Dates different |
Dates different |
Sat, 3 Mar 2018 - 18:47
Post
#1
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 10 Joined: 3 Mar 2018 Member No.: 96,844 |
Evening all,
I received a NIP/S172 form for speeding on X date. I completed the form and sent it back to the police. I was slightly confused as the car I didn't think I was there at the time, nor the speed alleged - and CCTV backs this up from my address. I made a phone call to the police and was told the offence wouldn't be discussed, and should I wish to do so a Court hearing would be the correct place to discuss my concerns. I noted the concerns on the S172 form within the comments box. I heard nothing for a few months then received a summons. However, the offence date on the summons charge sheet contains a completely different date to the NIP/S172 notice. The statement attached also shows a different date. The dates are not one or two days out, but nearly 4 weeks. The vehicle has a number of people insured to drive it. The registered keeper, me, received no further NIPs/S172 notices. It seems I am charged on the basis of the original response to X date, and been charged for an offence on Y date. I responded naming a driver for X date, not Y date - and of course I wasn't to know they wanted a driver for Y date. Any thoughts before I respond to the summons? |
|
|
Advertisement |
Sat, 3 Mar 2018 - 18:47
Post
#
|
Advertise here! |
|
|
|
Sat, 3 Mar 2018 - 19:02
Post
#2
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 272 Joined: 19 Aug 2016 Member No.: 86,499 |
Have they charged you with speeding, or failure to provide details?
|
|
|
Sat, 3 Mar 2018 - 19:11
Post
#3
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 4,126 Joined: 31 Jan 2018 Member No.: 96,238 |
It's not clear from your account if you're referring to two speeding events four weeks apart or an S172 offence following the original event
The S172 offence for the original NIP was committed 28 days after you received it because you had back-tracked on the identification of the driver This post has been edited by Redivi: Sat, 3 Mar 2018 - 19:13 |
|
|
Sat, 3 Mar 2018 - 19:38
Post
#4
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 41,510 Joined: 25 Aug 2011 From: Planet Earth Member No.: 49,223 |
What exactly did you say when returning the nomination?
Was the driver unequivocally named (You?) and signed? What charges are on the summons? What does the CCTV back up? (Are you saying the car wasn't there or you?) As already noted a potential s172 offence for failing to furnish driver details occurs 28 days after the request is made. This post has been edited by Jlc: Sat, 3 Mar 2018 - 19:41 -------------------- RK=Registered Keeper, OP=Original Poster (You!), CoFP=Conditional Offer of Fixed Penalty, NtK=Notice to Keeper, NtD=Notice to Driver
PoFA=Protection of Freedoms Act, SAC=Safety Awareness Course, NIP=Notice of Intended Prosecution, ADR=Alternative Dispute Resolution PPC=Private Parking Company, LBCCC=Letter Before County Court Claim, PII=Personally Identifiable Information, SAR=Subject Access Request Private Parking - remember, they just want your money and will say almost anything to get it. |
|
|
Sat, 3 Mar 2018 - 20:39
Post
#5
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 10 Joined: 3 Mar 2018 Member No.: 96,844 |
What exactly did you say when returning the nomination? Was the driver unequivocally named (You?) and signed? What charges are on the summons? What does the CCTV back up? (Are you saying the car wasn't there or you?) As already noted a potential s172 offence for failing to furnish driver details occurs 28 days after the request is made. Apologies, the driver was named as me as I did use the road going home on the original date stated - as it is local - however, I dispute the time. CCTV from my house shows at the alleged offence time that my car was at home. On the date stated on the NIP/S172, I only had access to the car. The charge is for speeding, NOT failing to ID the driver. On receiving the summons, the date is 4 weeks later - although the time remains the same. There has been no additional letters asking for the driver's identity on the charged offence date. I believe that the offence is one, rather than two, and the date completed incorrectly on the original NIP/S172. These haven't been sent by the Ticket Office, but a individual police officer. This post has been edited by snowdragon: Sat, 3 Mar 2018 - 20:40 |
|
|
Sat, 3 Mar 2018 - 21:06
Post
#6
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 41,510 Joined: 25 Aug 2011 From: Planet Earth Member No.: 49,223 |
What sort of difference in time are we talking here? Minutes/hours?
What's the alleged speed/limit? -------------------- RK=Registered Keeper, OP=Original Poster (You!), CoFP=Conditional Offer of Fixed Penalty, NtK=Notice to Keeper, NtD=Notice to Driver
PoFA=Protection of Freedoms Act, SAC=Safety Awareness Course, NIP=Notice of Intended Prosecution, ADR=Alternative Dispute Resolution PPC=Private Parking Company, LBCCC=Letter Before County Court Claim, PII=Personally Identifiable Information, SAR=Subject Access Request Private Parking - remember, they just want your money and will say almost anything to get it. |
|
|
Sat, 3 Mar 2018 - 21:15
Post
#7
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 4,126 Joined: 31 Jan 2018 Member No.: 96,238 |
Could you confirm that I've understood correctly ?
