producer for car docs

[batty_uk]

Anyone know what happens if the reg number on a "producer" written oput by police has wrong reg number on it? Is it still legal?

for example if the reg number is A120xxx and they put A102xxx

[Bookworm]

In the NHS forum? Why?

 

Moving you to parking/traffic forum.

[PhantomReclaimer]

As far as I'm aware it voids the producer. However, you are dealing with possible criminal scanctions by not producing, so I wouldn't take my word for it if I were you.

 

J.

[bigmama59]

I had one of these with totally the wrong number on it but as it was given after an accident that I wanted paying out on, I thought it was better to just take it to the police station and let them sort it out.

[batty_uk]

In the NHS forum? Why?

 

Moving you to parking/traffic forum.

 

 

 

 

 

sorry............ was totally accidental

[patdavies]

As far as I'm aware it voids the producer. However, you are dealing with possible criminal scanctions by not producing, so I wouldn't take my word for it if I were you.

 

J.

 

Absolutely not.

 

You have been given a HO/RT1 to produce the documents required. As it is not your vehicle, you MUST attend the police station with your docs and explain the error. They should make a note of it and pass the details produced and the note to the officer who issued the HO/RT1

 

If you do nothing, you will be prosecute for failure to produce

[batty_uk]

Hi Pat, the hort1 was given to my son who (being a stoppy teen) decided he would let them take him to court just to be awkward. He received a summons to court with a copy of the statement by the PC who has changed the reg number to the correct number and initialled his changes. (He was seen outside the house a few days later taking down the correct number) I encouraged my son to write to the court explaining the situation and which he did.

I just want to know if the hort1 is still legal with the incorrect reg number on it.

[chesham]

HORT1 don't exist anymore, as far as I am aware?

 

Anyhow, as this wasn't challenged at the beginning of the episode and the officer has probably submitted an addendum to the original statement, then I think your teenage son might be in for a grilling by a magistrate! Under PACE (Police and Criminal Evidence Act) regulations, a police officer can make an additional statement to the one presented to the court and I'm not entirely sure that this would be a defence.

 

The reason I say this is because of my experience within the police force. Very often, someone would report a vehicle or we would see one, and note down an incorrect VRM (vehicle registration marker) and when it came to writing up an incident report or a statement, it would normally state "we were given an index of A123XXX, and came across a vehicle matching the description with an index of A321XXX.."

 

All criminal (and most civil) law is based on the maxim of evidence "beyond reasonable doubt" and I don't think that in these particular circumstances that the incorrect VRM wod be enough to show that it put the evidence "within doubt". If it was a speeding ticket or a parking ticket, or another offence which did not involve the driver, then that would be a different matter, because it would be an offence involving the vehicle and the crux of that would be the ACTUAL vehicle.

 

As your son was stopped, it was more than likely to do with his actions whilst operating a motorised vehicle, rather than the vehicle itself and therefore the crux of this matter is the identity of the driver - the vehicle that he was using when he was stopped is (almost) not important (in the wider sense of the term).

[rogerebaker]

Hi Pat, the hort1 was given to my son who (being a stoppy teen) decided he would let them take him to court just to be awkward. He received a summons to court with a copy of the statement by the PC who has changed the reg number to the correct number and initialled his changes. (He was seen outside the house a few days later taking down the correct number) I encouraged my son to write to the court explaining the situation and which he did.

I just want to know if the hort1 is still legal with the incorrect reg number on it.

 

A HORT/1 is a legal document which is signed by both the officer and your son, a copy of which will be produced at court. The fact that it has the wrong details on it dosnt mean it isnt a legal document. The fact that it has the wrong details on it may though render it completely useless in trying to prosecute your son for failing to produce the documents. If the error is pointed out to the CPS prior to the case I would be surprised if they proceeded. The fact that a summons has already been issued limits your options a little. I think you have no choice but to challange it. If you dont hes going to get convicted anyway !! Assuming that your son has the relevant documents I would take them to court as well, To prove they are in exhistance.

 

Kids dont you love em

[batty_uk]

Thanks for your replies,

my son was not driving the car, it was outside the house. The car had been bought that day and we had been in the process of laying flags on the garden to park it there while he did some work to make it road worthy.

He is a banned driver until next month so he wanted to have a car ready to go so to speak when his licence was back.

I just wanted to know where we stood and what to expect at court (which is today).

Seems he has been adhering to the law for over 2 years and suddenly something so stupid may thwart all his efforts.

Will let you know later what happened.

 

Thanks

Batty

[batty_uk]

HORT1 don't exist anymore, as far as I am aware?

 

Anyhow, as this wasn't challenged at the beginning of the episode and the officer has probably submitted an addendum to the original statement, then I think your teenage son might be in for a grilling by a magistrate! Under PACE (Police and Criminal Evidence Act) regulations, a police officer can make an additional statement to the one presented to the court and I'm not entirely sure that this would be a defence.

 

The reason I say this is because of my experience within the police force. Very often, someone would report a vehicle or we would see one, and note down an incorrect VRM (vehicle registration marker) and when it came to writing up an incident report or a statement, it would normally state "we were given an index of A123XXX, and came across a vehicle matching the description with an index of A321XXX.."

 

All criminal (and most civil) law is based on the maxim of evidence "beyond reasonable doubt" and I don't think that in these particular circumstances that the incorrect VRM wod be enough to show that it put the evidence "within doubt". If it was a speeding ticket or a parking ticket, or another offence which did not involve the driver, then that would be a different matter, because it would be an offence involving the vehicle and the crux of that would be the ACTUAL vehicle.

