Someone else speeding in my car

thesteve

Long story short, a mate of mine was caught on camera speeding in my car, but had moved to Oz by the time I got the fine to my house (it was a good two weeks after the offense, he was using it to tie up odds and ends before leaving).

I put his name and Oz address on the letter, sent it back to the cops and got another letter telling me I now had no obligation to take the points or pay the fine.

Now I got another letter saying the one they sent to Oz was returned, and the clocks ticking to pay the fine, reminding me of the offense, bla bla and asking for a clarification of who was driving!

My question is am I bound to cover this if they can't get in touch with the driver, as the vehicle was registered to me? Is it my responsibility to get the driver to accept the letter / cough up the fine and their license details? Or are the cops chancing their arms?

Any advice would be appreciated!

CiniO

I generally have no experience in this matter, but from what I heard in this forum before, is that you are responsible for a fine and points, until other person accepts it.
So if they can't find your friend in Oz, or if he's not accepting the fine, you will be responsible.

For me it sounds extremally ridiculous (how can you be responsible for what other person did), but that seems to be the sad reality in Ireland.

bugler

CiniO wrote: »

For me it sounds extremally ridiculous (how can you be responsible for what other person did), but that seems to be the sad reality in Ireland.

Would any fine be paid if you could pawn it off on a guy halfway around the world?

CiniO

bugler wrote: »

Would any fine be paid if you could pawn it off on a guy halfway around the world?

The goal of issuing fines and points, is to fine a person who committed an offense.
Fining car owner when real offender rejects to pay a fine, is definitely not a way to obtain this goal.

corktina

if you didnt do the crime, you dont have to do the ...er, fine. Not your problem.

uberwolf

CiniO wrote: »

The goal of issuing fines and points, is to fine a person who committed an offense.
Fining car owner when real offender rejects to pay a fine, is definitely not a way to obtain this goal.

'the real offender' is accusing the OP of lying. The car owner was the driver until he can prove otherwise.

Jimbob 83

Love how you let this so called friend borrow your car and now he can't be seen for dust

Markcheese

The " a big boy did it and ran away " defense..... If he's your mate he should take the rap and get u off the hook....

Nissan doctor

If it came down to it, would it not be up to the Garda to prove that the OP was driving?

What sort of speed camera was it do you know? I'd ask the Garda do they have a picture of the offence.

K.Flyer

The simple answer is that the registered owner of the car is liable for any fines, penalties or points unless someone else accepts the responsability, signs the declaration on the back of the summons and sends it back to the fines office with all of their driving license details on it.

(from experience)

Yakuza

CiniO wrote: »

The goal of issuing fines and points, is to fine a person who committed an offense.
Fining car owner when real offender rejects to pay a fine, is definitely not a way to obtain this goal.

Cinio, I think you're mistaken in assuming the state values justice being done over the fact that someone gets done for it and forks over the money.

Sure isn't it like shooting fish in a barrel - presume the registered owner is guilty (by deeming him responsible) unless he can prove otherwise?

lostboy

well like, you now have a letter saying you were not responsible?

longhalloween

uberwolf wrote: »

'the real offender' is accusing the OP of lying. The car owner was the driver until he can prove otherwise.

That's how it goes. It was your car in your name, so you're responsible for it.

Sorry.

Jimbob 83

Fact is your friend is now living in OZ which means those harmless points here will mean something much bigger to him the way things are over there if he accepts them.

Was your friend insured to drive the car as insurance documentation should be tracable.

CiniO

uberwolf wrote: »

The car owner was the driver until he can prove otherwise.

Any link for any law stating the above?
Why would the owner be automatically considered to be driving the car?

I thought it was up to the accuser to prove someone was guilty, not to the accused person to prove he is innocent.

If I borrowed my knife to someone and that person would use it for murder, would I be automatically accused, and would it be up to me to prove it wasn't me who killed?the real offender' is accusing the OP of lying.

CiniO

Jimbob 83 wrote: »

Was your friend insured to drive the car as insurance documentation should be tracable.

That's the perfect point for the guards to start.
If his friend wasn't insured, then instead of doing OP for speeding (which he didn't commit), they should do OP for letting vehicle to uninsured driver.

uberwolf

CiniO wrote: »

Any link for any law stating the above?
Why would the owner be automatically considered to be driving the car?

