URI:
   DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
  HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       *****************************************************
   DIR Return to: Speeding and other criminal offences
       *****************************************************
       #Post#: 61225--------------------------------------------------
       s172 out of time and police refusal to accept evidence
   DIR By: docklander
       Date: March 7, 2025, 12:19 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Received NTP for 35 in a 20.
       Car owner did not recognise being in that location at that time.
       Questioned and subsequently provided photo of car elsewhere.
       Police refusing to accept as evidence and now passing on for
       prosecution.
       Is it still feasible to complete the S172? Was given until late
       February to complete as extension.
       #Post#: 61231--------------------------------------------------
       Re: s172 out of time and police refusal to accept evidence
   DIR By: NewJudge
       Date: March 7, 2025, 12:39 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Has the recipient of the request suddenly established that the
       car was in the location alleged?
       Need a bit more detail, including dates, etc.
       #Post#: 61236--------------------------------------------------
       Re: s172 out of time and police refusal to accept evidence
   DIR By: andy_foster
       Date: March 7, 2025, 1:03 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       --- Quote from: docklander link ---
       >
       > Received NTP for 35 in a 20.
       --- End Quote ---
       If you must invent your own acronyms, please provide the full
       version. But mostly, please don't invent your own acronyms.
       --- Quote ---
       > Car owner did not recognise being in that location at that
       time. Questioned and subsequently provided photo of car
       elsewhere. Police refusing to accept as evidence and now passing
       on for prosecution.
       >
       > Is it still feasible to complete the S172? Was given until
       late February to complete as extension.
       --- End Quote ---
       What information has been provided in response to the s. 172
       requirement so far?
       What form did this questioning take?
       Was the car elsewhere at the material time, or did the car owner
       take legal advice from some bloke down the pub?
       Otherwise, if he had until late Feb to provide the information,
       he might struggle to provide the information in time.
       #Post#: 61281--------------------------------------------------
       Re: s172 out of time and police refusal to accept evidence
   DIR By: docklander
       Date: March 8, 2025, 2:32 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       What information has been provided in response to the s. 172
       requirement so far?
       The owner of the vehicle provided photos of the car and then an
       image of CCTV showing the car elsewhere.
       What form did this questioning take?
       Email.
       Matter "has now been sent through to prosecutions for court
       proceedings". Can this process be stopped or is it now
       inevitable? Do prosecutions always decide to actually prosecute?
       Sorry about the incorrect acronym. PNTDIA (promise not to do it
       again).
       #Post#: 61296--------------------------------------------------
       Re: s172 out of time and police refusal to accept evidence
   DIR By: NewJudge
       Date: March 8, 2025, 5:41 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       The owner of the vehicle provided photos of the car and then an
       image of CCTV showing the car elsewhere.
       Presumably the police do not consider that to be a satisfactory
       response to the request for driver's details.
       Matter "has now been sent through to prosecutions for court
       proceedings". Can this process be stopped or is it now
       inevitable? Do prosecutions always decide to actually prosecute?
       You need to tell us some dates, what has been received, what
       responses were made and by whom before that can be answered.
       You mention "the owner", though don't say whether he is he
       person who received the request. What is your involvement in
       this?
       This is all so vague that no proper advice can be given.
       #Post#: 61299--------------------------------------------------
       Re: s172 out of time and police refusal to accept evidence
   DIR By: ManxTom
       Date: March 8, 2025, 5:50 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       --- Quote from: docklander link ---
       >
       > What information has been provided in response to the s. 172
       requirement so far?
       >
       > What form did this questioning take?
       > Email.
       >
       >
       --- End Quote ---
       Such an uninformative and cryptic response is unlikely to
       encourage people to help you
       #Post#: 61301--------------------------------------------------
       Re: s172 out of time and police refusal to accept evidence
   DIR By: docklander
       Date: March 8, 2025, 6:14 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       No wish to be cyrptic, trying to be direct.
       The original ticket was received around October.
       The car owner did not believe the car was in that location at
       the time of the alleged offence. A letter was posted to police
       explaining that. The police wrote back around December asking
       for photos of the car from all angles. This was emailed to the
       police.
       The police then wrote back saying that although a small
       difference had been identified on the number plate, they
       believed the car was in the time of the alleged offence.
       They emailed a photo of the front of the car and a photo of the
       owner from their driving license. It is not possible to identify
       the driver from the photo of the car.
       An email conversation followed. The owner then sent a printed
       photo of the car on CCTV elsewhere. The police emailed to say
       they could not see the car properly so an email photo was sent.
       The police then wrote to say that CCTV can be manipulated and
       this is not admissable as proof. As of around two days ago, the
       police stated the matter had now been sent for prosecution.
       Another speeding ticket was received two weeks prior to this by
       a different police force. The same process was followed but that
       police force accepted that it was 50/50 as to whether or not the
       car had been cloned and said no further action would be taken.
       The owner has not let the police force with the current alleged
       offence about the prior matter.
       The owner takes the view they would rather possibly now complete
       the s172 and accept they may be mistaken than to take the matter
       to court. Is it now too late to do this?
       I am the brother of the owner of the car and trying my very best
       to help.
       #Post#: 61302--------------------------------------------------
       Re: s172 out of time and police refusal to accept evidence
   DIR By: NewJudge
       Date: March 8, 2025, 6:27 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       [quote]Is it now too late to do this?[quote]
       If the speeding offence was last week, very possibly not. If it
       was three or four months ago, it almost certainly is.
       You need to help us out a bit with that. I'm not pulling any
       more teeth.
       #Post#: 61305--------------------------------------------------
       Re: s172 out of time and police refusal to accept evidence
   DIR By: docklander
       Date: March 8, 2025, 6:30 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       The alleged offence was in October, the deadline for reply was
       extended until 27.02.2025 due to ongoing communications.
       #Post#: 61343--------------------------------------------------
       Re: s172 out of time and police refusal to accept evidence
   DIR By: disgruntchelt
       Date: March 8, 2025, 9:29 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       I don’t understand. Either the owner knows his car was elsewhere
       and wasn’t speeding,
       Or the owner was trying a cunning wheeze to avoid points and a
       fine.
       In the former I don’t understand why they wouldn’t be willing to
       go to court to clear their name.  I’m sure the bench would
       accept the evidence.
       If it is the latter case, you are basically asking can the owner
       get out of this without consuming porridge? I guess if they
       don’t present any evidence and plead guilty to FTF (and not
       guilty to speeding if they’ve been dual charges) the police
       might ignore their attempt at perverting the course of justice,
       and they’ll just get the 6 points and hefty insurance premiums
       for a while.
       *****************************************************
       Page 1 of 4
   DIR Next Page