We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
IMPORTANT: Please make sure your posts do not contain any personally identifiable information (both your own and that of others). When uploading images, please take care that you have redacted all personal information including number plates, reference numbers and QR codes (which may reveal vehicle information when scanned).
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
The Forum now has a brand new text editor, adding a bunch of handy features to use when creating posts. Read more in our how-to guide
MoJ - no Owner liability for byelaw 14
financerulez
Posts: 103 Forumite
Hi all
Thought you might be interested to see this:
https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/statistics_for_prosecutions_of_r
MoJ state:
"Please note 14(4)(i) is not itself an offence but simply stipulates the penalty for any of these three offences." [14(1) - 14(3)]
Those three offences only ever refer to 'person in charge of any motor vehicle'.
The enforcement byelaw 24(1) states that "Any person who breaches any of these Byelaws commits an offence" and we know offences can only be enforced by Magistrates' Court as confirmed previously by DfT. As the Owner liability clause is now definitely not an offence, it has no relevance.
This effectively confirms our thinking that there can be no Owner liability with regards to byelaw breaches, unless it can be proven first in Magistrates' Court that the Driver or 'person in charge of any motor vehicle' committed a breach of 14(1) - 14(3).
Therefore any threats from PPCs claiming the old tripe that "even if you were not the driver at the time of this incident you may still be liable" is proven false.
Note: Attached to the MOJs response are the statistics for prosecutions using byelaw 14, broken down by subsection (1)-(3) and year.
Enjoy
Thought you might be interested to see this:
https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/statistics_for_prosecutions_of_r
MoJ state:
"Please note 14(4)(i) is not itself an offence but simply stipulates the penalty for any of these three offences." [14(1) - 14(3)]
Those three offences only ever refer to 'person in charge of any motor vehicle'.
The enforcement byelaw 24(1) states that "Any person who breaches any of these Byelaws commits an offence" and we know offences can only be enforced by Magistrates' Court as confirmed previously by DfT. As the Owner liability clause is now definitely not an offence, it has no relevance.
This effectively confirms our thinking that there can be no Owner liability with regards to byelaw breaches, unless it can be proven first in Magistrates' Court that the Driver or 'person in charge of any motor vehicle' committed a breach of 14(1) - 14(3).
Therefore any threats from PPCs claiming the old tripe that "even if you were not the driver at the time of this incident you may still be liable" is proven false.
Note: Attached to the MOJs response are the statistics for prosecutions using byelaw 14, broken down by subsection (1)-(3) and year.
Enjoy
0
Comments
-
Furthermore; byelaw 24(4) states:-
"No person shall be subject to any penalty for breach of any of the Byelaws by disobeying a notice unless it is proved to the satisfaction of the Court before whom the complaint is laid that the notice referred to in the particular Byelaw was displayed".
0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 354.4K Banking & Borrowing
- 254.4K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 455.4K Spending & Discounts
- 247.3K Work, Benefits & Business
- 604K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 178.4K Life & Family
- 261.5K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards