Free Traffic Legal Advice

Who knows?

If RK can get the Notice voided on a technicality and enable Driver to avoid any further action, result.

RK has already nominated someone: https://i.ibb.co/yXY9b9h/imgonline-com-ua-dexifsa-Jd9-Ms-D9z-PK.jpg

If the error/oversight/whatever this is, isn't spotted in the meantime, is it likely that a Court hearing (assuming it went that way) against the RK would conclude within 5 months (Offence was 1 month ago) ie: would it be 6 months+ by the time the Police realise what's going on?

RK has already nominated someone: https://i.ibb.co/yXY9b9h/imgonline-com-ua-dexifsa-Jd9-Ms-D9z-PK.jpg

If the error/oversight/whatever this is, isn't spotted in the meantime, is it likely that a Court hearing (assuming it went that way) against the RK would conclude within 5 months (Offence was 1 month ago) ie: would it be 6 months+ by the time the Police realise what's going on?

Regardless of that message saying that a nomination has already been submitted, what did the RK say on that nomination?

Did the RK simply name you as the driver, or did they add anything else that might have suggested that they weren't 100% absolutely sure that you were the driver?  (Because if they had, the nomination would likley have been rejected, but the online system may not have been updated yet and may not realise it's been rejected)

As somebody else has asked, did your friend not take a screenshot of the nomination and didn't they receive any online confirmation of it?  I had to deal with this last year and took screenshots of everything, including the confirmation page that showed details of my nomination.

Why doesn't your friend just phone the ticket office and ask what the problem is?

And if she can't resolve it that way then yes - she needs to send a paper copy of the nomination.  Keep a copy and get proof of posting from a post office counter

Your friend has two choices: either leave it as it is or try to find out what’s going on.

If he leaves it as it is and the police do not consider a satisfactory response to the s172 has been received, your friend will be prosecuted for failing to provide the driver’s details. He may have a defence to that charge – it depends what sort of response was made and whether he can show that it was submitted. If that does happen, whether he is convicted or not, the speeding charge is a dead duck as the police have no evidence to prove who was driving.

If he makes some enquiries he might find out what is causing the apparent confusion, get it put right and the driver will face action for the speeding offence. This could result in a course, a fixed penalty (£100 and 3 points) or prosecution in court (depending on the speed/limit and the driver’s eligibility for the out of court disposals).

The advantage of doing nothing is that, if the police do not have satisfactory evidence of who was driving the speeding charge is a nullity. The disadvantage is that if the RK is prosecuted and convicted for failing to provide the driver’s details he faces a hefty fine, surcharge and costs (probably around £1,000) and six points. He will also have an endorsement code (MS90) which will see his insurance premiums rocket for up to five years.

The advantage of sorting it out is that the RK will be off the hook once the police are satisfied that the driver’s details have been provided. The disadvantage is that attention then turns to the driver who will face action for speeding.

If I was the RK I would want to find out what the problem was rather than playing hardball by insisting he has complied with the request.

If you tell us the alleged speed and limit, together with the RK's driving record, we can tell you what the likely outcome of the speeding allegation will be. But nobody on here will encourage your friend to commit a criminal offence.

One thing that doesn't seem to have been mentioned so far is the severity of the speeding, but it might be a worthwhile consideration when weighing up whether to run the risk of defending a S172 charge in court.

Of course if you win, everyone is happy. But if it was only a very minor speeding offence, risking 6 points, costs of close to £1,000 and significantly increased car insurance premiums to avoid a speed awareness course seems like a risky strategy.

"Alleged" offence was 79mph vs 70mph limit with Driver having no points currently and no speed awareness course for many years (therefore speed awareness offer likely, hopefully!). Totally agree that it was likely not worth the risk, especially if the RK doesn't have quiet as clean record! Worth exploring nonetheless (more for the Driver than the RK!).

The Photographic Evidence shown on the website portal has an image of the motorway gantry at the time of the alleged(!) offence with no speed limit on (not even National Speed Limit sign). Do motorway cameras catch/are motorway cameras turned on at all times, even when not displaying any limit. I was under the impression cameras were only active when a speed (or NSL sign) was displayed?

There might be a subtle clue in the fact that the RK and the nominated driver have each received a NIP for exactly that.

Historically, VSL cameras on the M25 weren't used to enforce the NSL because nobody could agree whose responsibility it was to do so. That changed years ago - possibly around the same time that the police started getting kickbacks for every SAC booked.