PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice Support health workers

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Single justice Procedure Notice
Cap
post Wed, 26 Feb 2020 - 18:09
Post #1


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 21
Joined: 26 Feb 2020
Member No.: 108,036



Dear Forum,

Today I received an email notifying me, that I will receive a Single justice Procedure Notice as I have been unable to identify the driver for a speeding offence. 51mph in a 40mp zone.

Actions taken.
I received a NIP which I filled in with the name of a family member who I thought was the driver, signed and dated etc, and at the same time attached a letter requesting a photo to help matters.

I received the photo. The photo is of the back and does not show the driver at all. The number plate on the print is too blurry to see fully but I imagine the original photo is clear.

The summary unit ignored my NIP and just sent back the photo with another NIP (to me) demanding information on the driver. Obviously they received both, as they sent me the photo.


I then emailed them outlining that I had in fact filled in the NIP. Having received the photo I also said that it doesn’t help identify the driver. I listed the potential other driver. Mentioned that I have put forward ‘reasonable diligence’ to identify the driver but as the photo doesn’t help, and my NIP was ignored, I’m unable to do anything further but please contact me.


So now the status is that I will receive a Single Justice Proc Notice.

I’ve checked my bank statements and they’re are no petrol purchases on the day or near, and I don’t commute and the car is hardly used by either driver.

What should I do. Any help would be appreciated.

Thank you in advance.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
3 Pages V  < 1 2 3  
Start new topic
Replies (40 - 52)
Advertisement
post Wed, 26 Feb 2020 - 18:09
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
bill w
post Thu, 27 Feb 2020 - 12:44
Post #41


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 294
Joined: 8 Oct 2007
Member No.: 14,341



N.B. don't act on my comments without the further advice from the more experienced members on here.
Firstly, you can't make any assumptions of what charges will be on the paperwork until it arrives and you've seen it for yourself, so don't start panicking yet.

Do you have a mobile phone with location services enabled? If so, check your location history and see if it places you at the location of the alleged offence at the correct time.
If it does, and you hadn't thought to check it before, then surely you you now have acceptable grounds for admitting the speeding offence and doing a plea bargain, assuming you are dual charged.
If it turns out your phone was not at the said location, then that's a different ballgame, so don't write up your answer here before seeking further advice.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Cap
post Thu, 27 Feb 2020 - 13:00
Post #42


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 21
Joined: 26 Feb 2020
Member No.: 108,036



QUOTE (bill w @ Thu, 27 Feb 2020 - 12:44) *
N.B. don't act on my comments without the further advice from the more experienced members on here.
Firstly, you can't make any assumptions of what charges will be on the paperwork until it arrives and you've seen it for yourself, so don't start panicking yet.

Do you have a mobile phone with location services enabled? If so, check your location history and see if it places you at the location of the alleged offence at the correct time.
If it does, and you hadn't thought to check it before, then surely you you now have acceptable grounds for admitting the speeding offence and doing a plea bargain, assuming you are dual charged.
If it turns out your phone was not at the said location, then that's a different ballgame, so don't write up your answer here before seeking further advice.


Thanks bill, will check & will wait for the paper work.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nosferatu1001
post Thu, 27 Feb 2020 - 14:47
Post #43


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 28,687
Joined: 27 Nov 2007
Member No.: 15,642



Accepting a Ms90 when you have a CHANCE of a defence is a poor, poor choice I would say
The increased costs at coutr really dont come into it compared to the insurance

I would suggest you explore the "keeper" angle more.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
TonyS
post Thu, 27 Feb 2020 - 15:14
Post #44


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,214
Joined: 24 Mar 2013
From: Scotland
Member No.: 60,732



Who normally has control of the car keys for example?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Cap
post Thu, 27 Feb 2020 - 16:10
Post #45


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 21
Joined: 26 Feb 2020
Member No.: 108,036



QUOTE (TonyS @ Thu, 27 Feb 2020 - 15:14) *
Who normally has control of the car keys for example?


The keys are normally in the lounge with mum in the cabinet. It sees very little use but I don’t take the car without asking. We’re all adults but it’s not my car.

Still, unfortunately reading, I think they’ll argue I’m the keeper. As mentioned I insured after parents started having some bad health problems, in case I needed to do a lot of driving. I’m down as the main driver, as I went comprehensive so that I could be covered for dad’s car to cover all bases.

So the last avenue looks like a non starter.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Logician
post Thu, 27 Feb 2020 - 16:22
Post #46


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 13,572
Joined: 28 Mar 2010
Member No.: 36,528



QUOTE (Cap @ Thu, 27 Feb 2020 - 16:10) *
QUOTE (TonyS @ Thu, 27 Feb 2020 - 15:14) *
Who normally has control of the car keys for example?
The keys are normally in the lounge with mum in the cabinet. It sees very little use but I don’t take the car without asking. We’re all adults but it’s not my car. Still, unfortunately reading, I think they’ll argue I’m the keeper. As mentioned I insured after parents started having some bad health problems, in case I needed to do a lot of driving. I’m down as the main driver, as I went comprehensive so that I could be covered for dad’s car to cover all bases. So the last avenue looks like a non starter.


I disagree, your Mum is the registered keeper, the car is kept on her drive, the keys are in her house and you do not drive the car without asking her. I think she is the owner, the registered keeper and the keeper, even if she never drives it.

It does seem strange that if the car sees very little use, neither you nor your brother remember this occasion when it was used.



