Aretnap, I am thinking of doing that too, but I dont think they will provide it to me and it could possibly be that he may have allowed someone else to borrow the car. in the first instance my responsibility would be to answer their questions such as: Dear xxx "not for use as evidence under PACE ACT I acknowledge receipt of your letter-dated 16th January 2012 and respond accordingly. Having read your letter I found it ambiguous on a number of grounds, firstly you ask for information about the driver of the car, while at the same time alleging that I am the driver based on your subjective impression of images, thus informing me in the letter that I might face prosecution, this to me is clear breach of Article Six of the European Convention on Human Rights Act. It is also arguably a breach of my human rights in that I am being subjected to unreasonable and possibly unlawful pressure by being placed into a 'accept the offence now” and save yourself ‘harassment later' position. I regard your allegation with the utmost concern as I am being asked to make a very important decision, which could very seriously affect my future quality of life. Nevertheless, I respond to your queries accordingly: • I did not indicate on the form reasons for Mr smith being in possession of my car, this was just a genuine oversight • I lent the car to Mr Smith on the 18th October 2011 • Mr Smith was a lodger/visitor at the address that I supplied • With regards to Mr Smiths date of birth, this is a little difficult to retrieve as it is somewhat personal, but I am trying to retrieve this and will forward as soon as I have this information I will help assist you and attempt to seek a telephone number and/or forward further details of any other person who could be asked to give information and may lead to the identification of Mr Mr Smith. I am willing to cooperate and help assist you in identifying the driver and if there is anything else that I can do please contact me. Regards This is the best I can do so far..any other suggestions, points for me to consider are welcomed.

Many thanks Old Snowy, I am furnishing as much details to my knowledge that I have, your points noted, but based on principles I seriously dont have a problem retrieving such information its just based on principle their letter is very contradicting as I found it ambiguous on a number of grounds, firstly they ask for information about the driver of the car (which i am in the process of retrieving), while at the same time alleging that I am the driver based on their subjective impression of images, thus informing me in the letter that I might face prosecution, this to me is clear breach of Article Six of the European Convention on Human Rights Act. is it not?

He had showed me the time that he did have insurance to drive the vehicle, as he was fully comp.

The driver was a family friend, not a relative, but why would I expect to know his date of birth, I hardly know my family members. I have asked other members to provide me with forwarding information of the driver, and awaiting for information. ut your point noted and will seek expert legal advice.

Thank for the advice guys, This is genuine and no dishonestly. I was not the driver as I was actually working on that day. In terms of trace, the named driver was a visitor, they could not trace him because they were trying to identify him through electoral register etc..In terms of being summoned for the s172, which I was as the registered keeper, but forwarded details of the alleged driver at the time. I suppose my question really was: they are asking for the alleged drivers dob....i have no clue, he's not a relative friend, not as if needed to make a note of dob as I didt foresee what was going to happen. Also I dont think its fair that Im being enticed into a confession, just because the driver has not sent the NIP/S172....

I have a scenario and seriously do not know how to respond to a NIP/sec 172 notice that I had received in October 2011. As the registered keeper I had provided the identity of the driver, unfortunately the driver has not responded back to any of the notices, so the police authority have written back to me to state the following: a) why i did not indicate on the form why the driver was in possession of my car b)Provide further details of the driver to accept him as a nomination such as date of birth, address as they can not find a trace of him at the address i provided c) They want me to re-consider my decision and get me to accept liability as the driver based on their brief view of the images that the driver may be a female and very well be me!!! I would really appreciate your comment and views although this is my response in draft: Dear "not for use as evidence under PACE ACT" I refer to your letter dated 16th January 2012 and respond accordingly. Firstly, I am fully aware that the NIP itself specified severe penalties for “providing false information”, in which case it is not my statutory duty to trace the driver, but to supply you with the identity i.e name and address of the alleged person or information which could lead you to the identification of the driver at the time of the alleged offence:- The Section 172 of the Road Traffic Act 1988, subsection 2 (a) the person keeping the vehicle shall give such information as to the identity of the driver as he may be required to give by or on behalf of a chief officer of police Your reiteration of the severity and consequences in your letter informing me of providing false details and enticing me to reconsider my decision to confess liability, is not only deemed to me as oppressive but actually attempting me to pervert the course of justice. Irrespective of the above, in terms why I did not indicate on the form reasons for Mr Smith being in possession of my car, this was just a genuine oversight; I had lent the vehicle to Mr Smith from 15-20th October 2011, the only time I was aware that the offence had taken place was when I was in receipt of the NIP notice in October. In relation to me providing you with Mr Smith's date of birth, I am unable to provide such ‘personal’ details, I’m certain that he would be able to disclose such information himself, from my understanding Mr Smith was a visitor at the address last known to me where he was living which I provided. I also feel that I am being enticed into a confession for an offence under S172, to make such allegations and presumption based on your subjective impression of images from the speed camera, to me is unfair and since you have made such a allegation, I would now like to see the supported photographic evidence, whilst asserting my right under the Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights Act. Lastly, I do not believe that I have committed an offence as Under Section 172 of the Road Traffic Act, I have provided the name and address of the person who I believe to the best of my knowledge was the driver of my vehicle at the time of the alleged motoring offence. I will attempt to seek a telephone number and/or forward further details of any other person who could be asked to give information and may lead to the identification of Mr Smith. Do you think im being to harsh?? Am I right in my response? Anything else I should consider? Do I have to respond?