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Note that there is no restriction on who the Representative might be, eg a parent who has had their own PG licence withdrawn.
In this case the individual can perform all the functions of a PG licence holder, despite having their own licence withdrawn, provided he/she has the written permission of another PG licenceholder and carries that licence.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.
|
|