Mike-C:
Is everyone forgetting something here? Richie was advised he was getting a NIP even before he got it, his agency told him so. It could of /should of been sorted out there and then?
Cheers for that Mike
this IS relevant to this case and adds to it. i was told a week before the SCP wrote to me (their letter 31/08/2007, my post on here was 24/08/2007) which means there was clearly a conversation between pollocks and the agency before the agency informed me about it. explain how this came about when it was known that i was not driving?
could it be that you was booked for a shift at pollocks for that saturday but you decided you didnt want to go in there again because of your disagrement over how long the run took and the agency sent someone else in your place but didnt inform pollocks of this.
so the other drivers gone through a camera and pollocks not being informed of the driver change sees your name on the run sheet and the agency who seem very incompitant anyway sent it to you.
if you’d have gone down to pollocks / the agency to sort it out it wouldn’t have got to this stage, instead of blasting everyone left right and centre
Thinking about it - I am quite surprised that Pollocks don’t take a copy of agency drivers licence’s before they let them loose in their wagons. Fairly standard practice at most of the larger places I have worked.
Would not have needed to bring the agency into it then anyway … … …
i was already booked out for the week Jon. apart from that thursday, i have worked exclusively with one client for the past 2 months. that particular week, i was the only driver sent in there from my agency
are you telling me this is a mistake considering the following facts:
i was our only driver in there that week
i did a day shift, this was a night shift they were TOLD it wasnt me
either the management is seriously questionable or this was intentional. either way it doesnt say much for them (or any other company that gets into this situation)
it doesnt really matter now anyway. as i said before, this is in the hands of the SCP now. they will decide what action (if any) to take. there is nothing that anyone can do to influence it. as soon as i denied being the driver, its up to them. it is that simple
scott if it is you why did you always run from your car to the office in the morning when you were based in musselburgh always wanted to know always made me laugh
scania245:
scott if it is you why did you always run from your car to the office in the morning when you were based in musselburgh always wanted to know always made me laugh
cant the firm [pollocks] tell off the photo copy of your tacho[ im assuming they take one] who was driving, the firms i drove for on agency always took a copy when you got back and that would have ,times, dates , names etc.
i can understand how scanny fills but i think just talking to pollocks as many have said would have been wiser
Mike-C:
Is everyone forgetting something here? Richie was advised he was getting a NIP even before he got it, his agency told him so. It could of /should of been sorted out there and then?
Cheers for that Mike
this IS relevant to this case and adds to it. i was told a week before the SCP wrote to me (their letter 31/08/2007, my post on here was 24/08/2007) which means there was clearly a conversation between pollocks and the agency before the agency informed me about it. explain how this came about when it was known that i was not driving?
Well given the fact the agency give them your full adress to send to the NIP to i’d say thats how this has come about. Given the fact you have said you dislike Pollocks and want them done and not tried to sort this out earlier, i’d say Pollocks won’t have anything to worry about. Your agency might though. Between yourself, Pollocks and your agency i’d say the only one to come out of this looking good after the way it is going is going to be Pollocks. All Pollocks have done is contact your agency for the full name and address of one of their drivers who has been speeding?
Just looked at the NIP that’s been posted and I’ve noticed something.
The date between the offence taking place being 11/08/07 and the NIP being printed being 31/08/07 is 20 days.
Am I correct in believing that the Notice of Intended Prosecution letter must be printed within 14 days of the alleged offence otherwise they cannot prosecute?
This page quite clearly states that Quote: “If a vehicle is caught speeding or jumping a red-light by a safety camera, the registered keeper will be sent a notice of intended prosecution within 14 days of the alleged offence.”
always wanted to know always made me laugh 
Hmmmmmm, idle thought 
