked me to come back in.
       
      I did and they took me upstairs.
      I was mortified and said I forgot to scan the clothes and a conditioner, 5 items.
      I know its unacceptable but I was distracted and Initially hadn’t really planned to use scan and shop.
       
      No excuse.
      I offered to pay for the goods but the manager said it was too late.
      He looked at the CCTV and because I didn’t try to scan the items he was phoning the police.
       
      The cost of the items was about £40.
      I was crying at this point and told them I was a nurse, just coming from work and I could get struck off.
       
      They rang the police anyway and they came and issued me with a community resolution notice, which goes off my record in a year.
      I feel terrible. I have to declare this to my employer and NMC.
       
      They kept me in a room on my own with 4 staff and have banned me from all stores.
      The police said if I didn’t do the community order I would go to court and they would refer me to the PPS.
       
      I’m so stressed,
      can u appeal this or should I just accept it?
       
      Thanks for reading 
      • 16 replies
renegade1972

police speeding fine

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 3619 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

hi my partner has just received a letter from the police of a NOTICE OF INTENDED PROSECUTION in accordance with section 1 road trafiic act 1988

 

i hereby give you notice that proceedings are being considered against the driver of the said vechicle for an alleged offence of excess speed 50mph-camera

speed 61mph

 

contrary to section s84 rtra 84 sch 2 rtoa 88 and local order

 

this allegation is supported by means of photographic/recorded video evidence

 

 

it then goes on to say that you are the reg keeper and should give details of driver if it wasnt her

my question is this,,,she actually was not the driver of the vechicle at the time and this can be proved because she was at work,,we are not 100% sure who was driving as there are several people that use the car,,,should i first ask for photographic evidence to try and ascertain who was driving ? not sure where we stand on this

any advice would be much appreciated

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, you should ask if they can provide you with a photo to help you assertain who was driving. Make sure you do not use the word "evidence" anywhere in your request as the police are under no obligation to provide "evidence" prior to court and may stonewall you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

thanks for your prompt response,,,,,i also have a form here which they say should be filled in and returned,,,,section 1 -i was the driver

section 2 if you were not the driver plesse provide details of the driver at the time

section 3 if you were not the keeper

 

it also says on the form

 

NOTE Police are unable to respond to any comments that you may make unless it is to a point of law

 

am i still ok to ask for photo ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes. If you ask for a photo and it turns out the photo is blank or has been taken from the back then you would need to write back and ask for a clearer picture of the driver.


So whats cooking today ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But time is not on your side. You have to get this done before the deadline.


Warning: Freemen of the Land Operate here. Think twice before accepting 'legal advice'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i only received the letter on saturday so i will write a reply today and send it off first class recorded,should arrive by tuesday,,i have 28 days,,also we checked on the internet about speed detection along the said road,and it turns out that local residents have been trained to use speed detection apparatus,and in turn pass on the details of alleged speeding motorists to police who in turn then contact the registered owner to take further action,,this is a new method which i have never heard of before,,just wondering what the legalities of this are, if anybody knows

thanks for all the replies :-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

does it really say "section 3 if you were not the keeper" or does it say "section 3 if you were not the registered keeper". They are very different.NIP forms are famous for not being comprehensive and for trying to box you into a corner. As the RK was at work and the car wasn't she was not the keeper and so only has to give information 'that is in her power to give'. If that is a list of possible drivers make sure that all the requested information is given for each possible driver/other keeper. the SCP won't like it though. make sure they all have insurance cover as well or the SCP may go for a consolation prize. You can attach your response in a letter, stapled to the form with "SEE ATTACHED' written on the form.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

section 3 says IF YOU WERE NOT the keeper/owner at the time of the alleged offence complete this section

 

the section to be completed is as follows

 

 

the vechicle was sold/disposed of on date...... to(full name)

of address..................................................................

signature...........................date...........................................

 

this is slightly misleading as if i wasnt the keeper that dosent mean i have sold it

all i have done at the moment is wrote a letter asking for a photo so we can accertain who the driver was

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

".NIP forms are famous for not being comprehensive and for trying to box you into a corner." yours is a perfect example of that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
i only received the letter on saturday so i will write a reply today and send it off first class recorded,should arrive by tuesday,,i have 28 days,,also we checked on the internet about speed detection along the said road,and it turns out that local residents have been trained to use speed detection apparatus,and in turn pass on the details of alleged speeding motorists to police who in turn then contact the registered owner to take further action,,this is a new method which i have never heard of before,,just wondering what the legalities of this are, if anybody knows

thanks for all the replies :-)

The Police are unlikely to proceed on the word of joe public operating the speed cameras, in our area when this happens they usually send out warning letters to the RK when 'caught' by the citizens.

regards


Please remember our troops, fighting and dying in our name. God protect them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

this thread is similar to thread Is vehicle owner responsible when driver does not pay fine?

 

the vehicle user who who got caught speeding should pay the penalty,

you should present him/her with speeding ticket and let police now it was him/her and not the RK. If not as RK it falls to you to pay the penalty.

