Raykay
-
Posts
1,267 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
3
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Post article
CAGMag
Blogs
Keywords
Everything posted by Raykay
-
A complication could be the 'not guilty' plea, have you documentation that you had insurance for the vehicle at the time.
-
The initial stage is the service of the s.172 requirement and responsibility to identify the driver - there is nothing to prove at that point. Once the driver has been identified, that is when the matter of the underlying offence is dealt with. The driver is not entitled to any proof or evidence until a court hearing and a not guilty pleas is made, It is only then that the driver is entitled to the evidence or proof that the prosecution will be relying on. If, as in your case, the driver is not identified, whoever was served with the s.172 requirement would need to satisfy the court that they could not, with reasonable diligence, identify the driver. Which would include all the enqiries etc. made in attempts to identify the driver, not just relying on asking for a photo. Without the identication of the driver, the underlying offence cannot be dealt with, only the s.172 offence of failing to nominate the driver.
-
Some forces do not supply the photo, or reply saying that the photo would not help to identify the driver. The photos are only taken to identify the vehicle (some photos don't show the driver), it is the responsibility of the person receiving the s.172 requirement to establish and nominate who the driver was at the time. Unfortunately giving the information about possible drivers does not comply with that requirement. They would be expected to show what reasonable diligence they used, other enquiries etc., to establish who the driver was - not just asking for the photo.
-
If whoever was sent the form did not identify the actual driver, they will be guilty of the offence - s.172 (3), Road Traffic Act 1988. To be found not guilty they would need to convince the court that they used 'reasonable diligence' and were still unable to identify the driver - s.172 (4) of the same act. They would not be entitled to any evidence of the offence at that stage, but some forces may only send a photograph if it is requested 'to help identify the driver'.
-
It is not an endorseable offence, it could depend what the insurance company ask.
-
Historic vehicles are required to be licensed in the same way as other vehicles, it is just that no excise duty is payable. They do not need an MOT.
-
Not quite, there may be 'no money in it' for the DVLA contractor (not a DVLA official) for clamping abandoned vehicles, but it is the DVLA who prosecute for the offence of keeping an unlicensed vehicle, abandoned or not, which is the same offence that you have committed - contrary to s.29, Vehicles Excise & Registration Act 1994. The 14 days you mentioned is a time limit for a partial refund of the clamping fee if the vehicle is licensed within those 14 days. As your car was the subject of an off road notification it is only exempt from the requirement to be licensed if it is not on a public road, or being taken for an MOT test. What you should have done is had your car moved off the public road while you tried to arrange for it to be repaired, rather than leaving it unlicensed on a public road, which is what has caused the problem for you.
-
That would be the penalty for using a vehicle with no insurance - s.143, Road Traffic Act 1988, The penalty for s.144A is different - sch.2, Part 1, Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988, as amended by s.22, Road Safety Act 2006. Level 3 fine only, no points or disqualification.
-
A level 3 fine + any costs etc. - No points.
-
It doesn't matter where it is stored for that offence - s.144A, Road Traffic Act 1988.
-
NIP with incorrect speeding offence
Raykay replied to littlelamb010's topic in Speeding and Motoring Offences
It would be 70mph for cars, but the OP was restricted to 60mph as at was a Goods Vehicle. A Dual Carriageway only needs a central reservation - no mention of fence or crash barrier - sch.6, Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984. -
If it was 47 in a 30 limit, the Magistrates guidelines are 4 - 6 points and an income related fine, plus any costs etc. Courts no longer require licences to be submitted, but to accept a fixed penalty offer, the fixed penalty office still require the licence to be submitted to them, and the £100.
-
The 14 day limit only applies to the service of the NIP to the registered keeper - s.1,©,(ii), Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988 - (unless the exemption in s.2,(3) appliies) - it does not apply to the service of any subsequent NIPs.
-
If you didn't take out the licence when you purchased the vehicle, you would be liable for the penalty. It has nothing to do with sending anything to the DVLA.
-
With the words 'Indigo', 'penalty' and 'magistrates court', it could relate to a railway car park and a by-law claim.
-
Did you take out the licence as the new keeper, or as the existing keeper?
-
You need to apply for the V5C using form V62. The instructions on the New Keeper Supplement are that it is to be kept by the new keeper and not sent to the DVLA, unless the new V5C is not received within 4 weeks, and then to apply for it free with the supplement and the form V62. As you don't have the supplement, it will cost £25. One thing to check when you do receive your V5C is that they have not cancelled the vehicle licence and refunded the previous registered keeper.
-
Unfortunately not, only if you had kept the New Keeper Supplement and attached it to the V62 application form. It may also take about six weeks for them to send your V5C if they make enquiries of the old keeper.
-
The DVLA are notified of the change of keeper by the old keeper sending them the V5C with the new keepers details. You keep the New Keeper Supplement, not send it to the DVLA.
-
As the matter was dealt with at court, you would not need to send your licence anywhere, the court notify the DVLA of the penalty automatically. It is only required to be sent to the police to accept the fixed penalty.
-
If that is what happened, and she did not give the information (or it was late), then she would be guilty of the offence. The circumstances may be considered to be mitigation, not a defence.
-
As above, a s.172 form is required to be completed by the addressee, if that is a company, the reply needs to be 'on behalf of the company'. In your case it appears that 'the company' did not reply. You have now received a s.172 form addressed to you, so you need to complete and return it. Technically, 'the company' have committed the offence of failing to nominate the driver.
-
There was no original 'fine', an awareness course or a fixed penalty as an alternative to prosecution for can only be offered if certain conditions are met. Without receipt of the completed s.172 form identifying the driver, a prosecution for speeding would not be possible, so if your case was for speeding, they would have received the form. Have you checked with the Lancashire office that they sent documents to the correct address? If there was an admin error, it is mitigation to ask the court to consider the same level of penalty as the fixed penalty.
-
If the case was because you did not enclose your licence it would have been for speeding, and not failing to identify, but 6 points is above the guidelines for 51 in a 40. For that speed they are 3 - 4 points, and If you plead guilty I would expect about a £200-£300 fine. Did they have your correct address, or give any reason why you may not have receive the summons.
-
You need to contact the court to arrange to make a Statutory Declaration, but also the Lancashire processing office to try to establish why you did not receive any further letters or the summons, their reason may help when you make your application.
Latest
Our Picks
Reclaim the right Ltd
reg.05783665
reg. office:-
262 Uxbridge Road, Hatch End
England
HA5 4HS