Here's the rule - MSA H27.1.9 (c):
"When the holder of the PG Entrant�s Licence is unable to be present they may appoint in writing an Entrant�s Representative to act as their agent for all purposes under these Regulations."
So the Entrant can include a Representative at any time, as long as the Representative has the written permission (it doesn't say it has to be on a particular form, nor that it is lodged at Race Control) and the licence.
In Dynamax' case, the MSA Steward was wrong to exclude the driver concerned, as far as I can see.
Not only that, the MSA Steward shouldn't have made the decision alone. It should have been referred to all 3 Stewards and the "local" Stewards could have over-ruled the MSA Steward.
The driver concerned might want to have another look at the events...
Note that there is no restriction on who the Representative might be, eg a parent who has had their own PG licence withdrawn.
In this case the individual can perform all the functions of a PG licence holder, despite having their own licence withdrawn, provided he/she has the written permission of another PG licenceholder and carries that licence.
So the MSA National Court decision has - in effect - no punitive effect whatsoever. That's a very clear message that it is sending!
Whether the victim, the CPS, the Club or the Landowner want to take their own actions will be up to them.
|
|