Write the words of this act the way you think they should read. Solon shows your change as a redline against the published text and pins it to that exact text, so it can never be applied to wording you did not see.
Change 1
As published
12 Proof, in summary proceedings, of identity of driver of vehicle.
(1) Where on the summary trial in England and Wales of an information for an offence to which this subsection applies—
(a) it is proved to the satisfaction of the court, on oath or in manner prescribed by Criminal Procedure Rules, that a requirement under section 172(2) of the Road Traffic Act 1988 to give information as to the identity of the driver of a particular vehicle on the particular occasion to which the information relates has been served on the accused in accordance with Criminal Procedure Rules, and
(b) a statement in writing is produced to the court purporting to be signed by the accused that the accused was the driver of that vehicle on that occasion,
the court may accept that statement as evidence that the accused was the driver of that vehicle on that occasion.
(2) Schedule 1 to this Act shows the offences to which subsection (1) above applies.
(3) Where on the summary trial in England and Wales of an information for an offence to which section 112 of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 applies—
(a) it is proved to the satisfaction of the court, on oath or in manner prescribed by Criminal Procedure Rules, that a requirement under section 112(2) of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 to give information as to the identity of the driver of a particular vehicle on the particular occasion to which the information relates has been served on the accused in accordance with Criminal Procedure Rules, and
(b) a statement in writing is produced to the court purporting to be signed by the accused that the accused was the driver of that vehicle on that occasion,
the court may accept that statement as evidence that the accused was the driver of that vehicle on that occasion.
(4) In summary proceedings in Scotland for an offence to which section 20(2) of the this Act applies, where—
(a) it is proved to the satisfaction of the court that a requirement under section 172(2) of the Road Traffic Act 1988 to give information as to the identity of a driver on a particular occasion to which the complaint relates has been served on the accused by post, and
(b) a statement in writing is produced to the court, purporting to be signed by the accused, that the accused was the driver of that vehicle on that occasion,
that statement shall be sufficient evidence that the accused was the driver of the vehicle on that occasion.
Your change, as a redline
12 Proof, in summary proceedings, of identity of driver of vehicle.
(1) Where on the summary trial in England and Wales of an information for an offence to which this subsection applies—
(a) it is proved to the satisfaction of the court, on oath or in manner prescribed by Criminal Procedure Rules, that a requirement under section 172(2) of the Road Traffic Act 1988 to give information as to the identity of the driver of a particular vehicle on the particular occasion to which the information relates has been served on the accused in accordance with Criminal Procedure Rules, and
(b) a statement in writing is produced to the court purporting to be signed by the accused that the accused was the driver of that vehicle on that occasion,
the court may accept that statement as evidence that the accused was the driver of that vehicle on that occasion.
(2) Schedule 1 to this Act shows the offences to which subsection (1) above applies.
(3) Where on the summary trial in England and Wales of an information for an offence to which section 112 of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 applies—
(a) it is proved to the satisfaction of the court, on oath or in manner prescribed by Criminal Procedure Rules, that a requirement under section 112(2) of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 to give information as to the identity of the driver of a particular vehicle on the particular occasion to which the information relates has been served on the accused in accordance with Criminal Procedure Rules, and
(b) a statement in writing is produced to the court purporting to be signed by the accused that the accused was the driver of that vehicle on that occasion,
the court may accept that statement as evidence that the accused was the driver of that vehicle on that occasion.
(4) In summary proceedings in Scotland for an offence to which section 20(2) of the this Act applies, where—
(a) it is proved to the satisfaction of the court that a requirement under section 172(2) of the Road Traffic Act 1988 to give information as to the identity of a driver on a particular occasion to which the complaint relates has been served on the accused by post, and
(b) a statement in writing is produced to the court, purporting to be signed by the accused, that the accused was the driver of that vehicle on that occasion,
that statement shall be sufficient evidence that the accused was the driver of the vehicle on that occasion.
One line that says what changes, such as "Halve the dog tax".
Who it helps, what it costs, what it fixes. It is what persuades people to support it.
A proposal here is not law. Support on Solon is evidence that people want the change; the official route says what it takes to make it law.
Sign in to file your proposal. What you have written stays on this page.
Ask what your change would do, who would gain and who would bear a cost, and where something like it is already law. The assistant reads your draft as it stands, cites the law and the studies it finds, and takes no side. What you file stays yours.