Section 172

[rl4engc]

So Mrs.rl4's car was caught (fixed camera) doing 36 in a 30 zone, at the time we were both in the car, but cannot honestly remember who was driving as we tend to swap and share (It's the 'family car' - both insured to drive).

Photo provided on website only shows rear of car, so obviously not driver.
We don't keep a log of who drove when and where, as we're normal.

Anyone had this? My view is without further evidence (which doesn't exist) to help us ascertain the driver, neither of us can say with 100% certainty that it was us, we'd both be happy to go to magistrates court to confirm this.

In these circumstances would they just GTFO, or would they haul us up?

[clearedforlanding]

So Mrs.rl4's car was caught (fixed camera) doing 36 in a 30 zone, at the time we were both in the car, but cannot honestly remember who was driving as we tend to swap and share (It's the 'family car' - both insured to drive).

Photo provided on website only shows rear of car, so obviously not driver.
We don't keep a log of who drove when and where, as we're normal.

Anyone had this? My view is without further evidence (which doesn't exist) to help us ascertain the driver, neither of us can say with 100% certainty that it was us, we'd both be happy to go to magistrates court to confirm this.

In these circumstances would they just GTFO, or would they haul us up?

Mandate frontal photo. Contest from therr on.

[SimonMac]

(4) A person shall not be guilty of an offence by virtue of paragraph (a) of subsection (2) above if he shows that he did not know and could not with reasonable diligence have ascertained who the driver of the vehicle was.

That is the catch all statement, the registered keeper is culpable unless you can prove it was someone else

[stek]

Could end up with an MS90 and you don't want that unless you're fine with your insurance premiums going up 4/5 times....

[clearedforlanding]

Mandate frontal photo. Contest from therr on.

It was ME! If all they have is a rear photo, then I am really sorry I borrowed you car without your permission.

[rl4engc]

Cheers all, thought so.

Always worth having all drivers named on all cars.

Though I remember a few years ago some of my band mates had to keep 'taking' points when their bus kept getting caught. I guess being a business they had to keep a log or something and the 'can't remember' argument wouldn't wash.

[rl4engc]

Could end up with an MS90 and you don't want that unless you're fine with your insurance premiums going up 4/5 times....

How so? They can't force us to remember.

We're not failing to furnish, we're saying "We don't know without more evidence, please provide more evidence so we can tell you."

[rl4engc]

It was ME! If all they have is a rear photo, then I am really sorry I borrowed you car without your permission.

In fact I was really hoping there was another completely different car going round with the same plates.

[AtW]

One of you will get it if you go to court, possibly both - registered keeper is on the hook anyway, given that it's 36 in 30 then it could be fine but no points as long as you attend speed awareness course which they may offer if you got 0 points.

[LondonManc]

One of you will get it if you go to court, possibly both - registered keeper is on the hook anyway, given that it's 36 in 30 then it could be fine but no points as long as you attend speed awareness course which they may offer if you got 0 points.

An off the record chat may well establish this.

Key point is, do either have any points already?