Keeper Liability: Easy to Defeat

peter_the_piper

That reminds me of a recent case, sued wife and husband separately, both chucked out.

ManxRed

Is 'don't know' a valid response?

give_them_FA

Good idea. We can name the driver as Dont No. He's a Vietnamese gentleman.

ManxRed

He's a good friend of Hoo Cairs.

Seriously, what if the RK genuinely doesn't know who was driving. Is that a valid response?

give_them_FA

If the law says (as it appears to) that the RK can be pursued if the PPC has not been given the name and address of the driver, then the route by which the information has failed to arrive appears to be immaterial. So, I don't think that "don't know" will serve as any excuse. As there is no requirement to respond, it seems to me that the reason for a lack of response will be immaterial.

peter_the_piper

You know that any appeal naming the driver will automatically get lost/never recieved etc.

ManxRed

Undoubtedly.

treeboa

perhaps what we need is a standard reply, no names nothing more than a letter saying that the ppc replying further means the `company` has now accepted they have entered a contract which requires payment to cover losses, got to be worth £10 higher than their current `charges` and unless a check/postal order to the said amount is included no further communication will be forthcoming, of course there will be an appeal procedure - a waste paper bin

of course you could find that the ppc then use our tactic and refuse to contact further