Safe Speed Forums

Got done for driving 61 in a 50 - except it wasn't me! I was a passenger in my own car and don't know the driver - an internet online meet that happened to live around the corner from where I worked. I was a little hungover so they drove me to work in my car and surprise surprise not heard from them again. No idea where they lived, phone number, or even surname! (tut tut I know!)

But I have absolutely no way of proving it wasn't me because I normally drive along that route daily to work, so they are going to think it was obviously me! Detection was manual detetction which I'm assuming was not a photo but a gun. So any help appreciated!!!

Hmm, are you in the habit of letting complete strangers drive your car?

How do you know they were insured?

Sounds extremely dubious to me...

_________________
"Show me someone who says that they have never exceeded a speed limit, and I'll show you a liar, or a menace." (Austin Williams - Director, Transport Research Group)

Any views expressed in this post are personal opinions and may not represent the views of Safe Speed

No but after 'meeting' with them the night before there was an element of trust there! I was the passeneger so it's not like they'd drive off without me

If I'm not believed in a forum there's no chance of the Police believing me either eh?! Well you live and learn I suppose....

Do you have their online id at all? Can you show evidence of arranging such a meet with a person? You must know their first name?! I assume you stayed at that person's home so you need to go back there.

You could fill in the nip with all the details that you know about that person. If they live just round the corner from your work address then why don't you revisit their house or wherever it was you met up with them? If you can backtrace your steps then you might be able to find out someone else that knows them. Ask for the video evidence as with a laser gun there is video so that would either identify the driver as not you or identify the passenger as you and corroborate your story.

If this internet meet up involved anything not entirely innocent then expect it to be all over everywhere and expect the person you met to deny all knowledge of it.

If you are going to meet up with strangers then at least find out their surname and address in future!

If this is all made up then expect to be found out very quickly. If it is actually true it is still going to come across as a tall tale and be prepared not to be believed as it does beggar belief in all honesty!

You certainly can't fill in the NIP and say it was you driving the car when it wasn't I figure, that would be contempt.

The courts do tend to require concrete proof of such things.

Realistically, the only way for you to prove you were not driving is to identify and locate this person and get them to admit to it.

_________________
"Show me someone who says that they have never exceeded a speed limit, and I'll show you a liar, or a menace." (Austin Williams - Director, Transport Research Group)

Any views expressed in this post are personal opinions and may not represent the views of Safe Speed

In addition to the sound advice proffered so far, I would just like to make the OP aware (in case he isn't) that saying that someone else was driving when you actually were is viewed as a very serious offence by the courts, far more serious than any speeding offence. If it can be proved that you are lying (as opposed to them just believing that you are), you are very likely to go to jail, for perverting the course of justice. There have been many examples of this in the news. You'd almost certainly get a lesser punishment for burglary, however unfair that might be.

Please don't make the mistake of thinking that because it's "only a speeding ticket" and "loads of people swap points" and "cameras are just there to make money anyway" then deliberately filling in the wrong name is "no big deal". Thinking "There's no way I'll get caught" is all very well, but that's exactly what the other jailed people thought. Once it becomes a PCoJ investigation it becomes potentially pretty thorough, e.g. you may get police turning up and searching your house (and maybe your hard drive) for documentary evidence.

I'm not saying that you are lying, I'm just making you aware of the likely consequences if you are and you're found out. Please believe me that it's absolutely not worth it. I'm all for legally avoiding contributing to the camera fund however, and if you or your mysterious and transient friend are interested, much useful advice on how to proceed can be found at PePiPoo.

_________________
Paul Smith: a legend.

"The freedom provided by the motor vehicle is not universally applauded, however: there are those who resent the loss of state control over individual choice that the car represents. Such people rarely admit their prejudices openly; instead, they make false or exaggerated claims about the adverse effects of road transport in order to justify calls for higher taxation or restrictions on mobility." (Conservative Way Forward: Stop The War Against Drivers)

If they have any photo/video of the front of the vehicle (and maybe even from the back) that might well show that you weren't driving.

_________________
Andrew.

And the court would be profoundly unimpressed if you said you didn't know who the driver was driving despite sitting next to them.

_________________
"Show me someone who says that they have never exceeded a speed limit, and I'll show you a liar, or a menace." (Austin Williams - Director, Transport Research Group)

Any views expressed in this post are personal opinions and may not represent the views of Safe Speed

But I wouldn't be saying I didn't know them. I'd give whatever knowledge is in my power to give as to their identity. Or whatever the law requires. As long as I had done that and made sure that I didn't lie, I could say that it wasn't me.

So it would be something like... I do know that person, I have known them for <however long> and the only contact details I know are these. I have been unable to make further contact, although I have tried.

_________________
Andrew.

Remember the story of the lottery ticket holder who joined up two halves of different tickets using the previous week's winning numbers on a new ticket and the date and time from a ticket bought the previous week? - Claimed that the dog had chewed the ticket in half. He went to jail for that.

Well this story here has even less credibility IMO. No magistrate would believe it.

