Traffic Law Quiz

Question 1 is now closed.

Answer B - Permitting the use of a vehicle by another without insurance is an offence under s. 143 of the RTA 1988, and generally the offence is one of absolute liability. Answer D is therefore incorrect.

If, however, a person allows another to use his or her vehicle on the express condition that the other person insures it first, the lender cannot be guilty of 'permitting' (Newbury Vs Davis [1974] RTR 367). There is no mention of having to check a person's certificate before allowing him or her to drive, and presumably stating the condition will suffice. Answers A and C are therefore incorrect.

Welldone: sormicoft, ChoÞÞer, Dogbreath, loki101

Question 2
Which of the following statements, if any, is true in relation to 'temporary speed limits'?

A. Where a driver contravenes a temporary speed restriction, corroboration is not required, but a notice of intended prosecution is.
B. Where a driver contravenes a temporary speed restriction, both corroboration and a notice of intended prosecution is required.
C. Where a driver contravenes a temporary speed restriction, corroboration is required, but a notice of intended prosecution is not.
D. Where a driver contravenes a temporary speed restriction, neither corroboration nor a notice of intended prosecution is required.

I'll give this a little bit longer to run as I need to go shopping ;)

Burnsy
 
Last edited:
A, I think, Afaik a NIP is required for ALL endorsable Speeding offences.. but they dont have to pull you for it do they? because it would be sign posted as all speed limits are, temporary or otherwise. Even if it is temporary they have to be obeyed.
 
Last edited:
D. Maybe.

I have a vague feeling that (mandatory) temporary speed limits are classed differently and do not require a NIP or Corroboration, but then again I'm quite likely to lose some points on this one :D
 
Does C read wrong to anyone else? At the moment it reads the same as B

Shouldn't it read:

C. Where a driver contravenes a temporary speed restriction, corroboration is required, but a notice of intended prosecution isn't.

For me the answer looks to be A
 
B, temp speed limits are the same as fixed ones... (in the eyes of the law anyway ;) )
 
I've ordered another book on road policing to give more info on some of these answers. I'll put up the answer and question 3 when I finish work :)

Burnsy
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom