mjw Posted August 26, 2008 Share Posted August 26, 2008 really? Ill give you call then or can i just say you were driving? Trust me a very good friend of mine is a traffic cop,and you wouldnt belive the amount of convictions(for speeding) that get thrown out ,as the court as to convict you of a speeding offence within 6 months of it taking place,once you get a summons to appear in court(i wouldnt ignore a summons or you may get a visit) it is way passed the 6 month stage so the offence turns into failure to furnish which the court has to prove,which is very hard. The way some camera partnerships are set up it may never get to the court stage as they cannot go after every one who ignores them and if everyone ignored them no one would ever recieve a ticket!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arfur mo Posted August 26, 2008 Share Posted August 26, 2008 Havent opted out but i know someone who as and was not asked to provide any details apart from signing a bit of paper to confirm his vehicle WILL not be used privately,although almost all vehicles are tracked and how do you prove a negative?????,in law you are innocent untill proved (beyond resonable doubt) guilty,unfortunatley with the HMRC you are guilty unitll you prove you are innocent unfortunately that idea went out the window with the introduction of yellow lines anyway, as someone who has employed others, if i supplied a vehicle and was approached by an employee wishing to opt out i think it would be prudent to ask what viable alternative transport they had. if i just took their word and they got caught out i could possibly be held as complicit in a fraud or without insurrance cover in a accident if the vehicle was driven oot of work time, having no proof of checking the legitimacy of the opting out, and that may just be the reason for the questions to prevent any future blame being attributed. surely the simplest thing is to ask the employer the reasons for the intrussion into your mates privacy, followed by a pertinant question to his tax office? regs alan If you think education is difficult, try being stupid!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cubit Posted August 26, 2008 Share Posted August 26, 2008 Trust me a very good friend of mine is a traffic cop,and you wouldnt belive the amount of convictions(for speeding) that get thrown out ,as the court as to convict you of a speeding offence within 6 months of it taking place,once you get a summons to appear in court(i wouldnt ignore a summons or you may get a visit) it is way passed the 6 month stage so the offence turns into failure to furnish which the court has to prove,which is very hard. Not true! That applies to the NIP Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjw Posted August 26, 2008 Share Posted August 26, 2008 Not true!That applies to the NIP i think you will find it is....and i am not going any further with this one although i do know a number of a very good solicitor Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cubit Posted August 26, 2008 Share Posted August 26, 2008 i think you will find it is....and i am not going any further with this one although i do know a number of a very good solicitor Slight error on my part, a NIP is subject to a 14 day rule. however, the police only have to lodge papers of intended prosecution with court within 6 months. After that the court process may take its dreary way. That is different to actually being prosecuted within the 6 months Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.