Summons for speeding and failure to provide

[apocalypsedreams]

This is written on behalf of a very worried friend who fears she will lose her licence. There are two counts which allegedly took place within about an hour of each other.

 

Originally, she asked for evidence as she did not know who was driving. The evidence showed nothing so she replied saying she could not confirm whether she, or another driver, was driving at the time. Cops did not accept this so she wrote back saying 'As you have threatened “prosecution for failing to supply” the details of the driver, I will be returning your documentation naming the following person as the driver:' She provided the name and address of the driver.

 

This correspondence was in October, November of 2012 and the summons was received today.

 

Any advice gratefully received.

[sgtbush]

you say she didnt know, then she provided the name of the driver?

[Aretnap]

Need more information - it would be better if she posted herself.

 

Did she provide the name of the driver within 28 days of receiving the original NIPs?

 

Who did she name as the driver? Herself? Someone else? Did the driver subsequently receive any correspondance and did he reply to it? Was he insured to drive the car? I hope she didn't do anything silly like naming an untraceable foreign resident... that would not lead to a good outcome.

[apocalypsedreams]

Did she provide the name of the driver within 28 days of receiving the original NIPs?

 

I will check this detail.

 

She named a bona fide, real person as the driver. This driver is insured to use the vehicle. He received no correspondence but lives at the same address (partner).

[porkyp1g]

Did she provide the name of the driver within 28 days of receiving the original NIPs?

 

I will check this detail.

 

She named a bona fide, real person as the driver. This driver is insured to use the vehicle. He received no correspondence but lives at the same address (partner).

 

Why will she lose her license if she wasn't driving? Even if both offences were applied, that's only 6 points. Are there any points already on either license?

[Aretnap]

Why will she lose her license if she wasn't driving? Even if both offences were applied, that's only 6 points. Are there any points already on either license?

Failure to name the driver = 6 points, twice = 12 points.

[Aretnap]

Did she provide the name of the driver within 28 days of receiving the original NIPs?

 

I will check this detail.

 

She named a bona fide, real person as the driver. This driver is insured to use the vehicle. He received no correspondence but lives at the same address (partner).

In that case I'd guess that either she replied well outside the 28 day deadline and the process of going to court had already started, or else her reply naming her husband was not received. There's also the question of whether her reply was sufficiently unambiguous; generally the police won;t accept an answer along the lines of "I'm not sure, but it was probably this person". Does the paperwork say "no reply", "no satisfactory reply" or "no reply within 28 days" or otherwise mention her final reply in any way?

 

If her last reply was more than 28 days after receiving the NIP then the offence of failure to provide driver information is committed, unless she can prove that it would not have been reasonably practical to have replied more quickly.

 

If she sent an unambiguous reply within 28 days of the original notice and it got lost in the post then in theory she has a complete defence, though the magistrates may be sceptical if she claims to have sent it but can't provide any supporting evidence, and they might also ask why she didn't chase it up when her husband heard nothing.

 

A common thing to do in this situation is to come to an agreement with the prosecutor who will usually drop the more serious failure to ID charges if she pleads guilty to speeding, but if her husband was actually the one driving then pleading guilty to an offence she didn't commit is very dodgy territory (see Chris Huhne/Vicky Pryce for details). If her licence is important to her and if she can find the money I'd suggest that she seeks out a specialist motoring solicitor (preferably not a common or garden high street solicitor, who are not always very good with motoring matters).

[apocalypsedreams]

The paperwork says no reply. The details of the other driver were received as can be confirmed by correspondence with the police. I guess that the police are treating it as a refusal. This seems inaccurate as another driver was named, and that driver received no correspondence.

 

Motoring solicitor seems to be an option, but I understand legal aid won't be granted for motoring cases. She cannot afford legal fees.

 

I have now had a chance to read the witness statement. It says, "I could find no trace of any information being received which identified the driver of the vehicle at the time of the alleged offence and to the satisfaction of the Chief Officer of Police."

Edited March 1, 2013 by apocalypsedreams

[assisted blonde]

12 points isnt an automatic disqualification but you would have to persuade the judge that there is a really good reason not to disqualify, as for legal aid I dont think you will get it for a motoring offence.

