We had a situation a couple of months ago whereby one of our vehicles was inadvertently used with an expired Council plate. I know it shouldn't happen but it did. The car was spotted on one of our taxi ranks by our enforcement office. As soon as we were made aware of the expired plate the vehicle was immediately taken off the road. Now obviously we know that we were in the wrong and we accept this. However I have just had a call from the enforcement officer to make an appointment to come and interview my wife under caution. The cars are in the name of the limited company but it is her name on the vehicle license. The enforcement officer has said that he will be writing down the questions and the answers in his note book and my wife will be asked to sign this.
My questions are,
1, Does she have to answer any questions?
2, If she answers any questions, is she likely to incriminate herself?
3, Would she be entitled to a copy of PACE before the interview even though this is a council interview?
4, Should she have a legal representative?

1 no 2 yes 3 possibly 4 yes 5 sign nothing. I'd tend to ask him what he's doing about the out-of-towners who you are constantly telling us about...under caution.

In all fairness this issue does need investigating, so one can't castigate the council for acting.

In relation to the questions.

1. Depends what the questions are. If they are name etc then it would be daft not too. If she is asked if she was aware the vehicle was running unlicensed, then she should answer no, as she wasn't. If she is asked who's fault it is it wasn't licensed then she should say I'm not sure. Generally it's the follow up question(s) that is/are more awkward.
2. Not sure there is much more that need incriminating, the vehicle was unlicensed, she is (allegedly) legally responsible to ensure it's licensed.
3. Yes, and I would also ask for the council 'enforcement' policy.
4. I think so. Money well spent.

I have already explained to the council how the error occurred and it was my job to ensure that the vehicles were tested and plated on time. so it was my fault. I have also explained to the council what procedures we have put in place to make sure that it can't happen again.
However the vehicle is not in my name and I wasn't driving it. I'm not sure what else my wife can add because she is not involved with the vehicle side of the business.

But they need to hear what the registered owner says.

Look we all make mistakes, even me, this isn't a case of me pointing my finger, far from it, but the council will have set procedure (i.e. their enforcement policy) and if they don't follow it they are in trouble.

Say, for example, they don't question the registered owner, and they just go for you. If I was representing you I would say, if it got to court, sorry gov but on reflection looking at the law it wasn't my clients responsibility and he is not at fault.

The registered owner is the company.

No, the licence holder is responsible for relicencing. The directors could I suppose be done for causing or permitting it to be used whilst unlicenced as could the driver. Here's where a daily walk-round check like psv operators have to have would be of benefit.

But then the company really ought to carry out a check too. There's a good chance the company could have all its licences suspended pending an investigation, and once the Traffic Commissioner hears of it, if Grandad has psv discs too there could be a Public Inquiry! VOSA visits to check maintenance records... But surely all will be in order .

The registered owner is the company.