Speed cameras - Legal loophole???
28 March 2003, 05:15 PM
#31
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 11,581
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why not just follow the advice of a couple of speed trap sites and not sign the document naming the driver at the time of the offence? If you fil the form in, you are satisfying the law, but there is no legal requirement to sign it. If you don't sign it, it becomes inadmissable as court evidence and as long as you don't verbally tell the court you were driving, you can't be prosecuted due to lack of evidence.
28 March 2003, 06:39 PM
#34
Scooby Regular
This was being done in the 70's to avoid parking tickets - the minor got the ticket and the driver got away scott free, now, that was 33 years ago!!! I would think that that loophole is well and truly filled!! 
Pete
Pete
29 March 2003, 11:59 PM
#36
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
MooseRacer - How do they proove actual ownership, all they have is the registered keeper, and if they are not saying who the owner is then the courts are knackered.
Chiark - It doesn't fall to the parents automatically. If a child under 10 commits an offence, it is seen in law that the child does not know right from wrong, so they get away with it and the crime remains undetected.
NotoriousREV - Its similar, only the child is too young to fill the form in or name any driver. The registerd keeper can also be prosecuted under use, cause, permit (which they may be tempted to go for if they can't determine the driver). However, again, due to the child's age they would not be able to prosecute. BTW I'm sure its still admisable in court if its not signed, its just classed as 'refused to sign'.
BuRR - "You can have a "technical TWOC" - which counts."
I thought by making this reply, you were reffering to this thread.
pslewis - Obviously not, I posted this thread to see if it had been.
[Edited by Felix. - 3/30/2003 12:00:49 AM]
Chiark - It doesn't fall to the parents automatically. If a child under 10 commits an offence, it is seen in law that the child does not know right from wrong, so they get away with it and the crime remains undetected.
NotoriousREV - Its similar, only the child is too young to fill the form in or name any driver. The registerd keeper can also be prosecuted under use, cause, permit (which they may be tempted to go for if they can't determine the driver). However, again, due to the child's age they would not be able to prosecute. BTW I'm sure its still admisable in court if its not signed, its just classed as 'refused to sign'.
BuRR - "You can have a "technical TWOC" - which counts."
I thought by making this reply, you were reffering to this thread.
pslewis - Obviously not, I posted this thread to see if it had been.
[Edited by Felix. - 3/30/2003 12:00:49 AM]
01 April 2003, 10:51 AM
#40
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 11,581
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
NotoriousREV - Its similar, only the child is too young to fill the form in or name any driver. The registerd keeper can also be prosecuted under use, cause, permit (which they may be tempted to go for if they can't determine the driver).
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Mattybr5@MB Developments
Full Cars Breaking For Spares
28
28 December 2015 11:07 PM
Mattybr5@MB Developments
Full Cars Breaking For Spares
12
18 November 2015 07:03 AM
Sub-Subaru
General Technical
1
28 September 2015 12:47 PM