[Aretnap]

Legal aid is generally only available if there's a realistic possibility of imprisonment - which there isn't for most motoring offences, and certainly not for speeding/failure to identify.

 

The other bad news is that if she uses a solicitor then if she's aquitted she could only claim costs at legal aid rates. Most motoring specialists will charge more than legal aid rates, meaning she'd be out of pocket even if she won as she could only claim back a fraction of the solicitors fees.

 

Many solicitors will give a free initial consultation though, so it would be worth her while at least speaking to one.

[letsmakeamark]

Failure to name the driver = 6 points, twice = 12 points.

 

I thought it was one offence not two ? ms90 ? or is it mc90 ?

[Aretnap]

I thought it was one offence not two ?

Not how I read it.

There are two counts which allegedly took place within about an hour of each other.

[letsmakeamark]

oNE OFFENCE. oFFENCE ONLY OCCURS IF NO NAME IS PUT FORWARD.

[Feebee_71]

This is written on behalf of a very worried friend who fears she will lose her licence. There are two counts which allegedly took place within about an hour of each other.

 

Any advice gratefully received.

 

How I read the start of the thread by the OP, there were originally 2 speeding offences committed within an hour of each other. Then, because of inability to name driver the police have moved on to a 'failure to name' charge.

 

Feebee_71

[letsmakeamark]

The op's freind will get 6 points unless she names a driver in which case it will be disposed of. This is the snag. If op names someone then police have to chase it up and it can be ongoing for a long time. Also what prosecution evidence does the police have ?

[Aretnap]

We're admittedly playing Chinese Whispers here but two speeding offences would generally mean two requirements to name the driver which in turn would potentially mean two s172 charges and 12 points on conviction of both.

 

Naming the driver at this late stage will not necessarily result in it being dropped as the requirement is to provide the information within 28 days, not at some undefined point in the future. This would be doubly true if it's now six months or more since the original speeding incidents as it would be too late to prosecute the driver in any event.

[apocalypsedreams]

For clarity, it is two separate speeding offences and two separate failure to provide offences.

[assisted blonde]

12 points then 6 for each

[letsmakeamark]

For clarity, it is two separate speeding offences and two separate failure to provide offences.[/quote

 

No its one offence code ms90= 6 points.

[letsmakeamark]

12 points then 6 for each

 

Its one offence code ms90= 6points

[Aretnap]

Sigh. Two separate s172 offences, two separate MS90 endorsements, 12 points in total.

 

There might be an argument that both s172 offences were committed on the same occasion and therefore under Section 28(4) of the Road Traffic Offenders Act only one set of points should be imposed, but I would not want to bet my licence on the court agreeing with it.

 

The speeding charges should not proceed as they have no evidence that she was driving (and by the sound of it she wasn't) but that will be little consolation if she gets 12 points for failure to name the driver.

[letsmakeamark]

It is one offence not two. as the police are only chasing one offence.

[apocalypsedreams]

The court dates are identical, but there are two summons' documents, for separate offences.

[letsmakeamark]

Its one offence. however if there are two could you split these up and explain what these are ? According to what has been originally written by the op one offence has been committed. There fore 6 ponts ms90 is the code.

[Aretnap]

The OP's friend has two summons documents for two speeding offences and two s172 offences. Saying "it's one offence" over and over again won't make a blind bit of difference to that fact.

 

The friend was asked who was driving her car at a particular time and place. She (allegedly) didn't provide the info. One offence.

 

She was then asked who was driving her car at a different time and (possibly) a different place. She (allegedly) didn't provide that info either. Second offence.

 

Granted the two requests relate to two incidents a relatively short time apart but it doesn't really matter whether they were an hour or a week apart - it's still two speeding offences, two s172 requirements and two MS90 convictions if neither was answered correctly.

 

To get back on topic it's not entirely clear whether the CPS are claiming that no nominations were received at all, that no nominations were received within the required timeframe or that a nomination was received but it was not sufficiently unequivocal in its identification of the driver. We also don't know exactly how the reply was phrased, whether it was posted in time that it should have arrived within 28 days, or how sure she is that it wasn't her driving. It's difficult to say what the way forward is without knowing those things.