Speeding Summons?

Minrich

ChumLee wrote: »

You don't need to prove anything.

You simply need evidence of the alleged offence.

The evidence being the photo only .That evidence will need to be disclosed.

Mercdriver

Minrich wrote: »

The evidence being the photo only .That evidence will need to be disclosed prior to the court case if the defendant requests it .

You don't understand at all. The defendant can request the photo all they want, but if the safety partnership don't want to release it, there is absolutely nothing the defendant can do. They often do send photos provided you don't use the word evidence in the request. The usual advice (as given on pepipoo) is to ask for photos to assist in identifying the driver. They usually do but are under no obligation to do so. Being unable to identify the driver from the photo is also no defence.

If after the pleading hearing, having pleaded not guilty, then you can demand all the evidence you want.

Rover_Driver

Minrich wrote: »

The S172 requirement needs to have a reason behind it in order to ask , they cannot just send you the requirement .

The reason for the s.172 requirement in the OP's case is that the police are investigating and collecting evidence in respect of a driver of a vehicle who, it is alleged, has exceeded a speed limit. Part of that investigation will be the s.172 requirement for the keeper to nominate the driver.

They do not need any other evidence or proof.

Minrich

Mercdriver wrote: »

You don't understand at all. The defendant can request the photo all they want, but if the safety partnership don't want to release it, there is absolutely nothing the defendant can do. They often do send photos provided you don't use the word evidence in the request. The usual advice (as given on pepipoo) is to ask for photos to assist in identifying the driver. They usually do but are under no obligation to do so. Being unable to identify the driver from the photo is also no defence.

If after the pleading hearing, having pleaded not guilty, then you can demand all the evidence you want.

On pepipoo ! Apart from reading the internet , where do you get you knowledge base for these matters?
It cannot be refused if the defendant requests it , as you say once the case is going to trial .

Mercdriver

Minrich wrote: »

On pepipoo !
It cannot be refused if the defendant requests it .

It can. It's only after pleading not guilty at the pleading hearing that the defendant can demand the evidence.

ChumLee

Mercdriver wrote: »

They don't need a photo to issue a s.127. They just need an allegation. Many are issued in the case of minor incidents in supermarket car parks for instance.

This thread is all about a gatso offence so a photo is critical.

ChumLee

Minrich wrote: »

The evidence being the photo only .That evidence will need to be disclosed.

After a not guilty plea has been entered not before.

ChumLee

Rover_Driver wrote: »

The reason for the s.172 requirement in the OP's case is that the police are investigating and collecting evidence in respect of a driver of a vehicle who, it is alleged, has exceeded a speed limit. Part of that investigation will be the s.172 requirement for the keeper to nominate the driver.

They do not need any other evidence or proof.

They would need evidence of the alleged offence to substantiate the 172 in the event of a not guilty plea. So evidence of excess speed would be required.

Rover_Driver

ChumLee wrote: »

They would need evidence of the alleged offence to substantiate the 172 in the event of a not guilty plea. So evidence of excess speed would be required.

An allegation of an offence is all that is necessary for a s.172 requirement to be served - see s.172(2), Road Traffic Act 1988 - nothing about evidence.

thebullsback

I had a not sure who the driver was incident a few years ago before they upped the punishment to six points big fine .
My advice name yourself even if it wasn't you driving at the time unfortunately the motorist in this country is a "cash cow" and normal rules of law do not apply. Had you been found with a smoking gun in your hand and a dead body at your feet if you said it wasn't me guv then the courts would have to prove your guilt in a car however things change and YOU have to prove your innocence .GOOD LUCK