I thought it was up to the accuser to prove someone was guilty, not to the accused person to prove he is innocent.

If I borrowed my knife to someone and that person would use it for murder, would I be automatically accused, and would it be up to me to prove it wasn't me who killed?the real offender' is accusing the OP of lying.

No, I don't have a link.

To borrow your analogy. If your gun, for which you held a license, was used to kill someone and there was absolutely no evidence to show that you were innocent of the killing how do you think that would work out for you?

snowman707

Nissan doctor wrote: »

If it came down to it, would it not be up to the Garda to prove that the OP was driving?

What sort of speed camera was it do you know? I'd ask the Garda do they have a picture of the offence.

K.Flyer wrote: »

The simple answer is that the registered owner of the car is liable for any fines, penalties or points unless someone else accepts the responsability, signs the declaration on the back of the summons and sends it back to the fines office with all of their driving license details on it.

(from experience)

and proper order too

CiniO

Jimbob 83 wrote: »

Love how you let this so called friend borrow your car and now he can't be seen for dust

Are you trying to suggest that OP is not telling us all the truth?

masseyno9

CiniO wrote: »

Any link for any law stating the above?
Why would the owner be automatically considered to be driving the car?

I thought it was up to the accuser to prove someone was guilty, not to the accused person to prove he is innocent.

If I borrowed my knife to someone and that person would use it for murder, would I be automatically accused, and would it be up to me to prove it wasn't me who killed?the real offender' is accusing the OP of lying.

I agree it's a stupid way of operating, but it's commonly known that "innocent 'til proven guilty" doesn't apply to motoring offences. It's been on here a good bit.

OP, I'd argue the case, but I'd also get onto your "friend" and have him take his points and fine. Sure if he's in oz, the points hardly carry over? Was the notice that was sent to him actually rejected by him, or was it just undelivered. Is it possible the address wasn't transcribed properly?

Jimbob 83

CiniO wrote: »

Are you trying to suggest that OP is not telling us all the truth?

No it's exactly as stated, has his friend taken responsablility ?

CiniO

uberwolf wrote: »

No, I don't have a link.

To borrow your analogy. If your gun, for which you held a license, was used to kill someone and there was absolutely no evidence to show that you were innocent of the killing how do you think that would work out for you?

So you are saying, that if I had a gun licensed on my name, and I would borrow this gun to a friend who used it to kill someone, I could be automatically prosecuted for murder without any other evidence?
Would it be up to me to prove I was innocent?
I would think, that for being accused for murder, there must be an evidence provided that person accused it guilty.
If law in Ireland really works in a way you are saying, I should consider moving away then.

My understanding is that if I let my gun to someone who commited murder with it, then I should be prosecuted for letting gun to unauthorised person, but not for murder.

Obviously I don't have a gun neither licence for it, but example is nearly equivalent to OP's speeding fine example.

Del2005

CiniO wrote: »

Any link for any law stating the above?
Why would the owner be automatically considered to be driving the car?

I thought it was up to the accuser to prove someone was guilty, not to the accused person to prove he is innocent.

If I borrowed my knife to someone and that person would use it for murder, would I be automatically accused, and would it be up to me to prove it wasn't me who killed?the real offender' is accusing the OP of lying.

Driving isn't a right it's a privilege, or so the EU ruled. The usual assumed innocents doesn't enter it as you've no legal right to drive, you drive at the pleasure of our leaders, so they can make up any rule they want

corktina

I dont think that Legal Opinions on here are worth the Plasma they are written on.

Go to court if necessary, take the Oath and tell the Judge it was not you driving, then ask the Gard/Prosecution to furnish whatever evidence they have.If they have none (which according to you OP they wont have), then HOW do you all imagine he can get the fine/points?

Jimbob 83

CiniO wrote: »

So you are saying, that if I had a gun licensed on my name, and I would borrow this gun to a friend who used it to kill someone, I could be automatically prosecuted for murder without any other evidence?
Would it be up to me to prove I was innocent?
I would think, that for being accused for murder, there must be an evidence provided that person accused it guilty.
If law in Ireland really works in a way you are saying, I should consider moving away then.

