But unfortunately Perplexity's post doesn't help as you are dealing with the manufacturer for some reason, rather than insisting that the retailer fulfil his legal duties.

Absolutely so, but I just wanted to make the point about Scotland being different for any lurkers who read through this thread later

At the point they send a NIP, they also include a S172 request for they driver's details. As this is an information-gathering exercise, they are not required to provide any evidence whatsoever. The fact that they have sent you photographs is already beyond what is required of them. Did you send the form (or a letter) back informing them of who the driver(s) could have been? If not, that you will have been charged with a completely separate offence of failure to supply.

In England & Wales; the situation is different in Scotland.

If it is a PROW (Private Right of Way) then I suspect that you are limited to passing and re-passing over it only. There will probably no right to park - disabled or otherwise.

If you have a right of way over this land, you may remove the gate and lock to allow you to freely pass.

Ignore it! Have a read of the other threads on here relating to both Euro and PPCs (Private Parking Companies0

No. If the part isn't available, then it isn't available - end of. It's Honda not Hogwarts, they can't simply magic one up from thin air.

Wrong again (2 out of 2).

I definitely don't work for the DVLA - I work in a school! However, the query from the DVLA would imply tat the new keeper has applied for a V5 and DVLA have no record of receiving the old one from you telling them of the change of keeper. As asked above, did you receive the (non-statutory) acknowledgement? Thanks for the compliment Dennis:lol:

I would recommend checking building regs asap. You cannot normally have a conservatory open to the house; there has to be a door for reasons of energy efficiency

Not so. the valid ground of appeal is that the vehicle was left in that position without the consent of the owner. It was left there by an agent of the AA, unsupervised by you.

I suspect that the cyclist has now realised that as he was on the major road, then the driver was liable and can get his bike repaired, etc. on the driver's insurance. At this stage, the Police will be seeking to find out the driver's details having been given a VRM. Unless there was injury, they are unlikely to take any further action other than pass on the driver's details to the cyclist to make a claim against the driver. She may a ticking off for not reporting, but if they want to go further, then I suspect that her reasonable defence is that both agreed that nobody was hurt and that was the end of the matter.

An amber light also means stop. The offence is complete when any part of the vehicle continues across the stop line - even if the front wheels were already across the line, you are still guilty of an offence.

Although you have resurrected a thread that is almost 5 years old, my previous reply stands. There is no 'contract' and thus no applicable T&Cs. Council Tax is a statutory matter, like income tax etc.

Some traffic light cameras double as speed cameras - detecting speed when the lights are green. However, they always flash from behind. the OP might have triggered the other camera, but it will not produce sufficient evidence of any offence for a prosecution.

There is no requirement whatsoever for lines on the road for a Gatso; there is for a Truevelo. Gatso requires a secondary check to be performed before prosecution. This was originally done by using size of vehicle in the photographs; latterly and for ease of use, white lines are painted a known distance apart. If the lines are non-existent or covered, then it reverts to the earlier measuring system. Truvelo, when used in front facing mode, takes the single picture of the vehicle (and driver) as the car is on the three closely spaced lines just before the device. This is the secondary check If the device gets the primary speed wrong, then the camera will trigger at the wrong time. And Old Snowy is absolutely correct about the colour of the flash...

1) How? 2) How would you manage with lease cars/hire cars/etc where the RK is not the owner 3) Ownership has absolutely nothing to do with registration or the DVLA

No, they can't be deducted from your salary without a Court Order (which they won't get)

No

RayKay's advice is spot on. Ensure that the DVLA are informed of what is happening in writing. Make ure the Court inform them if the matter is set aside for a new trial

If they wish to proceed, then they have 6 months to 'lay the information' before a Magistrates' Court in order for a summons to be issued. Under case law, they then have 3 years to prosecute. What was the alleged offence and did he name himself as driver. If is always worth a quick phone call to ensure that they have received the s.172 reply.

What about any other driver named on the policy who could still drive? A disqualified driver can hold car insurance (with a named driver as chauffeur)

As the case is now with the Court, any notification as to date, time and venue will come from the Court and not the DVLA. Likewise, the DVLA should be communicating with the Court if they wish to make any changes to their case - like dropping it.

Cautions and convictions will remain on both standard or enhanced CRB for ever. FPNs do not.