In fact, it doesn't actually have to be a clone. Having the same registration number is enough.
Interesting story about woman in Nottingham who owns a Toyota car was given a ticket because a white van was seen parked in a bus lane with the same registration.
Raises interesting legal issues.
See tinyurl.com/az9a3a
and / or tinyurl.com/azm2bt
|
Same principle with a common or garden NIP for speeding etc. Prove it wasn't you driving or take the fine and points.
|
|
|
|
There are a raft of motoring laws that presume guilt. The fine and points that arrive through your letter box when you crossed a red traffic light, even though you did so by just a couple of feet to let an ambulance past. It's an absolute offence , thats one that simple says did you or didn't you with no ' because of's " allowed.
|
The first instance is easily dealt with. Since the recipient's vehicle is a car and not a van she could photocopy her logbook, with a covering letter, and let the council make up it's own mind. In the event that they prosecute they'll look pretty daft when she tells the court she's already advised them of the facts. She will then be able to claim her reasonable costs.
As for other offences - there are numerous details in a photo that will tend to prove/disprove the matter. Contacting the issuing office by phone will result in officers visiting you and investigating. These 'cloning' cases are nothing new and easily dealt with. And it's been said many times before on here - you don't receive a fine and 3 points by post, you have an option to plead not guilty and have the case heard. Yes I know people don't have the time, but when people are realistic about their guilt then 3 points and £60 is a good option, certainly one I'd take. Court is available for anyone else. It is not therefore correct to state that the law itself presumes guilt. the burden of proof on the prosecution has not changed and the case, if tested, must be proven beyond reasonable doubt. Perhaps what you really mean is that you don't like the conditional offer of fixed penalty system. This system made no amendments to existing law in terms of presuming guilt.
|
|
Woodster, thanks for that helpful explanation.
|
|
|
'there are numerous details in a photo that will tend to prove/disprove the matter.'
If that is the case, why send out a NIP if it can be disproved in the photo ?. Is it a case of hoping that some will just pay up and be done with it because they have neither the time nor money to go through the courts.
As for the cloning issue, I remember reading of a case where the same body kept sending tickets to the original vehicle and insisted that on EACH occasion, the case would have to be dealt with on an individual basis, even though they turner up time and time again with proof it was neither them or their vehicle but a cloned one.
|
|
|
she could photocopy her logbook with a covering letter and let the council make up it's own mind.
In the event that they prosecute they'll look pretty daft when she tells the court she's already advised them of the facts. She will then be able to claim her reasonable costs.
My thoughts exactly.
|
|
|
|
|
|
From the article, Lambeth ? council requested her details. If she's said it's not her, tell them to take it to court, whichever way they will - they can get it sorted out there.
|
|
|
|
If you are innocent then surely you can sue for harrassment, extortion and whatever else takes your fancy. They are after all trying to extract money under false pretences, whatever happened to innocent until proved guilty? oh I forgot, we are motorists................
|
|
Until you let them know that it wasn't you and you suspect you've been cloned, what reason have they to think it might not be you? The act of informing them that it was not your car then shifts the balance back over to them having to prove it was you, surely? I can't see how that's particularly unfair - why waste large amounts of money on an open and shut case in, for example, a car running a light?
|
|
I think a more joined up approach from the relevant authorities is required. You get a red light ticket from a clone of your car reg and you have to do all the chasing to prove it' wasn't you. Week later and a speed camera ticket arrives and off you go again. Then along comes a bus lane ticket, a parking ticket.... get the picture. Seems to be no way of sorting it out once and for all.
|
|
See psots from woodster & self.
|
One day I looked out of the window to see two policemen walking up the drive, they did not reach the door but started looking very closely at our car.
Went out to see what they wanted.
Them - Is this your car sir.
Me - No it is registered in my wife's name (of course they would already know this).
Them - Have you had it long?
Me - Since it was new, 8 years.
Them - A car with this number was used in a robbery in the south a few days ago.
At which point they depart without asking to see any documentation or even speak to my wife - the owner of the car.
The date - sometime in 1991!
So it is not new, and both vehicles were grey sierras
|
Similar thing happened to me one evening. Got a phone call from Lancashire Police.
'Do you own a Golf *** 24X ? ' 'My son does' 'Can you tell me where it is please'
' No problem it's here, at home, hasn't been on the road for a year or so '
An hour later a GMP policewoman sergeant knocked on the door to inspect it. It was all in bits with the engine out so she agreed it wAsn't the car they were looking for. She was very nice, had a cuppa and I told her about policing in the 'good old days'.
It had been in an 'incident in Blackburn or somewhere!
Ted
|
|
|
Old mate was woken up in the very early morning by armed police, through the front door with a battering ram.
His old Sierra (jelly mould model) had been nicked and used in a very nasty armed robbery that night and he hadn't noticed it gone.
A few minutes explaining that he and young family had been in all night watching Nole's House Party etc on Saturday evening sorted things out and the culprits were found by other means.
Not cloning but just shows that if your car is used by bad guys it can have nasty reprocussions.
|
|
|
|
|
I think a more joined up approach from the relevant authorities is required. You get a red light ticket from a clone of your car reg and you have to do all the chasing to prove it' wasn't you. Week later and a speed camera ticket arrives and off you go again. Then along comes a bus lane ticket a parking ticket.... get the picture. >>
no doubt all these offences are committed in different areas, different jurisdictions or handled by different staff...and/or you can't give a total exemption to the owner/driver of the genuine car, because they might commit an offence as well
e.g. cloned vehicle drives through bus lane covered by local authority A, then commits a speeding offence in Constabulary A, followed by speeding offence in constabulary B, parking offence in local authority B, beofre doing another bus lane in the first local authoity, but the matter is dealt with by someone different to the first one..or..they've dealt with so many between those times, they don't remember the car
and 'no' putting a marker on the Police National Computer which is possible, doesn't necessarily solve the problem, because A, the council can't access it and B, the genuine car might have a driver commit an offence as well, so they'd be sent the NIP (Notice of Intended Prosecution) at which point they could state the releavnt facts. They still have enter into some degree of correspondence with the authorities, to show the vehicle wasn't the offending vehicle because unsurprisingly loads of people try the cloned vehicle route to get off their own misdemeanours.
You couldn't possibly have a system whereby the claim that your car was cloned would automatically mean the offence was dropped..because all the oiks would do that automatically.....unless of course this modern system of prosecuting by camera was done away with in its' entirety
|
|
|
|
|
