I had a letter from the lovely Plod stating that I'd been caught doing 41 in a 30 zone on 2nd August. I replied, asking for photographic evidence as I (genuinely) do not know whether it was myself or Mrs Fab who was driving at the time. We both use the car and she frequently goes out in it as soon as I come home.
I've just had the photo evidence from them, and it is indeed my car, but the photos are of the back of the car and you cannot see any features of the driver at all. From their evidence, it is impossible to determine whether it's me or Mrs Fab.
However - the accompanying letter says:-
Dear Sir/Madam,
Thankyou for your request for the photographic evidence, in relation to the requirement made of you regarding the identity of the driver of the vehicle in question. I enclose, as requested, photographic evidence taken at the time of the alleged offence.
I should point out, however, that the Video/DVD or photographic evidence is taken only for the purpose of identifying the vehicle. It is not taken in order to identify the driver.
I have to inform you that, under Section 172 of the Road Traffic Act, 1988, you are still legally obliged to provide the information requested of you. This legal obligation applies whether or not you are able to make an identification of the driver from the Video/DVD or photographic evidence. Failure to comply will render you liable for prosecution.
I would ask therefore that the information requested be supplied within ten days of the date of this letter.
WTF ???
They don't know who was driving. I don't know who was driving. Their evidence is apparently taken only to 'identify the vehicle, not the driver', yet they won't be prosecuting a vehicle will they ! ......and, unless I tell them what I genuinely do not know, they are going to prosecute me !! Seriously - I have no idea who was driving the bloody car at a particular time on a particular day two months ago ! The location is on the road between here and a local retail park, so it's not as if I can even use the location to help me work it out.
I don't mind paying my dues if it was me at the wheel, but I'm not taking the hit if it was Mrs Fab who was to blame, and vice-versa.
Lack of planning on your part does not constitute an emergency on mine.
Also chips are "Plant-based" no matter how you cook them.
Comments
There are some very knowledgeable people on there.
"Take these three items, some WD-40, a vise grip, and a roll of duct tape. Any man worth his salt can fix almost any problem with this stuff alone." - Walt Kowalski
"Only two things are infinite - the universe, and human stupidity. And I'm not sure about the universe." - Albert Einstein
Seriously: If you value it, take/fetch it yourself
just because you do, doesn't mean you should.
One last thing. Where's your galantry!? I'd take a bullet for my missus!
Also chips are "Plant-based" no matter how you cook them.
"Take these three items, some WD-40, a vise grip, and a roll of duct tape. Any man worth his salt can fix almost any problem with this stuff alone." - Walt Kowalski
"Only two things are infinite - the universe, and human stupidity. And I'm not sure about the universe." - Albert Einstein
Also chips are "Plant-based" no matter how you cook them.
Also chips are "Plant-based" no matter how you cook them.
From that point on, the process is the same as of you own the car; if you believe it wasn't you driving, you have to disclose who was....
just because you do, doesn't mean you should.