Reasonable Diligence (often called Due Diligence) is the process of care & attention that would be expected to be exercised by a ‘reasonable and prudent person’ under the circumstances.
The offence of failing to provide driver information arises when you are sent a request to identify the driver of a motor vehicle after an alleged road traffic offence has been committed.
If you are the registered keeper of a car and you are accused of failing to name the driver you will be found not guilty if you can show that you used reasonable diligence to ascertain who was driving at the time.
There is no statutory definition of what amounts to reasonable diligence. Therefore, every case is decided on its own merits.
If you are going to try and use the defence of reasonable diligence you have to prove the defence on the balance of probabilities. This means that you have to show that “its more likely than not” that you have done your best to work out who was driving.
We have had cases where Judges have said that using reasonable diligence means “doing your best”. Again each reasonable diligence argument is judged on its own facts.
We are very good at defending allegations of failing to name the driver. Quite often, We can get the police to agree to take no further action or get the matter dropped without trial at court.
Please click below to ASK US A FREE QUESTION and find out how we can help you.
Didn’t Know Who Was Driving And Didn’t Accept The Speed
He Claims He Was Not The Driver
Back And Forth Re Naming The Driver
S172 – Three Drivers Took Turns On Long Journey
We Couldn’t Work Out Who Was Driving
Do you have any questions about Reasonable Diligence defences? Please ask and we will gladly give you legal advice based on the specifics of your case and offence.
Having been flashed for speeding & then not returned the S172 in due time, I turned to yourselves for help, despite being a London based Lawyer myself. Driving law isn't my speciality but you reassured me that I had made the right decision. With your assistance, both allegations were withdrawn and I got my costs awarded too...... far better than I had either expected or had thought I might achieve myself. Thank you all for a valiant job well done.
The service I received was prompt and professional. And the advice I received was very good. I would highly recommend Patterson Law.
I just wanted to thank you for the support and advice you have given me during the long drawn out proceedings for the case against my company, hearing the news on Tuesday afternoon that the Prosecution would ‘Offer no Evidence’ was music to my ears, it took a great weight of my shoulders I would like to thank Emma as well for her original advice and to say it all stacked up really neatly, I would certainly recommend your Company to anyone with a motoring problem with the Law knowledge you specialise in.
In the Magistrates Count the client was respresented by another firm of solicitors. The Court accepted that he didn’t get the original NIP. The Count advised the Prosecution to apply to change the dates to refer to the reminder letter. This was agreed. The Solicitor didn’t know what to do. They ended up presenting a reasonable diligence defence and lost. The client instructed us to appeal. The CPS refused to withdraw the case, but our appeal was successful. Excellent job fixing previous bad advice. You dug me out of a hole I got myself into by choosing non specialist solicitors to defend my case. Never again, I'm a convert now, you're my experts. So grateful.
I found the service to be very professional and friendly, their expertise on this particularly abhorrent legislation is second to none. From my experience, I can see what could be done to improve the service I received.