Single Justice Procedure - Speeding

Imperial1847

One of our company vehicles was caught by camera doing 37mph in a 30mph zone and received a NOIP. We gave this to the driver (mistakenly) to fill in and return. He has not done this and we (the company) have now received a Single Justice Procedure document asking us to claim to be Guilty or Not Guilty to identify the driver. Whats the best way to go forward with this?

Quentin

For best advice on proper fines take this to pepipoo. (But the form would have been clearly addressed to the RK, not the driver!)


(This forum majors on private parking company charges)

The_Deep

Simple, you tell them who the driver was. You should have done this in the first place.

HO87

SJP - in this case - means that your company has effectively been summonsed to court for the offence of failing to provide the details of the driver at the time of an alleged offence to the police in response to a requirement from them that you (the company) do so within 28 days of receiving the notice.

This doesn't mean that the company is being held responsible for the speeding and whether you provide the driver details now or not (assuming that this might still be within 6 months of the alleged offence) is unlikely to change the situation. If we are now beyond 6 months of the alleged offence then no case can be brought against the driver in any event.

If the company were minded to fight the case (something I would not recommend) then they would have to demonstrate that they exercised reasonable diligence in their efforts to identify the driver. On the basis of your post it would appear that the company failed right from the outset to do so in that it didn't even read the letter properly.

The driver was under no legal obligation to respond to the letter he was handed in any way, shape or form. It wasn't addressed to him.

The offence of "failing to furnish" as it is known carries a hefty fine and a mandatory 6 points - for an individual. The company cannot be awarded points but is likely to be fined. A director may be held personally culpable in certain circumstances - and if there is a demonstrable connection between the company and the driver (e.g. the driver just happens to be a director) then the company - and the director - might find the court process somewhat bumpy.

The_Deep

Even police forces have to name the driver, read this.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/chief-to-apologise-in-court-for-failure-to-name-police-driver-caught-in-speed-trap-190449.html