Free Traffic Legal Advice

Hi I would appreciate any help. I received a NIP on 22/4/25 for a speeding offence on 17/04/25 for doing 59 in 30mph zone. I am the RK of the vehicle but I was not driving at the time. I sent off the details for the individual driving who lives abroad. The police asked for further details on the individual's licence and insurance. The individual showed me his license and motor policy and I shared the information I had to the police to the best of my knowledge. The police responded by saying it is easy to nominate a driver abroad and require copies of his documents. I responded by saying I saw his documents and didn't think (or know how) to validate his license. In hindsight I regret making this error and did not think this would happen. On the 24/09/25 I received a SJP notice for 2 offences. Permit the driving of a motor vehicle otherwise than in accordance with a license - non endorsable offence. Permit use of motor vehicle with no insurance. I intend to plead not guilty to both offences as I feel hard done by this situation. However I am worried as I have no hard evidence and the police have referred to Section 101 or the magistrates court act 1980 stating the burden shall be on the defendant. What advise do you have?

I contacted him when I received the original NIP and again when the police requested further documenation. Infuriatingly he has not responded and I can't get a hold of him. I've tried going through mutuals but no luck. I'm so annoyed at myself I haven't really experienced this before when lending/borrowing cars.

I intend to plead not guilty to both offences as I feel hard done by this situation. However I am worried as I have no hard evidence and the police have referred to Section 101 or the magistrates court act 1980 stating the burden shall be on the defendant. What advise do you have?

You should only really plead not guilty if you have a defence.  Feeling 'hard done by' is not a defence.

As you note, most offences require the prosecution to prove your guilt but some, particularly insurance, the burden is reversed.  (The defendant has to prove the necessary cover was in place)

Without a defence, going to a contested trial will result in an additional costs bill on top of the sentence (also losing guilty plea discounts).

Struggling to see how s. 101 MCA applies - the driver being insured is not an exemption to the offence - it removes the entire legal basis of the allegation.

Case law provides that driving without insurance is a reverse burden offence - it is very difficult for the prosecution to prove a negative, and should be trivial for the driver to prove that he was insured, so for that offence to be workable, there must be a reverse burden of proof.

However, you have been charged with permitting. I am not aware of any case law specifically on the burden of proof for permitting. Whilst it is entirely sensible to impose a reverse burden of proof on the driver to prove that he was insured, it does not necessarily follow that the same should hold true for the person charged with permitting.

Where this starts to make my head hurt is that nobody involved in the process believes that the person you are accused of permitting to drive without a licence or insurance was actually driving. This is what is known as a prosecution under s. 69 of the Ways and Means Act. They think that you have failed to name the driver. They think that you have perverted the course of justice and/or committed perjury, but proving it beyond any reasonable doubt would be somewhere between too difficult and impossible.

If convicted, you can expect 6 points and a hefty fine for the permitting no insurance offence,

Thank you for all the advise I will seek some legal advice on how to proceed but leaning towards pleading guilty as I have no photographic evidence/copy of the insurance policy he had. The SJP notes include the police stating that they are unable to confirm or negate the existence of the driver. I just assumed the police abroad would be able to handle the chasing of their end since I have given his adress.

From what I've heard, most if not all EU insurances cover the vehicle rather than specific named drivers. As others have said, there's not much overseas police can or will do to find the driver. Was he from an EU country? Since the B word the UK has lost access to EU driver records, and the same applies to EU countries losing access to the DVSA database.

He was from Belgium. Would the authorities abroad not be able to access the database based on the name and address, and supply a digital copy of the driver's license/ insurance policy?

Technically, yes.  But it’s still your reverse burden.

From what I've heard, most if not all EU insurances cover the vehicle rather than specific named drivers. As others have said, there's not much overseas police can or will do to find the driver. Was he from an EU country? Since the B word the UK has lost access to EU driver records, and the same applies to EU countries losing access to the DVSA database.

Before Brexit it's reputed the UK police forces never  applied to EU countries for 'owner' details.
France did issue penalty notices to UK RKs, initially in French, and, just before Brexit, in an English language version.