There have been theories about loopholes in the law for years. People hear things about if this isnt checked or if the police forget to do this then they cant arrest you and most of the time, these things just arent true.
One of the most common theories people have is that if a police officer makes a mistake on a traffic offence ticket then that ticket is invalid and the charge is void, but as with most theories of this nature, there is very little truth to it.
This is because the ticket that he gives to you is not official evidence, it is just a brief overview of the offence and if you question the validity of the ticket due to an error, then all that will happen is that a court summons will be sent to you and the officer will have to draw up an official statement which he is not likely to make any errors on.
If you challenge the actual accusation however, i.e. you dont believe you did commit the offence they are accusing you of, then a mistake on a ticket could be put forward as evidence that the officers work is inaccurate and unreliable.
However if you did actually commit the offence and a police officer catches you, you dont really have a leg to stand on.
Another theory that has come up is that when the police ask you who was driving the vehicle at the time of the offence, you dont have to tell them because that would violate human rights. People think that if you are the registered keeper then you dont have to answer the question who was driving it as your human rights allow you to withhold this information.
In fact, this is simply not true. Human have been altered so that you do have to divulge who was driving at the time of offence or you face six points on your licence and a substantial fine. This is because of the importance of road safety.
Something else that is fairly common is that when people have insurance policies whereby they can drive other peoples cars with their permission, they will buy a new car and before they are changed to the registered keeper of the vehicle, they drive it around believing that they are insured to do so having kept their insurance on their old car, because officially the new one belongs to someone else.
This is not true either, if money has exchanged hands for the car then as far as a court of law is concerned the car belongs to you, and if you have not transferred the insurance over from your old vehicle, then you are not insured on the new one, and therefore driving illegally.
One of the most common theories people have is that if a police officer makes a mistake on a traffic offence ticket then that ticket is invalid and the charge is void, but as with most theories of this nature, there is very little truth to it.
This is because the ticket that he gives to you is not official evidence, it is just a brief overview of the offence and if you question the validity of the ticket due to an error, then all that will happen is that a court summons will be sent to you and the officer will have to draw up an official statement which he is not likely to make any errors on.
If you challenge the actual accusation however, i.e. you dont believe you did commit the offence they are accusing you of, then a mistake on a ticket could be put forward as evidence that the officers work is inaccurate and unreliable.
However if you did actually commit the offence and a police officer catches you, you dont really have a leg to stand on.
Another theory that has come up is that when the police ask you who was driving the vehicle at the time of the offence, you dont have to tell them because that would violate human rights. People think that if you are the registered keeper then you dont have to answer the question who was driving it as your human rights allow you to withhold this information.
In fact, this is simply not true. Human have been altered so that you do have to divulge who was driving at the time of offence or you face six points on your licence and a substantial fine. This is because of the importance of road safety.
Something else that is fairly common is that when people have insurance policies whereby they can drive other peoples cars with their permission, they will buy a new car and before they are changed to the registered keeper of the vehicle, they drive it around believing that they are insured to do so having kept their insurance on their old car, because officially the new one belongs to someone else.
This is not true either, if money has exchanged hands for the car then as far as a court of law is concerned the car belongs to you, and if you have not transferred the insurance over from your old vehicle, then you are not insured on the new one, and therefore driving illegally.
About the Author:
Driver defence service is an online service that provides free legal advice and free legal advice
No comments:
Post a Comment