The following points need to be borne in mind: The six-month time limit applies to most summary road traffic offences, but statutory exceptions do occur. It is also subject to the general requirement that any prosecution must be brought within three years of the offence taking place. Notice of Intended Prosecution; Section 172 notice; They, or in the case of a company vehicle, the company secretary, must return the notice within 28 days telling the police who was . The police should regularly update the CPS and court staff of any local or national criminal activity with regard to motoring documents and their use. I cannot prove this ( I do have a couple of texts I sent around the time stating . In particular s.6 RTOA 1988 provides a special time limit for offences listed in Column 3, Schedule 1 RTOA 1988, and for aiding and abetting those offences. Section 99 TA 1968 empowers police and Department for Transport officials to require the production of records and documents, whether or not offences are revealed on the face of them. CPS staff, agents or court staff should not ordinarily inspect or verify driving documents, see paragraph 4 of the Protocol in Annex A. Where special reasons are put forward in cases of drink and driving, the court must consider the following factors, see Chatters v Burke [1986] 3 All ER 168: In DPP v Bristow [1998] RTR 100 the Divisional Court stated that the key question justices should ask themselves when assessing if such special reasons existed on which they might decide not to disqualify was this: what would a sober, reasonable and responsible friend of the defendant, present at the time, but himself a non-driver and thus unable to help, have advised in the circumstances, to drive or not to drive? The 'prosecutor' for the purposes of section 6 can be the investigating officer or the informant (see [1976] 140 JP Jo., 675; Swan v Vehicle Inspectorate [1997] RTR 187. It is usually not appropriate to challenge the decision as it involves the exercise of discretion as the Administrative (Divisional) Court is unlikely to interfere if all relevant matters were properly considered. Note that the 6 month time limit in section 99(6) has no effect on the either way time limit and refers only to charts actually seized under this specific power, not to charts removed under the statutory powers. It is regularly updated to reflect changes in law and practice. For further commentary see (Wilkinson's 6.01). Such a warning need not be specific but must refer to one or more of the offences to which s.1 RTOA 1988 applies. This was confirmed in the case of Oldham BC v Sajjad [2016] EWHC 3597 (Admin). The Notice must be sent to the registered keeper to arrive within 14 days of the offence. All who deal with cases where document production is made should be alive to the current sophistication of fraudulently produced material. (e) the time at which or the areas within which the vehicle is used, An allegation of driving without insurance should never be withdrawn as a matter of convenience when pleas of guilty are tendered in respect of other offences. The effect is that the duty of the Director of Public Prosecutions to take over the conduct of all criminal proceedings instituted on behalf of a police force will not include a duty to take over specified proceedings. In cases of the unauthorised taking of mechanically propelled vehicles, delay can often occur due to the gathering of forensic evidence where the offence is denied. I was . (g) the carrying on the vehicle of any particular apparatus, or The expression 'traffic sign' is defined in section 64 of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 and the colour, size and type of signs are prescribed by the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2002. In such circumstances the prosecution need to decide which is the more appropriate charge. Bail should be considered for the period of any adjournment and the defendant encouraged to produce the relevant documents in the meantime. The police must serve the notice on either the driver or the registered keeper. Offences are either way, punishable by way of fine in the Magistrates' Court or by imprisonment (maximum two years) in the Crown Court. A Notice of Intended Prosecution (also known as a section 1 warning) is a warning issued under section 1 of the Road Traffic (Offenders) Act 1988. . However under Subsection (6) the company must prove that as well as not being able to identify the driver using reasonable diligence it must show that it did not keep a record of who was driving the vehicle and that the failure to keep such records was reasonable. I was driving a company vehicle Open or Close The registered keeper of a vehicle has a legal obligation under section 172 of the Road Traffic Act 1988 to provide the identity of the driver at the time of an alleged offence. The above cases expanded upon the methods of proof outlined in R v Derwentside Justices ex parte Heaviside in particular allowing the prosecution to rely on