My understanding is that if I let my gun to someone who commited murder with it, then I should be prosecuted for letting gun to unauthorised person, but not for murder.

Obviously I don't have a gun neither licence for it, but example is nearly equivalent to OP's speeding fine example.

You would probably do jailtime for not reporting your firearm stolen tbh.

Makes sense to me.

CiniO

Del2005 wrote: »

Driving isn't a right it's a privilege, or so the EU ruled. The usual assumed innocents doesn't enter it as you've no legal right to drive, you drive at the pleasure of our leaders, so they can make up any rule they want

I read the article linked by you.
Situation was significantly different there, as car owners refused to provide information who was driving, while OP didn't refuse to do so, and gave details of person who committed offence to authorities.

From article:

Those who keep and drive motor cars have accepted certain responsibilities and obligations ... in the legal framework of the United Kingdom, these responsibilities include the obligation, in the event of suspected road traffic offences, to inform the authorities of the identity of the driver.

I know it's UK, but maybe it's similar in Ireland. OP did inform authorities of indentity of the driver who committed offence.
Now it shouldn't be OP responsibility to catch him and force him to pay the fine. It's guards job to find and prosecute offender.

CiniO

corktina wrote: »

I dont think that Legal Opinions on here are worth the Plasma they are written on.

Go to court if necessary, take the Oath and tell the Judge it was not you driving, then ask the Gard/Prosecution to furnish whatever evidence they have.If they have none (which according to you OP they wont have), then HOW do you all imagine he can get the fine/points?

I agree with you.
I'm of the opinion, that he shouldn't be prosecuted for speeding until they prove it was him driving.

Nissan doctor

A couple of years ago when the wife only had her new car a few months, we got a letter with a fuzzy picture in which you could make out nothing but the registration, from the M50 toll saying we were overdue payment for a trip made. I rang them and told them that the car wasn't even in Dublin on the day mentioned(or any day near it). These letters and phone calls went on for a few weeks. eventually, a solicitors letter was sent, demanding evidential proof from them, other then an easily copied reg plate, that it was our car and my wife driving.

A couple of days later and a phone call saying they could not provide legal proof and would therefore not be pursuing the matter further.


Now the same has to be true in a situation like above, it may be assumed that the OP/car owner was driving, but if they say they weren't, then surely, in order to legally issue a fine, the Garda have to provide proof that it was the OP who committed the offence.

CiniO

Nissan doctor wrote: »

A couple of years ago when they wife only had her new car a few months, we got a letter with a fuzzy picture in which you could make out nothing but the registration, from the M50 toll saying we were overdue payment for a trip made. I rang them and told them that the car wasn't even in Dublin on the day mentioned(or any day near it). These letters and phone calls went on for a few weeks. eventually, a solicitors letter was sent, demanding evidential proof from them, other then an easily copied reg plate, that it was our car and my wife driving.

A couple of days later and a phone call saying they could not provide legal proof and would therefore not be pursuing the matter further.


Now the same has to be true in a situation like above, it may be assumed that the OP/car owner was driving, but if they say they weren't, then surely, in order to legally issue a fine, the Garda have to provide proof that it was the OP who committed the offence.

That sounds exactly as it should be working. I hope it it.

meathstevie

First important issue with a fixed penalty ticket is the following; it's an offer for an out of court settlement as a means of dealing with a driving offence.

If you don't accept the settlement; as in don't pay the fine or reply to the correspondence as a rule a summons to go and explain your actions in the district court will follow.

Now, OP, you're stating that you weren't driving the car but a friend of yours who has now left the country was. That's fine, not every vehicle is driven by the registered owner all the time so that's why there's an option to provide details of the driver on the documents sent out to you.

Your main problem is that the driver at the time is no longer in the jurisdiction so you can either clarify this with the fixed penalty folks or you can go and explain this in court. You will need to provide full ID details for your friend in either case ( name, date of birth and last known address in Ireland and preferably current address abroad ).

Now if either the fixed penalty folk or the district court judge accept that it was likely that your friend was driving ( remember, it's an offence, prosecutor must prove the facts beyond all reasonable doubt, as in make the district judge doubt that it was you, it could have been someone else driving that should be you in the clear ) he can expect a summons and maybe a warrant against him when he returns to Ireland from his time in Australia.

bugler

Nissan doctor wrote: »

If it came down to it, would it not be up to the Garda to prove that the OP was driving?

