Tacho Card as Defence for NIP

UK PROFESSIONAL DRIVERS FORUMS THE UK PROFESSIONAL DRIVERS FORUM (INTERACTIVE)
1

Hi All,

I have just been informed by the firm I am working for that there is a notice of inpending prosecution on its way to me for doing 35 in a 30mph limit. Now I know this road well, even though it is a dual carriageway with nothing but waste land at the side of it, there is an unmarked van parked on it frequently. I am convinced that I was not speeding so asked to see my Tacho charts for the day. The offence was supposed to have taken place at 12.18pm but my tacho chart shows the vehicle stationary from 12.14 until 13.00 apart from a small movement at 12.25 which was less than 20kmph. I know from my time sheets that this was the time I was at a factory loading.
My question is, as anyone used a Tachograph chart as evidence in a speeding case and is it worth going to court.

Thanks for all comments
regards
westie

2

You have my full sympathy on this mate, even if you were doing 35 and I’m definetly not saying that you were, I can hardly see any justification to such a harsh penalty as three points and the consequences of such that face people who drive for a living. As for the tacho itself, I’m sure I’ve read on here that a tacho alone can’t be used to prove innocence or guilt but don’t quote me on that. Would it be possible to get proof from the factory of the times you were there, from a gate house if they have one. Even if the tacho does show you as stationarry, they’ll just claim that the tacho clock was wrong even if only a few minutes out.

3

Westie, I’d contest it. You’ve got a good case and they’ll more than likely drop it. My course of action would be to ask for photographic evidence and I’ll bet that they can’t produce it.

4

Rob K:
Westie, I’d contest it. You’ve got a good case and they’ll more than likely drop it. My course of action would be to ask for photographic evidence and I’ll bet that they can’t produce it.

Sounds good to me.

5

Robinhood you voiced my thoughts about the tacho clock.
Apparently a tacho trace is inadmissible evidence regarding speeding offences…when referencing to speed. However, in this case, the vehicle was apparently stationary, as you say, if the factory gate records (& cameras??) can prove the vehicle was elsewhere at the time, then you definately have a case.

Suggest this thread is reposted in the legal section further down the index page.

A case in point indeed for making sure the forkies always enter the time when signing the paper work.

6

Now i would say you wouldnt be able to use this as whats to stop you tomorrow putting a chart in with the wrong date on it (IE the date of the offence) and parking up from 12 till 1230

But saying that i’d still go for it as we all know the law is there to be abused so go for it

simon

7

Rob K:
Westie, I’d contest it. You’ve got a good case and they’ll more than likely drop it. My course of action would be to ask for photographic evidence and I’ll bet that they can’t produce it.

And even if they can produce some photographic evidence, it is usually crap and wouldn’t stand up in court.

If you know you haven’t committed an offence then fight it all the way.

Good Luck

8

this has been argued recently AND WON! a driver received the NIP, wanted to use his tacho as defence and was refused. he argued that if it can be used as evidence for the prosecution then surely it can be used for defence. it was accepted and he was allowed to use it. i think this case was printed recently (within the last month) in Commercial Motor so it may be worth checking with them :wink:

9

SimonRS2K:
Now i would say you wouldnt be able to use this as whats to stop you tomorrow putting a chart in with the wrong date on it (IE the date of the offence) and parking up from 12 till 1230

Wouldn’t he then have the problem of having no tacho for 26/10/2005 and the associated un-accounted for driving time, km’s etc etc etc and then potentially get done for that if there was ever an inspection? At the end of the day the only way around this in the future is being a foreigner or holding a foreign licence, as then they can only fine you, but your licence, ie your lively hood is un-touchable. As this is pretty much out of the question for most people, we’ll just keep on getting abused by the law, and I say abused because thats exactly what it is, we’re not talking about serious criminal activitiy, but extremely minor speeding that goes side by side with being a human being and not a perfectly peogrammed robot at all times.

10

robinhood_1984:
Wouldn’t he then have the problem of having no tacho for 26/10/2005 and the associated un-accounted for driving time, km’s etc etc etc

Probably, but not with the police regarding this speeding offence which is what the thread is about

simon

11

I reckon you’ve got a defence, with the tacho evidence backed up by the CCTV and the log in the gatehouse. Basically the harder you make it for the Police or CPS to get an easy conviction the more likley they are to drop it.

12

Try asking on http://www.5ive-o.org the website is run by serving officers and are usually on the ball. :wink:

13

bottom line is you’re innocent until proven guilty so they ‘have’ to produce some kind of evidence.