similarity of name, date of birth and address. Where there is a conviction for careless driving the lesser offence of failing to conform should be preserved at least until the chance of a reversal of the careless driving conviction has passed. It does not mean the driver has 24 hours within which to report the collision. The issue of the defendant's conduct and any increased costs involved should be carefully considered and noted, and a departure made from the locally agreed standard costs application, where there has been an increase in prosecution costs. A. Totting Up Penalty Points. Where there are other charges alleging offences contrary to section 12(1) Theft Act and/or section 103 RTA 1988 (among others) they can be joined in the indictment under s.40(1) Criminal Justice Act 1988 providing they are founded on the same facts or evidence, or form part of a series of the same or similar character, as an indictable offence which is also charged. Failure to do so will entitle the prosecution not only to seek an adjournment but also to cross-examine the defendant on his failure to give such notice so that the court may consider whether that failure reflected upon his bona fides, see DPP v O'Connor [1992] RTR 66, an authority which is also helpful on the procedural requirements and the general approach to be adopted. Proper recording should take place in any such proceedings and arrangements made for the police to be informed. McCombe LJ said, delivering the judgment of the court: if the restriction is rendered ineffective by the operation of s.148 then the policy is to be read, as it seems to me, as if that restriction was treated as deleted in blue pencil from its wording.. Section 65 Public Passenger Vehicles Act 1981 - the forgery or alteration of a licence, certificate or operator's disc issued under the Act, likewise the use with intent to deceive of anything resembling such a document. For a detailed explanation of the consequences of prosecution and your options for defending a speeding charge, get in touch which our expert road traffic solicitors today. (d) the weight or physical characteristics of the goods that the vehicle carries, The words 'uses', 'causes' and 'permits' are deemed to have the same meaning for the purposes of the TA as they have for the purposes of the Road Traffic Acts. Such a challenge should usually be considered only if the law was wrongly applied or the decision can be shown to be Wednesbury unreasonable. It can be done by way of a summons served on the offender within 14 days of commission of the offence or by a notice of intended prosecution (NIP). However, a recent High Court case has offered some very useful clarity on the issue of time limits. However there is an exemption if the Police cannot reasonably obtain the keeper's details within that time, for example if the DVLA has no keeper details or they are incomplete. I have received a NIP for speeding, however at the date and time shown on the notice, I am 99% sure I was at home with the car. The same considerations will thus apply. It is no defence that the driver failed to see the sign. A useful starting point to determine what rules apply to a particular vehicle on a particular journey is to establish, firstly, whether the Transport Act 1968 applies to the vehicle under s.95(2) TA 1968. Service of a notice at the last known address of the accused will suffice for good service. . In essence the Notice of Intended Prosecution is a document that specifies the nature of the offence and the time and place it is alleged to have been committed. Mutual recognition of driving disqualifications between the United Kingdom and Republic of Ireland came into force on 28 January 2010. A notice of intended prosecution can be served for a range of driving offences, ranging from speeding to careless driving. Legal Process, Loopholes & Time Limits. In interview, the defendant conceded that he could be the rider. Note that this offence requires an intention to deceive by misusing the seal in the manner stated in the section. The general time limit for injury litigation is three years, with multiple exceptions and special cases. Although the offence was not one of strict liability, "permitting" in section 96(11A) was to be given a wide meaning of failing to take reasonable steps to prevent contraventions, to be governed by the objective standards of a responsible employer. Under section 6(3) a certificate signed by or on behalf of the prosecutor, stating the date on which the necessary evidence came to his knowledge is conclusive evidence of that fact. It should state the nature of the offence (for example Speeding) together with the time, date and place . Under section 72 of the Highway Act 1835 (extends to England and Wales only) it is an offence to wilfully ride on the footway. See also DPP v Vivier [1991] Crim LR 637, DPP v Neville [1996] 160 JP 758 and Cutter v Eagle Star Insurance Co. Ltd, Clarke v Kato and Others [1998] 4 All ER 417. Motorists, who have been unable to produce