Should you pay a speeding fine from Spain once you're back in the UK?

 Spanish police might make a mistake as to the car speed.

What happens if  the people in the car can't remember who was driving at the time?

 It seems to be the French police who have it in for British drivers.

A couple of English friends had hired a car in England for them both to drive. They had gone thru' a speed camera

about 10mph too fast and the car hire company and persued them, eventually.

Both drivers couldn't remember who was driving on a Wednesday evening at 1900 hrs four or five weeks back.

After a few letters to each, from the police, and nasty threats, they got off with it.

But that was England. 

 I think Baabaabing may be the voice of reason, his evaluation of the situation is spot on, did you do it? and if you did, pay it!

The only thing is, what about the part where once you are back in the UK? seems he is accurate up to the point of returning home...........

And Whiskyman, having more than one person in a car, and not revealing the driver is the only way that you wil usually cancel (note i didnt say "get away with) a speeding fine summons. The reason for this is that in the UK the law states you are innocent UNTIL PROVEN guilty. As the law stands a speeding fine is an "absolute offence" this neans you have no defence, as the crime is proven, but the law still needs to find the guilty party commiting the offence. When there is only the driver, you are bang to rights, but if it was a long time ago, and you had a passenger who could conceivably also have driven, aportioning guilt becomes harder. Until the law can conclusively place one of the people in the driving seat there is no conclusive proof of who committed the crime, although there is evidence the crime WAS commited. So not knowing the driver at that point is sufficient defence for the offence to be discharged(at least in the UK)

Problem is, some UK, and mostly in Germany, they position cameras pointing AT the car at the front, so they get a picture of the driver! try explaining your wife has a full beard and handlebar moustache...................

 I think you wil find that if the fine is not paid, then the next time that the person whose name is on the fine visits Spain they will be arrested at border control and requested to pay the fine plus addition penalties for non payment.  If they don't pay up, don't expect to travel to Spain again.

It happened to me in the USA, two years after the offence, arrested at border control.  Best for them to pay up.

 Johnzx you are only partially right with your reply,

"Section 172 of The Road Traffic Act 1988 (UK) requires an owner  (in most circumstances) to give the details of who was driving, not to do so (e.g. I forget who it was) is an offence."

If you re read my post i did not say "i forget who it was", that is blatant evasion of the law, and the law will pursue you to get to the bottom of who was driving and charge them. What I DID SAY was that if you were in a car with two occupants and you genuinely could not remember who was driving, and subsequently establish guilt, the law allows it as a defence. The person summonsed is not stating "i forget who it was" they are admitting they were involved with a speeding offence(so the offence is admitted) but that the person driving cannot be determined, and as such the person RESPONSIBLE cannot be determined. this is a reasonable defence for a WITNESS to the crime to give as evidence, it is NOT a denial of that offence or of who commited it. 

And yes, i expect there is a similar law in Spain.

As to your reply to Mefa, i dont know about Spain, but in the UK the police will accept a hirers statement that they hire vehicles , and not blame the hire company, but then they expect the hire company to supply the hirer/drivers particulars so that a summonse can then be sent to the culprit. The hire company has then fulfilled its duties effectively as a material witness by supplying evidence

However, it is rather academic as this thread refers to Spain.

Never expect, assume anything.

If you do not know, understand and are capable of assimilating 100%  of the information that is freely available to you, then you will surely be dissapointed especially in a foriegn land. Most proles cannot comprehend the law and its intracasies in their own land and tongue.

pro·le·tar·i·at  (prl-târ-t)

" Section 172 of The Road Traffic Act 1988 (UK) requires an owner  Section 172 of The Road Traffic Act 1988 (UK) requires an owner  (in most circumstances) to give the details of who was driving, not to do so is an offence." 

Note the quote you give has in brackets, 

"(in most circumstances)"

The owner is ADMITTING an offence is committed, but is making a statement that the driver cannot be CONCLUSIVELY established. Under English law, until the offender is established no one can be charged. I think you will find that this is one of those events that falls outside "(in most circumstances)"  and as such is the prosecutions duty to gather more EVIDENCE to secure a conviction. As this is a near impossibility without an admission of guilt, most police forces will, reluctantly, withdraw the offence, and is one of the very few times that a speeding fine can be cancelled. Also it should be noted that about the only time this is possible is with a speed camera, as all it can see is the back of the car, and not the driver clearly and conclusively to determine who is driving. Also, although it is taken from the rear it usually is good enough to show the occupants in the car so its no good saying there were two, when the picture shows only one

The bottom line is that you are being required to give evidence, and being untruthful is as quoted "not to do so is an offence."