 

:)

 

dk

 

ps; ready for salvo


:welcome::rofl::welcome:

 

 

 

 

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

 

 

:tea:

 

 

 

most of my knowledge is from the school of hard knocks

 

not based on any legal background

 

As quite a lot fellow caggers state seek Legal Advice

 

 

:ranger:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
this thread is similar to thread Is vehicle owner responsible when driver does not pay fine?

 

the vehicle user who who got caught speeding should pay the penalty,

you should present him/her with speeding ticket and let police now it was him/her and not the RK. If not as RK it falls to you to pay the penalty.

 

:)

 

dk

 

ps; ready for salvo

 

Speeding fines don't 'fall to the RK'

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Speeding fines don't 'fall to the RK'

 

who then pays in end?

 

you could of answered this in your last post, instead the question has to asked

 

:(

 

dk


:welcome::rofl::welcome:

 

 

 

 

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

 

 

:tea:

 

 

 

most of my knowledge is from the school of hard knocks

 

not based on any legal background

 

As quite a lot fellow caggers state seek Legal Advice

 

 

:ranger:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who ever is successfully prosecuted for it !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

surely then if they only have RK's name,

then proceeding that they have started will carry on with RK !

 

Therefore at this stage the OP is no further along with helpful info from first posting.

 

:)

 

dk


:welcome::rofl::welcome:

 

 

 

 

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

 

 

:tea:

 

 

 

most of my knowledge is from the school of hard knocks

 

not based on any legal background

 

As quite a lot fellow caggers state seek Legal Advice

 

 

:ranger:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

you are confusing a S.172 request and a NIP. also see posts #5 #7. your suggestion in post #11 would land the RK with 6 point penalty and a larger fine for failing the S.172 requirement. As far as I can see the OP got helpful advice then you chipped in with your 'version' - which was not helpful at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dragonkeeper, with respect you are also confusing criminal offences with decriminalised issues. This matter is on an entirely different level to that of a council issued pcn for a parking violation where the RK is ultimately held responsible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
does it really say "section 3 if you were not the keeper" or does it say "section 3 if you were not the registered keeper". They are very different.NIP forms are famous for not being comprehensive and for trying to box you into a corner. As the RK was at work and the car wasn't she was not the keeper and so only has to give information 'that is in her power to give'. If that is a list of possible drivers make sure that all the requested information is given for each possible driver/other keeper. the SCP won't like it though. make sure they all have insurance cover as well or the SCP may go for a consolation prize. You can attach your response in a letter, stapled to the form with "SEE ATTACHED' written on the form.

This is hard to digest

 

 

NIP forms are famous for not being comprehensive and for trying to box you into a corner." yours is a perfect example of that

:confused:

 

 

this thread is similar to thread Is vehicle owner responsible when driver does not pay fine?

 

the vehicle user who who got caught speeding should pay the penalty,

you should present him/her with speeding ticket and let police now it was him/her and not the RK. If not as RK it falls to you to pay the penalty.

Is the red text not factual

 

who then pays in end?

Who ever is successfully prosecuted for it !

who would that be

(would it be the person in the red text)

 

 

surely then if they only have RK's name,

then proceeding that they have started will carry on with RK !

 

you are confusing a S.172 request and a NIP. also see posts #5 #7. your suggestion in post #11 would land the RK with 6 point penalty and a larger fine for failing the S.172 requirement. As far as I can see the OP got helpful advice then you chipped in with your 'version' - which was not helpful at all.

 

 

 

If I had borrowed a vehicle and did not realise I had been speeding, I would hope that when the offence came to light as it has done. I would like to know from the person I borrowed the vehicle from to tell me so that I could deal with the offence, ie: present me with speeding ticket (figure or speech) by means of putting my name down as the driver.

(I must remember to write complete explanations in the future)

 

As for getting confused between different threads I did say similar and not the same.

(I was expecting the salvo of shots)

 

 

:)

 

 

dk


:welcome::rofl::welcome:

 

 

 

 

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

 

 

:tea:

 

 

 

most of my knowledge is from the school of hard knocks

 

not based on any legal background

 

As quite a lot fellow caggers state seek Legal Advice

 

 

:ranger:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For the benefit of Dragon Keeper:

 

When a someone is caught speeding (by a speed camera for instance), the registered keeper of the vehicle in question is sent a form asking them to identify the driver at the time of the offence. (a section 172 request.)

 

There are three options - 1) They were the driver, 2) They were not the driver, in which case, they must state who was driving and 3) they were not the registered keeper of the vehicle at the time of the offence.

 

In scenario 2, the person to whom the driver identification request is sent to is expected state who was driving. In the case of a hire car, the company would pass on the details of the person who had use of the vehicle at that time.

 

Where most confusion occurs is when the car is owned by a private individual but is used by other people - for example a family car driven by the wife, son and daughter. Failing to identify the driver is an offence and it is expected that one would be able to ascertain who the driver was. In such a case, the person to whom the S.172 was sent would have to name the driver (after interrogating the family) or, as a last resort, offer a list of possible drivers.

 

One may request photos in order to aid identification. However the police are under no obligation to send them.

 

After this, the police may decide to drop the case or investigate further to see if they can find out who was driving.

 

Who pays in the end? As Lamma said, whoever is prosecuted successfully! It may be that they never get to the bottom as to who was driving!

 

If I had borrowed a vehicle and did not realise I had been speeding, I would hope that when the offence came to light as it has done. I would like to know from the person I borrowed the vehicle from to tell me so that I could deal with the offence, ie: present me with speeding ticket (figure or speech) by means of putting my name down as the driver.

(I must remember to write complete explanations in the future)

 

In this event, your friend would inform the police that he was not driving. He would give them your details. They would then contact you.

  • Haha 1

Warning: Freemen of the Land Operate here. Think twice before accepting 'legal advice'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is all you need. ask them for a copy of the photo they have. If they dont provide it then they are very shaky ground as your direct defence would be that you were not provided with a picture when asked so you cannot identify the driver. However if they send you a photo and the picture is from the back then you need to ask them to send you a picture of the driver. In which case they cant and they are stumped.


So whats cooking today ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That is all you need. ask them for a copy of the photo they have. If they dont provide it then they are very shaky ground as your direct defence would be that you were not provided with a picture when asked so you cannot identify the driver. However if they send you a photo and the picture is from the back then you need to ask them to send you a picture of the driver. In which case they cant and they are stumped.

 

Not having a picture from the camera is not a defence per se.

 

The standard reply seems to be that the picture is merely to record the offending vehicle and not for driver identification. Since this is a summary case, advanced disclosure is not required either, so any documentary evidence the police (or safety camera partnership) may have would be to aid the prosecution case and nothing else.

 

However, should the police not provide a picture (or as you say, provide one showing the back of the car), one would be left with the option of just providing the details of possible drivers. It would then be up to the police to make the next move.

 

Further to this, the front facing cameras (truvelo) do take pictures which usually show the driver. Despite this, the police do not have to disclose them.

 

It is still worth asking for the picture however - if you believe it will help driver identification.

  • Haha 1

Warning: Freemen of the Land Operate here. Think twice before accepting 'legal advice'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That is all you need. ask them for a copy of the photo they have. If they dont provide it then they are very shaky ground as your direct defence would be that you were not provided with a picture when asked so you cannot identify the driver. However if they send you a photo and the picture is from the back then you need to ask them to send you a picture of the driver. In which case they cant and they are stumped.

Not quite, see the answer given by Mightymouse above.

regards


Please remember our troops, fighting and dying in our name. God protect them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Snap MM:D


Please remember our troops, fighting and dying in our name. God protect them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

this first bit is slightly of topic who's ......................(dk[EDIT](dk)

 

 

 

 

back to topic

 

 

For the benefit of Dragon Keeper:

 

When a someone is caught speeding (by a speed camera for instance), the registered keeper of the vehicle in question is sent a form asking them to identify the driver at the time of the offence. (a section 172 request.)

 

There are three options - 1) They were the driver, 2) They were not the driver, in which case, they must state who was driving and 3) they were not the registered keeper of the vehicle at the time of the offence.

 

In scenario 2, the person to whom the driver identification request is sent to is expected state who was driving. In the case of a hire car, the company would pass on the details of the person who had use of the vehicle at that time. agreed

 

Where most confusion occurs is when the car is owned by a private individual but is used by other people - for example a family car driven by the wife, son and daughter. Failing to identify the driver is an offence and it is expected that one would be able to ascertain who the driver was. In such a case, the person to whom the S.172 was sent would have to name the driver (after interrogating the family) or, as a last resort, offer a list of possible drivers.

if you where to ask me in regarding above paragraph and I was the driver then to save you further grief then I would agree to you nameing me as driver.

I do and did understand the the legalities of the form sent out, from post #1

 

One may request photos in order to aid identification. However the police are under no obligation to send them.

 

After this, the police may decide to drop the case or investigate further to see if they can find out who was driving.

 

Who pays in the end? As Lamma said, whoever is prosecuted successfully! It may be that they never get to the bottom as to who was driving!

 

 

 

In this event, your friend would inform the police that he was not driving. He would give them your details. They would then contact you.

Now with your post that I have quoted the OP may understand what his partener is required to do,ie: all in one statement and not fragmented

(minus my red writing)

 

 

 

:-o The penny has landed

 

I thought we were just helping the O P's partener who quite justified did not want to pay the penalty because she was not driving.

 

Now I realise you are offering a possible defence to the offending driver not to pay a penalty as well.

 

I will just keep reading the thread and will no longer post in the thread to me the OP's question has been answered quite well by mightymouse.

 

regards

dk

 

ps: apologies for the start of my post


:welcome::rofl::welcome:

 

 

 

 

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

 

 

:tea:

 

 

 

most of my knowledge is from the school of hard knocks

 

not based on any legal background

 

As quite a lot fellow caggers state seek Legal Advice

 

 

:ranger:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

there are differing requirements to and so possible defences to a S.172. depends on if you were the keeper at the time - as opposed to the RK. Hence my post way back in the thread about 'information in your power to give' which is less onerous than 'reasonable diligence'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...