1 You received a NIP/S172 for a speeding offence on Date X 2 You returned the form and identified yourself as driver because you were driving at the location but not at the exact time stated and expressed your doubts 3 You checked records and CCTV later and discovered the car was indeed not there at the time stated - how wrong is the time and how far away were you ? 4 You contacted the police with your doubts 5 You have now received a summons for a speeding offence on Date Y which happens to be four weeks after Date X 6 You have not been charged with a S172 offence 7 You have never received a NIP/S172 for a speeding offence on Date Y 8 You have not been charged with a speeding offence on Date X The police would have assumed your phone call to mean that you wouldn't accept a fixed penalty if offered leaving court as the only option If the above statements are correct, a possible explanation is that they confused the dates of the speeding and an S172 offence that they probably intended to charge The error in time isn't a defence if you haven't been misled about the incident You clearly knew what it referred to when you sent your reply I'm not convinced that the error of the date can be so easily dismissed Does the charge have a reference number that ties it to the original NIP ? If it doesn't, the OP can argue that he's never received a NIP for Date Y and there is no evidence that he was the driver on that date |
|
|
Sat, 3 Mar 2018 - 21:20
Post
#8
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 10 Joined: 3 Mar 2018 Member No.: 96,844 |
What sort of difference in time are we talking here? Minutes/hours? What's the alleged speed/limit? 6 hours difference. Offence is 77 in a 50. I am conscious that a signed statement must be true from my side, so I made the call, and then put my concerns down in the notes section stating that I had evidence to show my vehicle was not at the location at the alleged time. Could it have been 4 weeks later? Maybe, but as said multiple people are insured, but no request has been received in respect of that date. Could you confirm that I've understood correctly ? 1 You received a NIP/S172 for a speeding offence on Date X 2 You returned the form and identified yourself as driver because you were driving at the location but not at the exact time stated and expressed your doubts 3 You checked records and CCTV later and discovered the car was indeed not there at the time stated - how wrong is the time and how far away were you ? 4 You contacted the police with your doubts 5 You have now received a summons for a speeding offence on Date Y which happens to be four weeks after Date X 6 You have not been charged with a S172 offence 7 You have never received a NIP/S172 for a speeding offence on Date Y 8 You have not been charged with a speeding offence on Date X The police would have assumed your phone call to mean that you wouldn't accept a fixed penalty if offered leaving court as the only option If the above statements are correct, a possible explanation is that they confused the dates of the speeding and an S172 offence that they probably intended to charge The error in time isn't a defence if you haven't been misled about the incident You clearly knew what it referred to when you sent your reply I'm not convinced that the error of the date can be so easily dismissed Does the charge have a reference number that ties it to the original NIP ? If it doesn't, the OP can argue that he's never received a NIP for Date Y and there is no evidence that he was the driver on that date Yes - the evidence with the Summons includes an exhibit of the original NIP/S172 notice which the police say they sent and refer to in the statement. This carries date X. No evidence within the statement shows how the police identified the driver on date Y. |
|
|
Sat, 3 Mar 2018 - 22:07
Post
#9
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 2,389 Joined: 10 Jun 2010 Member No.: 38,126 |
When did you receive the first NIP in relation to the dates of the alleged offence ( the date given on the NIP and the court summons)?
|
|
|
Sat, 3 Mar 2018 - 22:29
Post
#10
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 10 Joined: 3 Mar 2018 Member No.: 96,844 |
When did you receive the first NIP in relation to the dates of the alleged offence ( the date given on the NIP and the court summons)? 3 days after date of the offence (Date Y) on the summons. Of course at the time of receiving I was none the wiser. I did think about the 14 day rule, however, the keeper changed from my father to me just after the offence date on the original NIP (Date X) |
|
|
Sun, 4 Mar 2018 - 08:44
Post
#11
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 41,510 Joined: 25 Aug 2011 From: Planet Earth Member No.: 49,223 |
You say this was a 'manually' processed NIP by a PC?
-------------------- RK=Registered Keeper, OP=Original Poster (You!), CoFP=Conditional Offer of Fixed Penalty, NtK=Notice to Keeper, NtD=Notice to Driver
PoFA=Protection of Freedoms Act, SAC=Safety Awareness Course, NIP=Notice of Intended Prosecution, ADR=Alternative Dispute Resolution PPC=Private Parking Company, LBCCC=Letter Before County Court Claim, PII=Personally Identifiable Information, SAR=Subject Access Request Private Parking - remember, they just want your money and will say almost anything to get it. |
|
|
Sun, 4 Mar 2018 - 09:14
Post
#12
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 10 Joined: 3 Mar 2018 Member No.: 96,844 |
|
|
|
Sun, 4 Mar 2018 - 10:06
Post
#13
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 56,198 Joined: 9 Sep 2003 From: Warwickshire Member No.: 317 |
It wouldn’t be.