Do I assume, like me, you speaking from 'hands on' actual day to day experience of operating the law in UK. ?

 Johnzx i have been involved with the haulage industry UK and european for the best part of my employed life, and as such have considerable experience of road traffic law. The defence i give, I.E; that the driver cannot be ascertained is not, as you say, an obscure hypothetical situation, it is quite often a possibility, and compliance with the law is never a "superficial argument"

The scenario is possible under current legislation, but should be truthfully recounted, as with giving any evidence with regard to an alleged offence, and in all fairness, when you and your wife go out in the car, usually most people can remember conclusively who WAS driving at the time, and so using this explanation of "we cant remember who was the driver" is usually not viewed favourably by the law. Therefore if anyone is considering using this type of evidence, beware, as the police are likely to try to clarify who the driver is due to the circumstances.

And in any event any evidence, or defence given should be of a truthful manner, and not just an attempt at evading conviction for an offence commited, and this is true in whatever country you may be in. 

 I know what you mean by people who "misunderstand" things, basically a desire to make the regulation fit the way they see it.

The point of this excuse for not being prosecuted has nothing in fact to do with UK motoring law. It is in fact based on the cornerstone of the law in the UK, which is anyone is innocent until PROVEN guilty. There was a case in recent years which i remember well as i was amazed that the prosecution took such a line, and that was in a child murder case. It was reported in the press that each parent , separately , was interviewed and both stories corroborated and from those statements responsibility for the childs death could not be CONCLUSIVELY established, and as two people can not commit the same crime the case was withdrawn. A motoring case when the driver cannot be clearly established is the same, the case is withdrawn. This is not because the case was not committed, it is because the perpetrator cannot be determined, and until they are there is no case as the person commiting the crime cannot be determined.

The law in other countries is of course different, I.E guilty till proven innocent, so readers be careful out there.................

Forgive me if I'm repeating what someone else might have said but I got bored after a few pages but my opinion for what its worth is that I would like to see some proof from the Spanish side, as that is what I would ask if I received one in the Uk that I hadn't been aware of and then if it was proven that I was indeed in the wrong I would be happy to pay the fine. (Sort of!)  Naturally it was a friend of the one who had given his credit card details that was driving.  Hopefully he was indeed insured, if he wasn't then they are all very lucky that they didn't get caught for that offence.  Whatever, it makes sense for all of the occupants of the car to split the fine as in a sense they were all responsible.  I read in one of the messages that the 'others' had told the driver to slow down, maybe they should have asked him to pull over and removed the keys from him as it sounds like he wasn't driving with due care to his friends!

Unfortunately if this fine isn't paid one way or another, the lad who's name was on the booking and credit card is liable to suffer in the future if he wants to rent another car.

I hope you managed to get it all sorted and I would be interested to hear the outcome!

 3 years ago, I was given a ticket for taking a friend to the airport and he gave me 50 euros, he gave me the money for other reasons not connected with taking him to the airport.I was stopped on the slip road out of the airport and the Guardia whetre not around at the time but a taxi driver pulled in behind me and saw m friend give me the money, so he must have radioed the Guardia. My fine was 1501 euros and I have been challenging it ever since, he wrote a letter explaining the reasons why he has gave me the money and this I have duly had translated and sent to Trafico, they have come back to say that the explanation given was insufficient and still want me to pay the fine. My wife is penalised for being the owner of the vehicule although I am acknowledged as neing the driver. When the fine came through, my wifes name was spelt incorrectly, my name was spelt incorrectly and the registration is also incorrect, my address,however, is correct. I have spoken to an official translator about the errors and she has said that it is a typing error and that it does not matter, I explained that European law states that a fine must be written correct for it to be valid, but this is Spain. It is now being reconsidered by another person at Trafico who feels that I have a case. In the case of the person being fined for speeding and in view of his age I would not pay the fine. I have spoken to Spanish people and I have found out that if I have to pay the fine then I must pay in one go, if I was Spanish then I could pay monthly (with interest). This is also against European law as I understand it but this racist and xenophobic government seem to do what they like.