Free Traffic Legal Advice

Hello  - really wondering if I could get some advice re the above as am wits end.
One of Company fleet vehicles was being used by 6 of us working in 3 pairs, to clean and clear a flat pending the arrival of a new occupant. I have provided the Met with the contact details of the 6 drivers, copy of my phone records when I made calls to try and establish who was driving at the precise time that the camera flashed and recorded 25mph in a 20mph zone, copy of the log that we hold to check who is driving what car (The log records who has the car on a daily basis not per hour or minute)and a copy of the document confirming the new occupant moving in date - a day after the offence. All to no avail. The second reminder again invited us to give name of driver. I replied to that saying it was impossible to know which of the 6 drivers was driving and we have done our very best to ascertain who was driving at that exact time. I have now had a third reply asking exactly the same. I cannot give a name when I don't know which of the 6 of us was behind the wheel. Would be so grateful for any advice as to how to respond. Thank you

The log records who has the car on a daily basis not per hour or minute

Then the log records who is the person keeping the vehicle?

The log confirms which of the 6 cars registered to the Company are being driven by which person.

Clearly it does not, or you would not be in this position.

You should be aware that "Where a body corporate is guilty of an offence under this section and the offence is proved to have been committed with the consent or connivance of, or to be attributable to neglect on the part of, a director, manager, secretary or other similar officer of the body corporate, or a person who was purporting to act in any such capacity, he, as well as the body corporate, is guilty of that offence and liable to be proceeded against and punished accordingly."

This means that (1) you personally may be charged with the offence of failing to provide driver details, and (2) you need a better logging system.

For the present, does the log for the day list a single person? If so, I'd suggest you nominate him (or her) as the person keeping the vehicle.

Others may have different suggestions.

I’m yet to be convinced that a person assigned a company vehicle for a few hours becomes “the person keeping the vehicle” in terms of the statute.

So am I.

Doing what you have done so far will not satisfy the police. They will not make enquiries based on the information you have provided.

If you do not provide the name of single person whom you believe may have been driving, the Company will be prosecuted for failing to do so.

There is statutory defence which states that a person (or company) shall not be convicted of an offence if he “…did not know and could not with reasonable diligence have ascertained who the driver of the vehicle was”. However, where the defendant charged with an offence is a “body corporate” they can only take advantage of that defence if “…no record was kept of the persons who drove the vehicle and that the failure to keep a record was reasonable”.

The Company did keep records, but it seems from your description that they were inadequate (to show who was driving at any particular time).

As I see it the choices are these:

- To name the individual to whom the vehicle was logged out.
- For the Company to plead guilty.
- For the Company to defend the charge.

To successfully defend the charge The Company will have to show (to the court's satisfaction that "on the balance of probabilities", that it was not reasonable to keep more detailed records than those you have and, despite exercising reasonable diligence, you could still not identify the driver.

A conviction for the Company will see hefty fine but no endorsement or points (a Company cannot see an endorsement imposed as it has no driving record). For an individual the fine will be smaller, but it carries six points and an endorsement code (MS90) which will see considerably increased insurance premiums for up to five years.

Doing what you have done so far will not satisfy the police. They will not make enquiries based on the information you have provided.

Whether or not the police are satisfied has no bearing on whether an offence was committed, or whether a defence is available, only on who is prosecuted.
We have seen cases where the police have sent s. 172 notices to multiple potential drivers.

If you do not provide the name of single person whom you believe may have been driving, the Company will be prosecuted for failing to do so.

That is very likely.

The Company did keep records, but it seems from your description that they were inadequate (to show who was driving at any particular time).

Interpreting the legislation purposively, an inadequate record is not a "record of the persons driving the vehicle". However, if the log is essentially meaningless, then the first question would seem to be whether the failure to keep a [meaningful] log was reasonable.

From the OP's version of events, my next question would be whether it was somebody's birthday, as the suggestion that all 6 people who were in the vehicle during the day in question would have driven it, and that a minute by minute log would be required to determine who was driving at the material time, suggests that they must have been playing musical chairs. Because, other than children's party games, in real life, this does not happen.

If the vehicle was used separately by 3 pairs of people - would all 3 pairs have used it by 10.02am? Is there no clue in the time and location that could narrow it down?

Thank you very much to everybody who responded. It would seem that as we cannot provide driver details we need to respond as we did before to the Police and wait for them to either drop the case (unlikely from what you have all said) or prosecute the Company

But we have had a letter from the Met Police with yet another S172 stating its a final opportunity to provide info. Are you suggesting I shouldn't respond to that letter.  In a previous communication, I provided the names and addresses of all the people using the car on that morning but no one person was nominated.

If you fail to nominate anybody to the satisfaction of the police, the company will receive a fine of around £5K

Are you sure about that?

Of course I don’t know the setup of your company.

However, the likely fine for the Company (depending on its finances) will probably approach the maximum (£1,000 but discounted by third if you enter a guilty plea).

The chances of the Company successfully defending the more serious charge are very slim. It appears that no “diligence” has been employed to identify the driver other than to accept it could have been any one of six people. You do not seem to have made any other investigations to try to pin it down and if you (as “the Company”) go to court and offer that as a defence I am fairly sure you will fail.

However, the likely disposal for a driver for the speeding offence will be the offer of a course (provided he has not done one in the previous three years). This will cost around £100 and a few hours of his time, but no endorsement or points will be involved.

Any repercussions of nominating the driver most likely to have been driving are extremely slim. Strictly speaking, doing that does not meet the requirements of the request – you are asked to identify the driver, not the person most likely to have been the driver. But it is a pragmatic solution employed by many people on here, especially where only individuals are concerned and the likely outcome for one of them is six points.

It may be worth considering.