UK Offence Report

Delivery of record sheets and other documents

regulation 97C(5) of The Passenger and Goods Vehicles (Recording Equipment) (Downloading and Retention of Data) Regulations 2008

This offence was read from the text as made, and no revised version was available, so a later revocation could not be ruled out. Check the current text at legislation.gov.uk.

What the provision says

5 If a transport undertaking fails without reasonable excuse to secure that each driver subject to its orders complies with subsection (2), in respect of documents relating to him in his capacity as such a driver, it is liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding level 4 on the standard scale.

Text as made, from legislation.gov.uk. © Crown copyright, reused under the Open Government Licence v3.0. This is the text as originally made; later amendments are not shown here.

Who it binds, and what has to be proved

Binds
a driver
Conduct
breaching the provision
Fault element
Strict liability
Burden of proof
An element of the offence, for the prosecution to prove

The prosecution must prove that the conduct happened. This is a strict liability offence as drafted: the provision uses no word of intention, knowledge, recklessness or negligence, so there is no need to show that a driver meant to do it, knew about it, or was careless.

Intention, knowledge and carelessness are irrelevant to guilt. They may still matter a great deal to sentence.

“Without reasonable excuse” here is an element of the offence rather than a defence, so its absence is for the prosecution to prove (R v Charles [2009] EWCA Crim 1570).

Classifier’s reasoning: no word of intention, knowledge, recklessness or negligence in the offence or its provision; qualified by reasonable excuse (an element; prosecution disproves once raised).

The defence, as drafted

5 If a transport undertaking fails without reasonable excuse to secure that each driver subject to its orders complies with subsection (2), in respect of documents relating to him in his capacity as such a driver, it is liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding level 4 on the standard scale.

What would breach regulation 97C(5)?

These are illustrations, not law. They are generated from the provision’s own words to show the shape of the offence. Whether any particular conduct is caught depends on the full text, on any amendment since, and on the facts.

  1. Doing what the provision prohibits, or failing to do what it requires under the Passenger and Goods Vehicles (Recording Equipment) (Downloading and Retention of Data) Regulations 2008.

Penalty

Mode of trial
Summary only — tried in a magistrates’ court
Maximum fine
£2,500
Standard scale
Level 4
Maximum prison (summary)
Not determined

Sentencing

Offences of this kind are usually sentenced under the guidelines below. This is a mapping by subject, not a finding about this provision, and the links go to a search of the Sentencing Council’s own site.

Prosecution figures

No published per-offence figure was found for this provision, and it could not be matched to a Ministry of Justice offence code. Offences created by statutory instrument very largely do not have one. Absence of a figure is not evidence that the offence is unused.

Status and lifecycle

Current status
Status not determined
Made
29 January 2008
In force from
Not determined
Extent
Not stated

How this was established: read from the text as made; no revised version available, so later revocation could not be ruled out.

What the instrument is for

(This note is not part of the Regulations) — the explanatory note published with the instrument, © Crown copyright.

These Regulations implement certain provisions of Regulation (EC) 561/2006 (OJ No L102, 11.4.2006, p.1) of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 March 2006 (on the harmonisation of certain social legislation relating to road transport and amending Council Regulations (EEC) No 3821/85 and (EC) No 2135/98 and repealing Council Regulation (EEC) No 3820/85) which have not previously been implemented. The subject matter of the European Community legislation is drivers’ hours and the equipment to be used for recording drivers’ activity. Article 15(7) of Regulation 3821/85, as amended by article 26(4) of Regulation 561/2006, requires a driver to produce to an enforcement officer hard copies of his driving record made during the current day and the previous 28 days. Section 97A of the Transport Act 1968 (“the 1968 Act”) conflicts with article 15(7) as amended as it requires drivers to return such records to their employers within 21 days making it impossible for them to comply with the new requirement. Regulations 2 and 4(c) therefore repeal section 97A of the 1968 Act and replace it with a new provision (section 97C) requiring drivers to return paper records held by them to the transport undertaking (or undertakings) for which they have been working within 42 days of the records having been created. Regulation 2 implements article 10(5)(a) of Regulation 561/2006 by inserting new provisions into the 1968 Act, as follows— new sections 97D and 97E require transport undertakings to download data held electronically on a vehicle unit and a driver card whenever that is necessary to ensure that the data is not overwritten or otherwise lost to the undertaking and in any event before the expiration of specific periods according to the data concerned, namely— in the case of data stored on the vehicle unit other than detailed speed data, a period of 56 days computed in accordance with section 97D(3); in the case of data stored on the driver card, a period of 28 days computed in accordance with section 97E(3); new section 97F requires transport undertakings to download any data held electronically on a vehicle unit or driver card where an enforcement officer has reason to believe that an offence under the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984, the Road Traffic Act 1988, the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988 or Part 6 of the 1968 Act has been committed; new sections 97G and 97H create offences of failing to download or to retain data and provide for the making of data which has been downloaded accessible to enforcement officers. Regulation 3 inserts new sections 102B and 102C into the 1968 Act which make provision in respect of— criminal proceedings against transport undertakings which are unincorporated bodies; offences committed by a corporate or unincorporated body with the consent or connivance of a director or other officer of that body. Paragraphs (a), (b) and (d) of regulation 4 implement article 20(3) of Regulation 561/2006 by making it an offence if a driver who works for two or more undertakings fails to provide each of them with sufficient information to enable them to discharge their obligations in relation to the drivers’ hours and provide for consequential amendments to definitions in the 1968 Act. New section 97G is inserted into the 1968 Act under the powers of section 2(2) of the European Communities Act 1972. A full Regulatory Impact Assessment of the effect this instrument will have on costs for the business and voluntary sectors has been produced and is available from the Freight and Logistics Division, Department for Transport, Zone 2/12 Great Minister House, 76 Marsham Street, London SW1P 4DR and may be accessed on the Department’s website at www.dft.gov.uk. A copy has been placed in the library of each House of Parliament. A Transposition Note is available and may be obtained or accessed as above. A copy of Council Regulation (EC) 561/2006 may be obtained from the Office of Public Sector Information. The Official Journal of the EU may be accessed via the website of the European Union at http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex .

Read the full note and every offence in this instrument

What Parliament said

Mentions of this instrument in Hansard. Parliamentary material is reused under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0.

Other offences in the same instrument

How this was identified as an offence

Everything above rests on the judgement that this provision creates a criminal offence, rather than mentioning one. That judgement is made by rule, from the words of the provision, and this is the rule that made it — with a confidence of 0.72.

Basis
the provision states liability on summary conviction
Confidence
0.72 of 1.00

A provision that states a penalty for an offence created elsewhere can read very like one that creates an offence, and the rules can mistake the one for the other. If the text quoted above sets a penalty for something made an offence by another provision, treat the classification on this page with that in mind, and read the instrument.

Check the source