WHO'S RESPONSIBLE?
Page 49
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
• Until a few weeks ago I was employed by a demolition company and before I left the eight-wheeler I drove was stopped a couple of times by police. There was no tax disc in the windscreen and I have now received two summonses for using the lorry without tax on different dates.
This amounts to me being charged for not taxing my employer's lorry. That can't be right, can it?
• In theory you can be prosecuted for using the vehicle without tax because you were driving it on a road at the time and, consequently, you were using it.
However, since the High Court case of Carpenter vs Campbell (1953)1 All ER 290, it is not the normal procedure for an employed driver to be prosecuted for such offences.
In that case the court expressed its disapproval of such action and said the duty to take out licences was that of the employer who owned the vehicle.
Having seen the summonses, also unusual is the fact that the prosecution is being brought by the police, because almost all VED prosecutions nowadays are instituted by DVLA or one of its local registration offices. I note on the statement of facts there will be a claim for costs but no reference is made to back duty. This, along with the charge being against you rather than the vehicle owner, suggests that the vehicle licensing people may not know about the prosecution.
Section 47 of the Vehicle Excise and Registration Act 1994 deals with the institution of proceedings and states that a constable cannot bring proceedings for using an untaxed vehicle without the approval of the Secretary of State (acting through the DVLA). That approval is normally given in the form of a certificate under Section 47(4).
At court you could ask the prosecution to produce the certificate authorising the police to institute the proceedings against you. If they could not produce it you could ask for the charge to be dismissed.