their driving documents on demand, following a lawful request by a police officer, should produce them for inspection within the required statutory period at a police station of their choice. Liverlad67 Forumite. Under s.145 RTA 1988 the policy must be issued by an authorised insurer and must insure for death or bodily injury to any person, or damage to property, caused by, or arising out of, the use of a vehicle on a road in Great Britain, i.e. The offence of driving whilst disqualified, although a summary offence, can be included in the indictment if founded on the same facts or evidence, or if it forms part of a series of offences of the same or similar character as an indictable offence which has also been charged - s.40 (3)(c) Criminal Justice Act 1988. There is a time limit for service of an Notice of Intended Prosecution and failing to abide by it can be fatal to the Crown case. Know your possible technical defences to protect your licence. Additionally it may not be in the best interest of the court to prosecute Directors (solely to get points put on a licence). It is enough that it is received by a member of his staff impliedly authorised to receive it. Attempting to or producing any document with intent to deceive may result in severe penalties. CPS and court staff are not trained in the detection of fraud. Copyright Roadtrafficlaw.com Solicitors Ltd (c), Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window), Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window), Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window), Click to share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window), Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window). You should note however, that the production to the police of these documents now will not be a defence to any prosecution for failing to produce the documents within seven days of the date of the original request. If the company did have such a system but it didnt work on a particular occasion that might suffice as a defence. They are capable of speeds up to 12 mph. Your co-operation is therefore in your own interests. Some 'routine' prosecutions, for example under the Construction and Use Regulations and related provisions of the Road Traffic Act (RTA) 1988, may have special significance for the traffic commissioners when dealing with licensing applications from heavy goods vehicle operators. For example, such a situation may arise where the outstanding summary offence is a drink/drive allegation where the accused is liable to a three-year disqualification following a previous conviction. The duty to determine whether any documents produced are valid does not pass to any other agency where a motorist fails to produce the required documents, therefore local arrangements should be agreed for the most effective method for the documents' validation by the police before the court proceeds. If that has been served late it does not give the driver an excuse for not replying to the requirement to provide driver details. If such a course is adopted, the reasons should be made clear to the Magistrates' Court. such proceedings must be properly recorded and the police informed; no action should be taken or departure from the standard procedure made where this might prejudice the future interest of any victim; Prosecutors must be alive to the sophistication of fraudulently produced material. by sending a notice within 14 days of the possibility of prosecution and specifying the nature of the alleged offence and the time and place where it is alleged to have been committed to the driver, registered keeper of the vehicle or rider of the cycle. A NIP can be issued verbally to the driver at the time of the offence or in written form 14 days from the date of the offence. They cannot be licensed for use on a road and they do not come within the categories of vehicle covered by a driving licence. Summary offences should only be restored for hearing if it is considered necessary to meet the justice of the particular case. The notice of intended prosecution will be accompanied by a Section 172 notice, which you are required to complete to confirm the identity of the driver. App. It appears to an officer that an offence has been committed under section 99(5) in respect of the vehicle or its driver. an admission under s.10 Criminal Justice Act 1967; fingerprint evidence pursuant to s.39 Criminal Justice Act 1948; and. Certain exceptions do apply however where it can be shown that the keeper did not know and could not with reasonable diligence have ascertained who the driver of the vehicle was (S172.4). evidence of a person who was present in court when the defendant was convicted on an earlier occasion and able to identify him as present in court. The Notice of Intended Prosecution must specify the nature of the alleged offence and the time and place where it is alleged to have been committed. Signed: .. Crown Prosecutor / Associate Prosecutor / Police Officer, [delete as appropriate or specify