What does the statement say was the means of capturing the offence? You have two thrusts to your defence, no NIP and no driver ID, should be fairly simple it looks. -------------------- There is no such thing as a law abiding motorist, just those who have been scammed and those yet to be scammed!
S172's Rookies 1-0 Kent Council PCN's Rookies 1-0 Warwick Rookies 1-0 Birmingham PPC PCN's Rookies 10-0 PPC's |
|
|
Sun, 4 Mar 2018 - 10:20
Post
#14
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 10 Joined: 3 Mar 2018 Member No.: 96,844 |
It wouldn’t be. What does the statement say was the means of capturing the offence? You have two thrusts to your defence, no NIP and no driver ID, should be fairly simple it looks. Offence was captured during an average speed check with the PCs unmarked police vehicle pacing behind. Notes in the statement show the PC was unable to stop me at the time due to an immediate grade call coming in. The statement goes on to explain how they sent a NIP/S172 themselves, received a reply and exhibited it themselves. Only involvement with the Ticket Office was submitting the file for summons. NIP/S172 all from the PC. No mention of calls or the comments I said around my "concerns". This post has been edited by snowdragon: Sun, 4 Mar 2018 - 10:20 |
|
|
Sun, 4 Mar 2018 - 11:36
Post
#15
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 56,198 Joined: 9 Sep 2003 From: Warwickshire Member No.: 317 |
So you have a solid defence on either one of those two bases, once the CPS realise they’ll probably drop it like a hot tuber.
-------------------- There is no such thing as a law abiding motorist, just those who have been scammed and those yet to be scammed!
S172's Rookies 1-0 Kent Council PCN's Rookies 1-0 Warwick Rookies 1-0 Birmingham PPC PCN's Rookies 10-0 PPC's |
|
|
Sun, 4 Mar 2018 - 12:06
Post
#16
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 10 Joined: 3 Mar 2018 Member No.: 96,844 |
So you have a solid defence on either one of those two bases, once the CPS realise they’ll probably drop it like a hot tuber. Thanks. I'll respond as such on the summons but as it goes to the Court, i'll follow up separately with the CPS. Surprised it got through as I thought all files were reviewed! I'll give the CPS a ring once I have a new date and they've hopefully got the file. |
|
|
Sun, 4 Mar 2018 - 12:47
Post
#17
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 56,198 Joined: 9 Sep 2003 From: Warwickshire Member No.: 317 |
The CPS won’t get the file until your not guilty plea is entered into the system after the first hearing, they have no need to see them until after that as the Police are the only ones involved so far.
-------------------- There is no such thing as a law abiding motorist, just those who have been scammed and those yet to be scammed!
S172's Rookies 1-0 Kent Council PCN's Rookies 1-0 Warwick Rookies 1-0 Birmingham PPC PCN's Rookies 10-0 PPC's |
|
|
Sun, 4 Mar 2018 - 12:51
Post
#18
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 10 Joined: 3 Mar 2018 Member No.: 96,844 |
The CPS won’t get the file until your not guilty plea is entered into the system after the first hearing, they have no need to see them until after that as the Police are the only ones involved so far. No problem. I'll respond NG and give the police contact a ring as listed on the summons, then see what the CPS say. I'll keep you updated! |
|
|
Sun, 4 Mar 2018 - 14:23
Post
#19
|
|
Member Group: Life Member Posts: 24,213 Joined: 9 Sep 2004 From: Reading Member No.: 1,624 |
Did you actually receive a summons? If so, where did the alleged offence occur?
-------------------- Andy
Some people think that I make them feel stupid. To be fair, they deserve most of the credit. |
|
|
Sun, 4 Mar 2018 - 14:27
Post
#20
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 56,198 Joined: 9 Sep 2003 From: Warwickshire Member No.: 317 |
I heard nothing for a few months then received a summons. However, the offence date on the summons charge sheet contains a completely different date to the NIP/S172 notice. The statement attached also shows a different date. The dates are not one or two days out, but nearly 4 weeks. Seems likely he has a summons? -------------------- There is no such thing as a law abiding motorist, just those who have been scammed and those yet to be scammed!
S172's Rookies 1-0 Kent Council PCN's Rookies 1-0 Warwick Rookies 1-0 Birmingham PPC PCN's Rookies 10-0 PPC's |
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: Thursday, 28th March 2024 - 23:35 |