NIP Details and Circumstances
What is the name of the Constabulary? -
Date of the offence: - September 2013
Date of the NIP: - 4 days after the offence
Date you received the NIP: - 5 days after the offence
Location of offence (exact location as it appears on the NIP: important): - at A1058 COAST ROAD/ BENFIELD ROAD, NEWCASTLE UPON TYNE
Was the NIP addressed to you? - Yes
Was the NIP sent by first class post, second class or recorded delivery? - First
If your are not the Registered Keeper, what is your relationship to the vehicle? -
How many current points do you have? - 3
Provide a description of events (if you know what happened) telling us as much about the incident as possible - some things that may seem trivial to you may be important, so don't leave anything out. Please do not post personal details for obvious reasons - slowed down for the camera early as I always do and had a brain fart (my mind was on other things) my speed crept up to 57 in a 50 limit. I have only held my licence for 1 year although I have been driving for 20, my licence will be revoked if I am found guilty. I was thinking of seeing what evidence the police have photos, certificate for the truvelo... and as I have had an accident and cannot use my writing hand I was going to ask my father to fill in my NIP for me leaving the signiture box blank

NIP Wizard Responses
These were the responses used by the Wizard to arrive at its recommendation:
Have you received a NIP? - Yes
Are you the Registered Keeper of the vehicle concerned (is your name and address on the V5/V5C)? - Yes
Did the first NIP arrive within 14 days? - Yes
Although you are the Registered Keeper, were you also the keeper of the vehicle concerned (the person normally responsible for it) at the time of the alleged offence? - Yes
Were you driving? - Yes
Which country did the alleged offence take place in? - England

NIP Wizard Recommendation
Based on these responses the Wizard suggested that this course of action should be considered:

• The law requires you to provide the information requested in the Section 172 notice within the 28 day period, naming yourself as the driver. If you are considering obtaining formal legal advice, do so before returning the notice.
  
  You should note that there is nothing to be gained by responding any earlier than you have to at any stage of the process. You are likely to receive a Conditional Offer of a Fixed Penalty (COFP) and further reminder(s). If you want to continue the fight, you should ignore all correspondence from the police until you receive a summons. You need to understand from the outset that while you will receive much help and support from members on the forums, you will need to put time and effort into fighting your case and ultimately be prepared to stand up in court to defend yourself.

Generated by the PePiPoo NIP Wizard v3.3.2: Thu, 03 Oct 2013 13:57:22 +0000

This post has been edited by Santatiger: Thu, 3 Oct 2013 - 14:04

Many would suggest that anyone picking up 3 speeding offences in their first 2 years of (unsupervised) driving might benefit from retaking their test. Hence the legislation.

this is only my 2nd offence for speeding and I have been driving for 20 years unsupervised... a licence does not make you a good or bad driver it only shows you can pass a test which is nowhere near like driving in the real world... As I have said I am resigned to my fate and will fork out the monies to the corrupt system re-take my test, pass and only learn in the process to make as much money through a claim as possible in future..

OK, in the interests of pedancy, 2 speeding offences (SAC for one, and this one) plus another endorseable offence.

If you've had your full car DL for less than 2 years, i fail to understand how you've been driving unsupervised for 20 years.

This post has been edited by peterguk: Thu, 3 Oct 2013 - 19:55

I mentioned earlier in the thread that part of my health condition makes taking tests unbearable. I am an accomplished driver and have drove for 18 years without incident. I could easily pass my theory and practical knowing it was just for fun... but under test and just thinking about it makes my stomach churn my heart pound and I freeze... I am resigned to having to go through the rigmarole that I have undertook previously, I would rather not. If the law was changed again to make every driver have to re-apply, retake both theory and practical tests regardless of when they originally passed do you think that would be fairer for all road users? I know most people pre theory test would fail a re-test without spending lots of money in the process... I presume all people on here have broke the law, otherwise why be here? Driving otherwise in accordance with a licence holds the same punishment as a speeding fine so in the eyes of the law any wrongdoing on my part for driving without a licence is exactly the same as speeding and yes I was insured and always have been when driving.

This post has been edited by Santatiger: Thu, 3 Oct 2013 - 20:22

Unlawfully.

This post has been edited by peterguk: Thu, 3 Oct 2013 - 20:17

You didn't answer the question, how can you claim to have driven for (18) years unsupervised if you hadn't passed a test?

See my post above.

and are you here as a conscientious objector to this site or have you been UNLAWFUL yourself?? If you have been unlawful yourself don't preach to me thanks...


Well...... I took lessons and I drove! How do you think people managed to drive before licences? " err we best not drive this automobile we have just invented because we do not have a licence to drive this automobile..... "

If you have little regard to driving lawfully why are you worried about losing your licence? Won't you just drive regardless? The good news is that after revocation if you can face it you can be back on the road legally relatively quickly.

The best result for you would be a short period of disqualification rather than points on your licence, in which case the New Drivers Act will not operate. As stated, magistrates have guidance not to circumvent the New Drivers Act in this way, but it is guidance only. The point about any guidance is that it may be disregarded in unusual circumstances. Your difficulty with testing means that revoking your licence would cause you problems that are really exceptional, and I think a case could be put to the bench that they should disregard their guidelines in the interests of justice. I suggest you get evidence from a qualified medical professional about your condition and get a motoring specialist solicitor to present your case in court.

This post has been edited by Logician: Thu, 3 Oct 2013 - 21:45

cheers Logician I can see the benefit of trying this and as I have nothing to lose, this will be my option thank you I only wish I was kicking the arse out of the law breaching the limit with excess then a ban would have been no problem... go figure??. mrh I have every regard to driving lawfully and most of the time I do. I dare you to show me any driver that has never broke a statute (law) and as I mentioned previous what are you on here for if you have never broke the law yourself??

Obviously excluding first 18 years.

Am I missing something here? I thought you're not insured if you're driving on a provisional unsupervised are you?

Edited to remove unintentional ad hominem

This post has been edited by Decker: Thu, 3 Oct 2013 - 22:02

Aren't you?

I genuinely don't know. It wasn't intended as an attack on the OP - I am asking if you are or aren't? As in I'd assume that if I was driving in breach of my license my insurers would wash their hands of me?

IMHO, if you want to try for a short ban then pleading guilty will help get the mags (slightly) onside.

Apologies if this has already been answered, but is your medical condition a 'recognised' one, have you been diagnosed by a doctor and could you produce some form of evidence from a doctor to the effect that taking tests causes you exceptional difficulty?

It depends on the terms of the policy.

If the OP took out policies over eighteen years with a provisional licence, maybe none of them made supervision a requirement, but I'd be surprised.

Personally I think the OP might want to keep their mouth shut about their previous 18 years of trouble-free driving when they get to court.

If they become aware of the SAC, third offence in a year is going to require some extremely understanding magistrates to plead for a ban in a 57 to avoid revocation.

Providing advice and assistance to people such as you? Please don't question the motives of people trying to assist you.