alternative]. It is a matter for police investigation. Dangerous driving. This guidance assists our prosecutors when they are making decisions about cases. Many road traffic offences are minor in nature. Time which he necessarily spends travelling (from a point to take over a vehicle subject to that Regulation) which is not the driver's home or the employer's operational centre; and. This should inform the recipient that not only should the relevant documents, if they exist, be sent or handed to the court as required in the summons, but that before that date, the documents must firstly be produced at a police station for inspection and validation and for the police to note relevant details. Mere passive acquiescence is not enough - see Redhead Freight Ltd v Shulman [1989] RTR 1. The offence under section 11 of the Fireworks Act 2003. If you do not complete and return the NIP/S172 notice correctly within the 28 day time limit, you face a separate charge of failing to notify driver's details, which is a 6 penalty point offence with a fine of up to 1,000. However, to establish this defence, it is not sufficient for the defendant merely to show that the breaking or removal of the seal could not have been avoided by himself; he must show that the breaking or removal of the seal could not have been avoided in itself (Vehicle Inspectorate v Sam Anderson (Newhouse) Ltd [2002] RTR 13). Failure to produce your documents at the police station may well result in additional loss and inconvenience to you, and led to an application for additional prosecution costs for the extra work involved. If it is issued to you after the incident, it must be done within 14 days. It's often the case that this offence exceeds the penalty for the substantive offence such as speeding that can carry three points or more. DPP v Hay [2005] EWHC Admin 1395 - Where a defendant is charged with driving otherwise than in accordance with a licence and driving without insurance, and the Crown have proved that the defendant was driving a vehicle on the road, the non-issue by the police of form HO/RT/1 (requesting production of the documents) is not fatal to the prosecution case. Subsection (3) makes it an offence for the keeper to fail to comply. 1503 & 1507. Further guidance can be found in Wilkinsons Road Offences (29th Edition Chapter 10). Such a certificate is deemed under sub-section (4) to have been so signed unless the contrary is proved. Section 127 MCA 1980 states that for all summary offences the information must be laid within six calendar months of the commission of the offence, except where any other Act expressly provides otherwise. An analogy can be drawn from the case of DPP v Hay where it was held that once the prosecution has proved that the defendant drove the motor vehicle on a road, it is then for the defendant to show that he held a driving licence and that there was in force an appropriate policy of insurance, since these are matters that are peculiarly within his knowledge. Notice in writing to that effect must be given to the driver of the vehicle. Single Justice Procedure Notice. A Notice of Intended Prosecution is exactly what it says - a warning that the driver of the vehicle is being considered for prosecution. Because self-balancing Personal Transporters do not meet the relevant requirements for use on UK roads, and because there is no separate legislation here for public road use by non-EC type-approved vehicles, they cannot be registered and licensed for use on a public road. Section 170(3) places an obligation on the driver, if he does not give his name and address under subsection (2) above, to report the accident to a police constable or police station as soon as reasonably practicable and in any case within 24 hours. within 28 days you must complete the Section 172 notice declaring who was driving the car at the time of the offence. However, if a Prosecutor is asked to sign a certificate, or to advise the police upon its format, the following example may be adopted. A. As a result, if an insurance policy contains a restriction (for example) that the driver must be aged over 21, that restriction may be void and a person aged under 21 who would otherwise have been covered to drive the vehicle may not be guilty of driving without insurance. Legal aid Scotland may be able to help in your case, one of our lawyers will . For this reason, it is best to seek legal advice before completing a Notice of Intended Prosecution. The Concise Oxford Dictionary defines 'road' as a line of communication for use of foot passengers and vehicles; while in Oxford v Austin [1981] RTR 416 it was said to be a definable right of way between two points. Prosecutors who are dealing with a prosecution for no insurance where the case is based on the driver not meeting some condition of the insurance must be vigilant to check that the exclusion relied upon to make out the offence is not one of those avoided by s.148(2).
1987 Telstar Motorhome,
Storage Wars: Texas Bubba Smith Age,
Articles N