If it was a camera van then there will be a photo, you’re entitled to see it.

If it’s a couple of coppers with their gun then it’s your word agaisnt theirs and you’ll also have witnesses putting you somwhere else.

14

Commercial Motor is a good one to try, was only a few weeks back.
Also, you could look at the Pepipoo website.
The guy in CM didn’t actually get to court if I remember rightly, he was on his way to court and was contacted to be told the case had been dropped, they obviously didn’t like the idea that someone may use the tacho in their defence, like they can use it in the prosecution.
In fact, when the digital tacho comes in, it could make the prosecutions case even harder to prove in cases like this, they are supposed to be proofed against fiddling :laughing: :laughing: :laughing: :laughing:

15

You also need to consider your position when you get the NIP - if you were not at that location at the specified time you might be best not to reply, or at least to ask to see the photograph before you reply. 35 is a very marginal excess speed - the whole system depends on them shuffling out lots of paper and you sending back sixty pounds - I doubt if they could be bothered to prosecute in court over such a case, as long as you don’t tell any lies or cause them any hassle - maybe its best to lie low.

16

serving officers and are usually on the ball

or should that be on the bill :laughing: :laughing:

17

Have a look here at my post (13th down the list) for some tips that might prove useful.

I was also going to mention about the case recently reported in the Trade Mags but Scanny beat me to it!! :wink:

18

Dratsabasti said;

In fact, when the digital tacho comes in, it could make the prosecutions case even harder to prove in cases like this, they are supposed to be proofed against fiddling

The bit about being harder to fiddle is true (although nothing is impossible). However, the digital tacho records the speed of the vehicle to a resolution of 1 km every second. But, like all tachographs, it is only required to read within +/- 6 km/h of the true road speed.The problem is that this record is overwritten after 24 hours of driving. Unless you knew at the time and did a vehicle download immediately the chances of the speed record still existing when the NIP drops on your doormat are about zero. Still the printout for the day will show at what times your vehicle was moving and stationary, so if you were stationary in a yard and the prosecution alledge you were speeding down the road, the printout will help you. But you will have to explain that the tacho clock records in UTC so in summer there will be a time difference of 1 hour (in the UK)

19

The problem of the time stated on the tacho remains the same though. As he was supposedly caught speeding 4 minutes after his tacho says he was stopped, they’d just assume his tacho clock was out. I’ve never been in a truck yet where the tacho clock setting was right, they’re always out by 3 or 4 minutes, and one truck was out by 38 minutes!!!

20

Petrock Wrote:

You also need to consider your position when you get the NIP - if you were not at that location at the specified time you might be best not to reply, or at least to ask to see the photograph before you reply.

NO NO NO, This would consitution an offence under Section 172 of the Road Traffic Act

172.–(1) This section applies–
(a) to any offence under the preceding provisions of this Act except–
(i) an offence under Part V, or
(ii) an offence under section 13, 16, 51(2), 61(4), 67(9), 68(4), 96 or 117,
and to an offence under section 178 of this Act,
(b) to any offence under sections 25, 26, 27 and 45 of the [1988 c. 53.] Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988, and
(c) to any offence against any other enactment relating to the use of vehicles on roads.
(2) Where the driver of a vehicle is alleged to be guilty of an offence to which this section applies–
(a) the person keeping the vehicle shall give such information as to the identity of the driver as he may be required to give by or on behalf of a chief officer of police, and
(b) any other person shall if required as stated above give any information which it is in his power to give and may lead to identification of the driver.
In this subsection references to the driver of a vehicle include references to the person riding a cycle.

(3) A person who fails to comply with the requirement of subsection (2)(a) above is guilty of an offence unless he shows to the satisfaction of the court that he did not know and could not with reasonable diligence have ascertained who the driver of the vehicle or, as the case may be, the rider of the cycle was.

(4) A person who fails to comply with the requirement of subsection (2)(b) above is guilty of an offence

(The right of the Police to request this information has been appealed to the House of Lords and upheld).

The CPS would then take both cases to court. The defense of the S172 case would be to admit you were driving at the time and therefore an admisstion of guilt to the speeding offence.

The magistrate would think you were trying it on and may be inclined to pass a greater punishment (Fine & Points).

Should you not admit to driving and be convicted of the S172 offence you would still receive 3 Points. Insurance companies take a dimmer view of the offence code (MS90)on your driving licence for this offence than they do for speeding.

You only have the legal right to see any evidence against you, AFTER you have elected to go to court. Which you can only do by completing the NIP and receiving a conditional offer, which you then must refuse and elect to go to court.