Safe Speed Forums

Not exactly, no.

The responsibility of the recipient of a S172 notice is to provide 'such information as they may have' to 'assist in the identification of the driver at the time of the alleged offence'.

Frequently a lease company gets a notice and names a company who has leased the vehicle. The company then might name the branch office, and the branch office may name the normal driver. The normal driver may then name his wife...

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety

SS said:-




Nice one, Einstein!

(I'm surprised at you all continuing to feed the troll! Sounds like he wants his job back at bollocks!)

A very dangerous practice then IMO. As Paul said, the responsibility to supply info under s.172 lies with the person or legal body to whom the notice was served. It is legally permissible to have an agent fill in the form for you, but the agent will be seen in law as acting on your behalf, not in your stead.

So giving the form to someone else to fill in is not passing the buck. If I were the agents and the company sent me a form addressed to them asking me to fill it in I'd name their company CEO as the driver, just to get it right up them!!!

what SHOULD happen is that the S172 is forwarded to the agency and they fill out the drivers details. that did not happen. my details were given to pollocks (agency admitted this was wrong of them) and they filled the details in despite knowing that not only was i not in that day (finished at 0600? i didnt do a night shift) but i was our only driver in that week from my agency.

go on, explain that one. not only have you got the day wrong but also the time. i started at 0600 and i didnt drag the job out. straight to the customer, straight back with 3 stops en route. one of which was part of a split break, the other 2 were no more than 5 minutes each and i have a copy of the tacho to prove it

_________________
Richie

SSAFA supporter
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=126025031585

No, no, no, and did I say no.

The S172 must be filled in by the party to whom it is addressed and only them.

The company (Bollocks) should fill in their S172 naming the agency. The agency then get their own from the Police to fill in. They then name the driver and he/she will get their own S172 to complete.

If the company have simply forwarded/passed the original NIP/S172 on, then simply ignore it and wait for them to be prosecuted for failing to supply.

The Pollocks are leaving themselves wide open to a charge of failing to supply. The legal requirement is for them to complete and return the S172 giving the agency details.

Somewhere on that form or accompanying letter it will specifically state that the firm is not to be passed on.

Leaving aside the gratuitous insult.

Yes they are under a legal obligation. In this case, it is S172 of the Road Traffic Act.

And before you open your mouth about Data Protection, there is a specific exemption for disclosure in Section 35

technicalities aside, the point is that the agency should have filled my details in, not the client (if i had been driving of course)

the data protection act does not apply when details are given for charges such as this. for instances where the authorities are after a name of an alleged crime, either give them the details or face prosecution yourself for failing to provide. but they still arent allowed to give details away to non authoritive bodies willy nilly

_________________
Richie

SSAFA supporter
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=126025031585

wives have to earn their keep somehow

_________________
Richie

SSAFA supporter
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=126025031585

this has been dropped. SCP wrote badk saying they are sending another NIP to pollocks but wont be prosecuting them. i am clear without having to prove anything which came as a surprise

_________________
Richie

SSAFA supporter
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=126025031585