 

As your son was stopped, it was more than likely to do with his actions whilst operating a motorised vehicle, rather than the vehicle itself and therefore the crux of this matter is the identity of the driver - the vehicle that he was using when he was stopped is (almost) not important (in the wider sense of the term).

Hi yes it is definatly a hort1 it is on the document he has in his possession. Thanks for the advice .

 

Batty

[batty_uk]

Hi update to last postings..........

when my son was issued the producer he was in the house.........car had just been delivered he had just bought it from a private seller.

my partnert and my son were in the process of moving one car to put this new one on drive as it was not taxed.

my son was banned for 2 years for no insurance, tax etc so it was a very hard lesson to learn.

however, he planned to work on this car so it would be road worthy (it did have a current mot) for when he got jis licence back on 17th dec 2006. he was not driving, or even sitting in the car when he was given the hort1

 

he has to return to court in feb 07 for a hearing as th pc was not there today. they are charging him with "using" the vehicle...............what does that mean?

 

:confused:

[PhantomReclaimer]

they are charging him with "using" the vehicle...............what does that mean?

 

I think you "use" a vehicle on a public road even if you aren't driving it at the time. However, if he didn't put it there then I fail to see how he could be using it.

 

P.

[StudentInDebt]

they are charging him with "using" the vehicle...............wha t does that mean?

 

It probably means that the vehicle was untaxed and on a public road.

[rogerebaker]

When you say using.

 

What are they accusing him off.

 

Using without insurance ?

 

Using without MOT ?

 

At each court a solicitor is available usually free of charge especially if the case is complex which this sounds like it is. In light of the info you have disclosed it may be worth speaking to them.

 

From the sounds of it your son has a fair bit to lose if convicted so I would get some expert advice.

[funkyparott]

I don't know the full facts, but magistrates don't have a problem in sending convicted disqual drivers to prison for driving whilst disqualified (especially if you get a stroppy disctrict judge as opposed to magistrates).

 

Tread very carefully and get your son legal representation.

 

Are you sure you are being told the whole story here by him?

 

Using in legal speak tends to refer to the insurance element.

ie You use a car without insurance

wheras you drive a car with no license.

 

Its just the way it is written when they are laying information.

 

FP

[breadline]

Why dont they give peeps a break if i had a ticket for every time i had pushed a car i was working on off the drive and on again i could wall paper my front room:rolleyes:

 

Sadly used means on the road so expected to be fully legal. If a car is on the road its seen as being on the road and so using the road and so in the state of being used.

 

If the car hand been sold to your son and was then in your sons name then, it became his car and his responsibility an so all documents would be requested.

 

Sadly if he was in it or not makes no difference, but if you can prove it was delivered that day it may help you just grab what evidence you can of the situation and go for it.

 

We had a case thrown out of court regarding lights on a car, and the case was thrown out due to their own laziness of paper work.

you never know until the day.

 

Its hard when its your kids, and out of our hands:(

BL

[Bailiffchaser]

Two quick points. If ever you goto magis court and the prosecution try and ajourn the case refuse. The case then gets thrown out as the defendant does not have a case to answer to. 2. even though the car owner is your son that does not mean that you or your husband cant drive it as long as you have third party on anycar. If your son is being done for the tax then not to worry. If insurance then Technically as your son has recieved the car and it is in the previous owners name the previous owner is liable unless he can show what time the vehicle was dropped off!! A bit of a technicality but works if you see how.

[batty_uk]

Hi, my son lives with me and my partner was present when he was given the producer. My son was not and has not driven this car of that i am absolutely certain

[batty_uk]

Hi the magistrates have decided it will go to trial and wants the police officer present for morew info. We asked for duty solicitor and was told they would not see him for driving offences!

He now has a solicitor and is seeking advice.

[patdavies]

Two quick points. If ever you goto magis court and the prosecution try and ajourn the case refuse.

 

You can object, but the actual decision is for the Magistrates and they usually allow a CPS application for adjournment the first time round.

 

The case then gets thrown out as the defendant does not have a case to answer to. 2. even though the car owner is your son that does not mean that you or your husband cant drive it as long as you have third party on anycar. If your son is being done for the tax then not to worry. If insurance then Technically as your son has recieved the car and it is in the previous owners name the previous owner is liable unless he can show what time the vehicle was dropped off!!

 

And you think that the Police will not ask the previous owner if this is claimed!

 

A bit of a technicality but works if you see how.

 

No it doesn't, because regardless of who might be holding the insurance, it has not been produced and that is the offence - failure to produce.

 

 

Waht we need from the OP is the actual offence(s), exactly as listed in the summons

[breadline]

. 2. even though the car owner is your son that does not mean that you or your husband cant drive it as long as you have third party on anycar.

 

Hi Bailiff

I think this is if the person borrowing the other vehicle holds fully comp and the vehicle they are driving has to have a valid policy on it.

But its always best to read your insurers conditions first.

[patdavies]

duplicate post deleted

[patdavies]

Hi Bailiff

I think this is if the person borrowing the other vehicle holds fully comp and the vehicle they are driving has to have a valid policy on it.

But its always best to read your insurers conditions first.

 

Nope. There is no requirement for any insurance on the temporarily covered vehicle.

 

In the UK, vehicles are not insured - drivers are.

[Bailiffchaser]

So if the police approach the owner his father comes forward and says its under my control.Here is my insurance. Signed sealed delivered !!!!