Speeding Bad Photos show no evidence of who was driving

[gewag]

I have a "Notice of Intended Prosecution" speeding charge from a mobile camera 2 of us shared the driving that day but the photographic evidence provided by the police camera cant see clearly who was driving see attachments Regards

[wales01man]

They will want to know the driver its an offence not to tell look it up

[islandgirl]

You know who was driving. Tell the Police.

[gewag]

You know who was driving. Tell the Police.

That's the point we don't, My wife and I were away for the weekend and shared driving , the pic clearly doesn't show who was driving she would not want to take the points nore do I .

[gewag]

They will want to know the driver its an offence not to tell look it up

That's the point we don't, My wife and I were away for the weekend and shared driving , the pic clearly doesn't show who was driving she would not want to take the points nore do I .

[Pezza54]

I could be wrong, but I thought I read the registered keeper must prove they weren't the driver if they want to avoid the offence

[PallasAthena]

ANPR cameras rarely show who was driving although they may help you identify the place which might assist you identify the driver.

The photo with the s172 NIP identified the car not the driver. It's up to you as Registered Keeper to decide who was driving. Failing to name someone as driver is a more serious offence than the speeding and will get you, as RK, 6 points and a substantial fine.

It is very difficult to convince magistrates that you don't know who was driving. If it was as easy as just saying "we shared it and can't remember which of us was driving" people would try that on all the time!

You or your wife might offered a speed awareness course instead of points/penalty notice/prosecution. Depends on the speed recorded and whether you've been on a course in the last 3 years. That might help jog your memories as to which of you was driving.

EDIT Speed awareness course criteria here.If you've received a speed camera activation letter or notice | Metropolitan Police Takes about 3 hours done online on Zoom.

Course cost if eligible is around £90 from memory. But as it's training not a criminal penalty or conviction there are no points on licence , no criminal conviction, no fine, not recorded on police national computer or by DVLA, and (usually) it doesn't have to be disclosed to insurers so no insurance premium consequences. (You may deduce that I have recently done one. It's actually quite interesting!).

[islandgirl]

"It is very difficult to convince magistrates that you don't know who was driving. If it was as easy as just saying "we shared it and can't remember which of us was driving" people would try that on all the time!"

Exactly! We have heard it all before. In this situation, given that you know the time of the offence, this would most certainly not be a get out of jail free card - and I am one of the people who hear cases such as this...

[HandyAndy]

I could be wrong, but I thought I read the registered keeper must prove they weren't the driver if they want to avoid the offence

Yes, you are wrong. Speeding is a criminal offence and, as with all criminal offences, nobody has to prove their innocence.

"The person keeping he vehicle" has a duty to provide the driver's details. As above, failure to do so will see a charge of "failing to provide driver's details". On conviction this carries six points and an insurance crippling endorsement code (MS90) which will see considerably increased premiums for up to five years.

There is a statutory defence which says:

A person shall not be guilty of an offence...if he shows that he did not know and could not with reasonable diligence have ascertained who the driver of the vehicle was.

As islandgirl suggests, it is not an easy defence to make out. There have been one or two notable successes. Here's one:

https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2003/...heatherstewart

The pragmatic way to deal with this is to decide which of you was the most likely to have been driving and respond with their details.

[Pezza54]

So what would happen in the situation where the car is photographed speeding, the registered keeper proves he is abroad and couldn't be the driver. Nobody else drives his car.
Possibly a cloned number plate?

[HandyAndy]

He would be charged with "failing to provide driver's details".. He would have to go to court and plead not guilty, using the statutory defence I mentioned. That is, after the police had produced evidence to show he committed the offence.

That is somewhat different to the situation you described, where the police have no idea whether the person they accused committed the offence or not.

However, we digress.

[islandgirl]

So what would happen in the situation where the car is photographed speeding, the registered keeper proves he is abroad and couldn't be the driver. Nobody else drives his car.
Possibly a cloned number plate?

We may well accept that excuse in court - though not without requiring other proof (who is on the insurance, where was the vehicle kept during the time they were abroad, other evidence of a cloned plate etc). As always. proof would be key...

Re the very interesting case
https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2003/...heatherstewart
it was a District Judge not us mags - I cannot see that we would have been quite as trusting...

[Pezza54]

So the registered keeper has to prove his innocence? If he can't prove his innocence and the offence was local to where he lives, what happens then?

[islandgirl]

Well if he didn't everyone would say "it wasn't me guv". Not about proving innocence but about telling the court who was driving which is a legal requirement. If you say you can't you have to convince the court why.

[Pezza54]

The Hamilton loophole case wasn't decided in a high court so it didn't set precedence
Other registered keepers have tried the same argument (can't be sure who was driving) but failed dismally