What sort of speed camera was it do you know? I'd ask the Garda do they have a picture of the offence.

I'm now wondering if I should wear a balaclava while driving.

Who needs to keep an eye out for speed cameras?!

thesteve

Thanks for all the replies. I'll call them tomorrow and see what they say.

For the sake of clarity;

What sort of speed camera was it do you know? I'd ask the Garda do they have a picture of the offence.

It was a screenshot of the plate in the letter

The " a big boy did it and ran away " defense..... If he's your mate he should take the rap and get u off the hook....

My mate isn't dodging the bullet, he lives at the address I stated, he doesn't know why it was returned. I can pay the fine on his behalf and get it back off him but what can either of us do if the post is being returned out of our control

well like, you now have a letter saying you were not responsible?

I threw the fecking thing out weeks ago, raging, I presumed it was all over with on my end

Fact is your friend is now living in OZ which means those harmless points here will mean something much bigger to him the way things are over there if he accepts them.

I seriously doubt points or traffic offenses transfer to Oz

Was your friend insured to drive the car as insurance documentation should be tracable.

Nope, he literally had the car for a few hours

they should do OP for letting vehicle to uninsured driver.

Ya, I thought about that too

OP, I'd argue the case, but I'd also get onto your "friend" and have him take his points and fine. Sure if he's in oz, the points hardly carry over? Was the notice that was sent to him actually rejected by him, or was it just undelivered. Is it possible the address wasn't transcribed properly?

As mentioned, he lives there and will take the points but how can we 'complete the transaction' when the letter didn't get through

Now if either the fixed penalty folk or the district court judge accept that it was likely that your friend was driving ( remember, it's an offence, prosecutor must prove the facts beyond all reasonable doubt, as in make the district judge doubt that it was you, it could have been someone else driving that should be you in the clear ) he can expect a summons and maybe a warrant against him when he returns to Ireland from his time in Australia.

I thought as much. If it was a harsh offense I'd go the court route. It's 80 euro and 2 points (I have none, I've only been done for speeding once at 5mph over the limit before penalty points came in) so for that much hassle inc. solicitors and time off work, I'd take the hit and learn my lesson never to lend out my car again.


Thanks for the advice!

CiniO

thesteve wrote: »

Nope, he literally had the car for a few hours



Ya, I thought about that too

So you lent a car to uninsured driver.

In that case, if I were you, I would accept speeding fine and points, as this might be way smaller than fine for letting car to someone uninsured (even for few hours)

Technically by accepting a fine, you are admitting you were driving, which in this case would be a false statement.
But I doubt guards would investigate any further if you pay it, even though they should IMHO.

thesteve

So you lent a car to uninsured driver.

I didn't say he was uninsured, he wasn't on my insurance, that doesn't mean he wasn't insured to drive the vehicle. It might be an offense to drive uninsured, but what's the offense in lending a vehicle to someone (who may or may not have their own insurance)?

Big Nasty

If you're not bothered about the points chalk it up and get your buddy to send you the money for the fine.

He'll owe you a night on the town on his return also.

CiniO

thesteve wrote: »

I didn't say he was uninsured

Someone asked you if your friend was insured to drive, and you answered: nope.
That's why I understood he was not insured.

, he wasn't on my insurance, that doesn't mean he wasn't insured to drive the vehicle. It might be an offense to drive uninsured, but what's the offense in lending a vehicle to someone (who may or may not have their own insurance)?

I can't find appropriate SI at the moment, but there definitely is one stating that it's an offense for vehicle owner to allow uninsured person to drive it.

mickdw

What about if you resent them the guys name with a new australian address - an address that is guaranteed to reply to them. i.e anyone you know in australia.
If the reply contained payment for the fine and stated that foreign licence was held, would this make the points go away?

mcgarrett

Originally Posted by uberwolf
The car owner was the driver until he can prove otherwise.

CiniO wrote: »

Any link for any law stating the above?
Why would the owner be automatically considered to be driving the car?

I thought it was up to the accuser to prove someone was guilty, not to the accused person to prove he is innocent.

