I'm sure you are aware that if you fail to provide the name of the driver of a vehicle when you get a NIP from a Gatso you can now get an MS90 endorsement on your licence. I was quite surprised to find that insurance companies keep it in the same class not as SP30s but DD10 & IN10 remarkable the lengths they will go to to make a few quid.
Wasn't actually, when did this happen ?
I assume it only applies if you *won't* name the driver, not if you
*can't* name the driver ?
Depends on the definition above. If it is directly as a result of deliberately withholding information, then it deserves to be taken seriously.
I can't see the courts differentiating between the 2, if it's a private car you are expected to be able to remember who was driving a fortnight ago and companies are now supposed to keep records of who is using a car and when, not that I would imagine that any of them do log all trips and drivers.
No, I didn't know, how does that all work then?
If the registered keeper of the vehicle fails to provide the police with the information on who the driver of the vehicle was at the time they will be charged with the offence "Failure to give information as to identity of driver etc.........." (name given on DVLA site) and receive the MS90 and 3 points. So in short it would seem that if you are the registered keeper and get a NIP but don't know who was driving then you are much better off saying it was me and taking the SP30 and 3 points. I only found out how bad the MS90s are when the first one came through the office this week.
Bit OT but there are some interesting offences one the DVLA site:
MS30 : Play street offences..........
Play street? Wasn't that a program for kids on the BBC? I know TV has gone down hill but not enough to give someone 2 points.
In article , blank@128.0.0.1 spouted forth into uk.rec.cars.modifications...
That is the areas where they have instituted 20MPH zones (not statutory limits) and have those stupid looking signs that are bazed on kids drawing, plus chicanes, bumps, tables, and plantpots.
It's where kids play and have priority of working people going about their business.
Why not, it's an extremely important difference. You can't punish people for having a bad memory !
Courts do not work on what is "expected" tho, and it's certainly not unreasonable to be unable to remember or specify who was driving a vehicle if several people are using it on the same day.
That much is just common sense for any business.
Kids have priority over cars on the road ?
In article , snipped-for-privacy@recycle.bin spouted forth into uk.rec.cars.modifications...
It seems on play streets yes.
On any road, if a pedestrian is crossing when you arrive, you are supposed to give way to them.
But on play streets, kids seem to have priority over everything else arround them.
It's probably a strict liability offence, either you provide them with the information or you don't there is no requirement for mens rea.
Oh I was thinking of Play School and Sesame Street. ;)
Lets look through the rectangular window heading towards you at 19.9mph today shall we.
Are you sitting comfortably? You won't be when I run over you.
But the current situation is you provide them with a list of suspects. It's then the Police's duty to prove who did and did not drive. That is /not/ failing to provide information.
What a brilliant idea. I can't think of a better way to teach kids that it's fine to wander out into the middle of the road without looking whenever they fancy it.
MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.