--------------------



Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
southpaw82
post Thu, 27 Feb 2020 - 16:44
Post #47


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 33,610
Joined: 2 Apr 2008
From: Not in the UK
Member No.: 18,483



I’m not aware of any case law concerning “equivocal nominations” and I’d be happy to be pointed at some. From first principles, it doesn’t seem incorrect for the form to be filled in and returned but some equivocation to take place in separate correspondence. This is particularly so if the person the notice was addressed to has named someone else - the notice is not going to be used in evidence against them under s 12 RTOA 88 so it doesn’t really matter if it’s equivocal or not. The police could have and arguably should have made enquiries of the person named (the OP’s brother) by serving a notice on him.

It bears repeating to the OP that if he denies being the person keeping the vehicle it is up to the prosecution to prove, so that the court is sure, that he was in fact the person keeping the vehicle. I don’t see what evidence the prosecution will have to that effect other than his name on an insurance certificate. The OP can give his own evidence as to the facts. If he is not the person keeping the vehicle then his duty is much reduced, as has been said. At that point it’s worth considering whether he has discharged that duty.

I don’t see this as a hopeless case, in fact far from it, but the OP needs to decide whether he is up for the fight or not. If not, there’s little point in debating the merits.


--------------------
Moderator

Any comments made do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon. No lawyer/client relationship should be assumed nor should any duty of care be owed.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Cap
post Thu, 27 Feb 2020 - 16:50
Post #48


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 21
Joined: 26 Feb 2020
Member No.: 108,036



QUOTE (Logician @ Thu, 27 Feb 2020 - 16:22) *
QUOTE (Cap @ Thu, 27 Feb 2020 - 16:10) *
QUOTE (TonyS @ Thu, 27 Feb 2020 - 15:14) *
Who normally has control of the car keys for example?
The keys are normally in the lounge with mum in the cabinet. It sees very little use but I don’t take the car without asking. We’re all adults but it’s not my car. Still, unfortunately reading, I think they’ll argue I’m the keeper. As mentioned I insured after parents started having some bad health problems, in case I needed to do a lot of driving. I’m down as the main driver, as I went comprehensive so that I could be covered for dad’s car to cover all bases. So the last avenue looks like a non starter.


I disagree, your Mum is the registered keeper, the car is kept on her drive, the keys are in her house and you do not drive the car without asking her. I think she is the owner, the registered keeper and the keeper, even if she never drives it.

It does seem strange that if the car sees very little use, neither you nor your brother remember this occasion when it was used.


Thanks.

The car is used randomly and the location was local. Probably less than 10 miles. So no obvious long journey. With hindsight a log of use should be used. I’m saying I think it was my brother and he’s saying not. I’ll look into what bill mentioned.

And many thanks Southpaw, just saw your post.

This post has been edited by Cap: Thu, 27 Feb 2020 - 16:58
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jlc
post Thu, 27 Feb 2020 - 17:38
Post #49


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 41,506
Joined: 25 Aug 2011
From: Planet Earth
Member No.: 49,223



A 'log' isn't a requirement but perhaps would make future identifications easier... As has been mentioned already, the requirement is for the keeper to use reasonable diligence upon notification.

This post has been edited by Jlc: Thu, 27 Feb 2020 - 18:40


--------------------
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.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
The Rookie
post Thu, 27 Feb 2020 - 18:25
Post #50


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 56,198
Joined: 9 Sep 2003
From: Warwickshire
Member No.: 317



QUOTE (Jlc @ Thu, 27 Feb 2020 - 17:38) *
A 'log' isn't a requirement but perhaps would make future identifications easier... As has been mentioned already, the requirement is to use reasonable diligence upon notification.

Only the keeper has to use RD, any other person, such as the OP (to me, and others suggest the same), does not. Your statement is just confusing the issue.


--------------------
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
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
gilan02
post Fri, 28 Feb 2020 - 11:34
Post #51


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 233
Joined: 28 Jun 2011
Member No.: 47,856



QUOTE (Cap @ Thu, 27 Feb 2020 - 17:10) *
I’m down as the main driver, as I went comprehensive so that I could be covered for dad’s car to cover all bases.

Just to check, you have arranged to be covered to drive other vehicles? It does not always come as standard with comprehensive insurance.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
TonyS
post Fri, 28 Feb 2020 - 11:41
Post #52


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,214
Joined: 24 Mar 2013
From: Scotland
Member No.: 60,732



QUOTE (Cap @ Thu, 27 Feb 2020 - 16:50) *
The car is used randomly and the location was local. Probably less than 10 miles. So no obvious long journey. With hindsight a log of use should be used. I’m saying I think it was my brother and he’s saying not. I’ll look into what bill mentioned.

You said earlier that you don't normally use the car without asking. So why were you named as the driver in the first place?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Cap
post Mon, 2 Mar 2020 - 16:12
Post #53


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 21
Joined: 26 Feb 2020
Member No.: 108,036



Sorry for slow reply, mum had to go into hospital, and thinking about this stuff is getting to me.

Re insurance. Thanks. Yes, covered for other vehicles.

As to why I was named. I think I posted earlier, mum assumed it was me, as I pay the insurance and technically the ‘main driver’.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

3 Pages V  < 1 2 3
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



Advertisement

Advertise here!

RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: Thursday, 28th March 2024 - 17:18
Pepipoo uses cookies. You can find details of the cookies we use here along with links to information on how to manage them.
Please click the button to accept our cookies and hide this message. We’ll also assume that you’re happy to accept them if you continue to use the site.
IPS Driver Error

IPS Driver Error

There appears to be an error with the database.
You can try to refresh the page by clicking here