If I borrowed my knife to someone and that person would use it for murder, would I be automatically accused, and would it be up to me to prove it wasn't me who killed?the real offender' is accusing the OP of lying.

Section 107 of the Road Traffic Act 1961 places a number of obligations on the registered owner of a vehicle where an offence has been alleged. Section 107(4) to be more specific.

teednab-el

What happens if your car is stolen and speedd camera catches it and issues fine and point to your name? Even if car is recovered but the thief isn't. What happens then?

Jimbob 83

teednab-el wrote: »

What happens if your car is stolen and speedd camera catches it and issues fine and point to your name? Even if car is recovered but the thief isn't. What happens then?

If car isn't reported stolen within a reasonable time you will be liable

teednab-el

Jimbob 83 wrote: »

teednab-el wrote: »

What happens if your car is stolen and speedd camera catches it and issues fine and point to your name? Even if car is recovered but the thief isn't. What happens then?

If car isn't reported stolen within a reasonable time you will be liable

If it is reported, who pays fine then if the thief isn't found?

T-Maxx

A vehicle is registered in someone's name, a knife is not. (Same goes for firearms.)

And this here case is one of the reasons why.

bazz26

Some muppet was caught driving my car too:

Jimbob 83

teednab-el wrote: »

If it is reported, who pays fine then if the thief isn't found?

Once a vehicle is reported stolen it is well, reported stolen until that time it is assumed that it is either being driven by the owner or with the owners consent by someone else.

Common sense really, this is why you don't lend out cars or guns etc :pac:

R0bb01987

if the summons is not served to you correctly then the case can be thrown out of court on the day but i'm not sure if this works with motor offences of this kind as they are generally just a fine and dont go to court till after the fine payment date has expired.

One way around it would be ask the guards for a picture of the car which should show the reg the name of the road and the time it was taken. This is normally on the original letter. If you were in work at the time your job may be able to write you a letter to this effect. The flipside to this as mentioned earlier is that if you friend wasnt insured to drive your car then the guards might throw another fine onto it.

Really your between a rock and a hard place. If your mates doesnt own up its really your word against theirs.

CiniO

mcgarrett wrote: »

Section 107 of the Road Traffic Act 1961 places a number of obligations on the registered owner of a vehicle where an offence has been alleged. Section 107(4) to be more specific.

(4) Where a member of the Garda Síochána has reasonable grounds for believing that there has been an offence under this Act involving the use of a mechanically propelled vehicle—

(a) the owner of the vehicle shall, if required by the member state whether he was or was not actually using the vehicle at the material time and, if he fails to do so, shall be guilty of an offence,

(b) if the owner of the vehicle states that he was not actually using it at the material time, he shall give such information as he may be required by the member to give as to the identity of the person who was actually using it at that time and, if he fails to do so, shall be 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 that person was,

(c) any person other than the owner of the vehicle shall, if required by the member, give any information which it is in his power to give and which may lead to the identification of the person who was actually using the vehicle at the material time and, if he fails to do so, shall be guilty of an offence.

So according to this, vehicle owner is obliged to give identification information of who was driving, as it's an offense to refuse it. Fair enough.

But nowhere is said, that vehicle owner is guilty of an offense committed on the road, if person who he pointed out as the one who was driving, doesn't respond or doesn't accept liability, etc...

MugMugs

bazz26 wrote: »

Some muppet was caught driving my car too:

I lold

teednab-el

Jimbob 83 wrote: »

teednab-el wrote: »

If it is reported, who pays fine then if the thief isn't found?

Once a vehicle is reported stolen it is well, reported stolen until that time it is assumed that it is either being driven by the owner or with the owners consent by someone else.

Common sense really, this is why you don't lend out cars or guns etc :pac:

if car is reported stolen first to gardai before speed cameras later detect that the car was speeding. Is the fine overruled then?

air

Since your mate is happy to co-operate should have just gotten your mate's details and entered them on the first notice you got and that would have been the end of it. The points shouldn't bother him as the clock will start on them as soon as it's paid and will have partially expired by the time he gets back.

Wossack

teednab-el wrote: »

if car is reported stolen first to gardai before speed cameras later detect that the car was speeding. Is the fine overruled then?

I wouldnt say overruled, as in squashed. I would imagine the intent would then be to try and apply any fines or points to the thief, if one is found