If it was the result of an *ahem* internet meet - presumably there wil - somewhere - be some internet evidence of the rendezvous being planned....

The way it is supposed to work it's up to the CPS to prove it was you.

However you might want to consider what other offences you may be admitting to, such as any offence relating to the driver being uninsured.

You will also have to show you have made all possible effort to name the driver otherwise you will be prosecuted for failing to identify.

And if you are making it all up then as has been mentioned you could be facing a prison sentence.

Of course you wouldn't want to say you were driving and then the CPS turn up with video showing a woman driving and you in the passenger seat. That would be a pickle.

Taxi might have been best choice assuming true. Or phoning in to report headache and will be in later as being "hungover" in the office or wherever hardly makes you a productive worker

On a par with the the mysterious "Bulgarian" dreamt up by a Manchester couple

But if any doubts about laws broken over insurance - already posted up the law regarding this on this board - so do a search for my little quizes

But assuming there is some truth - then the obvious first step would be to get hold of any photographic evidence to help you identify the driver.

Second would be to go back to wherever on the internet you "met" this person and arrange to meet them again to explain what happened to them

Finally, I am about to be blatantly and bluntly rude for probably the first time on this forum - and suggest that you are a first class pretzel of twazak class proportions and that the does not wear a costume and is not easily taken in by fancies of imagination Might I suggest less wine next time you bed a perfect stranger.

_________________
Take with a chuckle or a grain of salt
Drive without COAST and it's all your own fault!

A SMILE is a curve that sets everything straight (P Diller).

A Smiley Per post
FINES USfor our COAST!

Approach love and cooking with reckless abandon - but driving with a smile and a COAST calm mind.

This is nothing short of poetry, I salute your command of the language and will do my utmost to use this phrase whenever the opportunity presents itself.

_________________
COAST Not just somewhere to keep a beach.

A young loner on a crusade to champion the cause of the innocent, the helpless, the powerless, in a world of criminals who operate above the law.

I think you are pulling a fast one or you are a little stupid, I'm not sure which.I would avoid admitting you were hungover, if you have made that admission they may even nick you for drink driving lol. Its up to them to prove you were driving, they will probably do you anyway thinking you wont bother taking it any further, if you do they have to prove you were driving for sure at a higher court and cps might drop it then, but not always! Dont you have a mate who had a licence at the time but is banned now?

Very easy to prove if true.

ISP logs
Chat logs
E-mail logs

All of the above is kept by providers for a minimum of 18 months as required by law.


Two ways to go "stevieboy"...

1. Contact your ISP and ask them for a copy of your internet activity to prove you are tellling the truth.
2. Give it up now, or you WILL go to jail for attempting to pervert the course of justice (as well as getting the points anyway).

_________________
What makes you think I'm drunk officer, have I got a fat bird with me?

How would a judge look upon it if the defendant pleaded guilty but stipulated "due to being unable to prove innocence", and when the judge questioned what the **** he was playing at, simply explained that he was gonna get done either way by a system requiring him to demonstate his innocence and would be convicted regardless, so settled for the lesser charge and is pleading guilty to the offence, but would like it recorded for honesty, accuracy and truth that he wasn't driving? Would it still be PCOJ if you're frank about it? Or would the judge decide you're making a mockery of his house of cards and throw the book anyway?

_________________
Fear is a weapon of mass distraction

I am sure other BIB on here as you like to call us will be laughing to themselves with this one,and It does ring alarm bells,when this is suggested. I am sure you will have been told that all you have to do is send an e-mail to them and just ask them there details,and surely you must have discussed things throughout your meet that would at least give you a clue as to where to start to look.
I have got two similar incidents in my tray at work at the moment not speeders but collisions fail to stop ones and guess what they are both on similar stories,but not internet ones but man in the pub ones,and I can prove one that he is lying so will be proceeding with that,what you have to watch for is that they dont try and get you for an offence of Aid and Abeit speed and possibly permit no insurance if they interview you correctly,then if all else fails 6 points for failing to disclose driver as opposed to 3 points for the speed offence.
As others have said think long and hard before you start the wheels of justice in motion as you may be on here saying how much,injustice has been done to you for your effort. What i think or say is immaterial as only you knows the truth asnd if this is the truth then stick with it as it will be proved to be the truth in the end wont it.
Stephen

I want to correct a point her. You must by law give all information in your possession to enable the police to identify the driver. Sometimes the nip is over simplified in its wording!


Assuming for a second you were telling the truth.
As the owner of the vehicle, you should not allow people to drive unless you know they are liscenced and insured to drive. Unless you have a very rare any driver insurance or you know your mate has his own insurance policy on his own car you took a mad risk.

_________________
Speed limit sign radio interview. TV Snap Unhappy
“It has never been the rule in this country – I hope it never will be - that suspected criminal offences must automatically be the subject of prosecution” He added that there should be a prosecution: “wherever it appears that the offence or the circumstances of its commission is or are of such a character that a prosecution in respect thereof is required in the public interest”
This approach has been endorsed by Attorney General ever since 1951. CPS Code