Speeding Fine Scotland 17 year just passed test.

oliel

Can anyone offer advice.  My son passed his test last month and started a new job.  We live in a rural area and he was driving to work early the morning in the city and we just received a notice of intention to proscecute letter from police scotland that we have to fill in with the name and details of driver.  It says he was going 41 in a 30 area.   The area is a bit of a nightmare as goes between many different speed limits - he thought it was still a 40.   Will he get banned from driving? He's really upset and worried he has just started his first job which involves driving.  I understand 6 points for a new driver is a ban.  Any advice greatly appreciated.   

Car_54

At that speed he should be offered a fixed penalty - 3 points and £100.

(In England he'd be offered an awareness course)

6 points for  a new (up to two years) driver is NOT a ban: the licence is revoked. The big difference is that he/she can apply for a new provisional immediately and get back on the road as soon as tests allow.

fatbelly

Yes in England at 10% +8 he'd be offered a speeding awareness course, probably.

They are actually quite useful. I've been much more able to determine what speed limits apply, and stick to them, since the course.

To register a speed of 41 it was probably showing 45 on his speedo. He does need to be more careful. If there are regularly spaced lampposts it is likely to be a 30 limit

TadleyBaggie

Going "unsigned" is still an option in Scotland, if done it will result in no points or fine. 

TooManyPoints

Just to elaborate a little, “going unsigned” means he completes the “Section 172” request for driver’s details, but does not sign it. There is case law used in courts in England & Wales which has ruled that this does not meet the requirements of s172 – the response must be signed. 

But case law in E&W is not binding on Scottish courts. So far, the Procurator Fiscal has not chosen to take a driver who responds with an unsigned return to court. But the process almost always results in hassle from the police until the speeding matter “times out” six months after the date of the alleged offence. It usually results in a visit or two, urging the recipient to sign the return. 

Herzlos

I haven't spent long looking, but I can't find any claims about a successful unsigned attempt in Scotland. Or an unsuccessful one, to be fair. A few folk asking on motoring forums about 2007 and then going quiet.

Have you got any citations?

I'd be surprised such a loophole would still exist, as submitting any paperwork incomplete will be seen as not submitting it properly.

Mildly_Miffed

oliel said:

It says he was going 41 in a 30 area.   The area is a bit of a nightmare as goes between many different speed limits - he thought it was still a 40.

Even if he missed the change-of-limit sign, I'm sure his instructor explained to him that 40 limits must have repeaters - whilst without repeaters (but with streetlights) the default limit is 30.

Arunmor

I got away with it once but that was before Police Scotland came in to force and Strathclyde couldn't be bothered doing the leg work for Lothian and Borders

TooManyPoints

Quite a few successful examples on the unfortunately now defunct Pepipoo. FTLA (Pepipoo's successor) has had one or two examples but no reports back yet..

As far as is known, the PF still does not take unsigned s172 cases to trial. It plays a blinking game but always blinks first and folds. I think there is a fear that a court will not be swayed by the English precedents, acquit and open the floodgates. Of course the risk is that this could change at any time, especially if lots of people do it.  

I'd be surprised such a loophole would still exist, as submitting any paperwork incomplete will be seen as not submitting it properly.

The issue is that the law (s172) does not prescribe how the information must be provided. It simply says the recipient "...shall give such information as to the identity of the driver as he may be required to give by or on behalf of a chief officer of police." It doesn't say it has to be in the form of a signed statement which can then be used as evidence to prove who was driving.

Section 12 of the Road Traffic Offenders Act says that a signed s172 statement is evidence enough to prove who was driving but it does not make it an offence to provide an unsigned return.

The issue was settled (in E&W) in the case of Idris Francis v DPP which reached the High Court in March 2004. The court ruled that s172 RTA and s12 RTOA should be taken together and it is this case which the courts in E&W rely on. Whilst this precedent might be persuasive in Scotland, the PF so far has chosen not to test it.

Aretnap

Herzlos said:

I haven't spent long looking, but I can't find any claims about a successful unsigned attempt in Scotland. Or an unsuccessful one, to be fair. A few folk asking on motoring forums about 2007 and then going quiet.

Have you got any citations?

I'd be surprised such a loophole would still exist, as submitting any paperwork incomplete will be seen as not submitting it properly.

The legally arguements were thrashed out (in England at least) in the case of Francis v DPP (2004).

https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2004/591.html

Broadly, the law requires that you provide information about the identity of the driver, but does not (explicitly) say that the information has to be provided in any particular format. There is (or was) a reasonable argument that the police cannot impose legal requirements on the public over and above those that the law explicitly allows them to impose, and that therefore while they can require you to provide the information in some manner, they can't force you to do more than the bare minimum that the law requires (like using their silly little form rather than providing the information over the phone say, or signing the form if you do choose to use it.)

That argument was rejected by the English High Court, which ruled that the police can make reasonable requirements about the manner in which you provide the information, including that it be provided in writing and that it be signed. Nowadays refusing to sign the form in England just gets you 6 points and a large fine. However English case law is not binding on Scottish courts, so it is perfectly possible that a Scottish court might come to a different conclusion.

The general assumption is that if push came to shove the Scottish courts would probably reach the same conclusion as the English ones, but so far there seems to have been a lot of push but very little shove. Until a case actually comes before the higher Scottish courts nobody can say for certain whether the loophole exists in Scotland or not. If the number of people who return forms unsigned remains low, it may be that the Procurator Fiscal has judged that it's better to let a small number of people get away with speeding than take the small but non-zero chance of the courts delivering a judgement which would result in the effective collapse of the speed camera system in Scotland (at least until Parliament got around to changing the law).