PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

No NIP or Reminder, Only SJPN
CheshireMatt123
post Thu, 8 Feb 2018 - 14:46
Post #1


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 13
Joined: 8 Feb 2018
Member No.: 96,413



Hi All,

My partner and I are in a weird predicament. I've tried searching this forum but can't quite find the same or very similar incident.

Yesterday, my partner received an SJPN with two charges: one for doing 51 in a 40 zone; and another for failure to give information relating to the identification of the driver of the vehicle.

We never received any initial correspondence and this is the first we knew about it. The original incident is said to have occurred on 05/10/2017 and I know that it was me driving from the date and location.

This is where we have the other issue: my partner has been charged with both offences but I'm the one that was driving.

We're not sure how to proceed with this so that I can be charged for the speeding offence only and she has all charges dropped?

Is this even possible? We know we never received the initial letters but have convinced ourselves they have sent them and will have proof they've sent them, which doesn't even matter at that point if we've received them or not.

My partner has had a speeding charge previously, received the necessary letters, filled them in correctly and timely and has done a speed awareness course. This just didn't happen this time around.

Any help would be appreciated.

Thanks,
Matt
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
2 Pages V   1 2 >  
Start new topic
Replies (1 - 19)
Advertisement
post Thu, 8 Feb 2018 - 14:46
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
The Rookie
post Thu, 8 Feb 2018 - 14:55
Post #2


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 39,979
Joined: 9 Sep 2003
From: Warwickshire
Member No.: 317



They dual charge to allow a driver to admit to speeding (the less onerous offence) and not get convicted of the S172 (failure to furnish offence), the prosecution will only progress one charge.

Then speeding is now irrelevant as he can't plead guilty to it, and without evidence he was driving they can't progress it.

Do you need to look at what defence he has for the S172 charge, any reason he didn't get the notification, have you checked the registration document address is 100% correct and matches the NIP/S172 request that would have been sent (there should be a copy in the evidence pack).


--------------------
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 8-0 PPC's
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
peterguk
post Thu, 8 Feb 2018 - 15:00
Post #3


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 13,130
Joined: 22 Oct 2007
Member No.: 14,720



Partner has been dual charged, but was not driving. So partner can't plea bargain.

So as advised, is V5C exactly correct?


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Logician
post Thu, 8 Feb 2018 - 15:10
Post #4


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 11,594
Joined: 28 Mar 2010
Member No.: 36,528



The ideal solution now would be to contact the CPS and offer to plead guilty to the speeding if they charge you with it, as it is still within 6 months, if they will drop the s.172 charge against your partner. Otherwise she will be trying to defend the s.172 charge and if she fails she will get 6 points, if she succeeds no one will be sentenced for the speeding, which the CPS will not like. That would be a reasonable deal for the CPS, but the problem is getting hold of the right person to speak to. This is so difficult we do not recommend even trying when it is the usual deal involving just one person, but on occasion people have managed it, so it might be worth trying in your case.


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



Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
CheshireMatt123
post Thu, 8 Feb 2018 - 15:17
Post #5


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 13
Joined: 8 Feb 2018
Member No.: 96,413



The vehicle is registered to her mother's address. She is between her mothers property and mine for uni term time.

SJPN was sent to her mothers address and the evidence states that the initial forms were sent to the mothers address.

Her mother always opens her post to let her know what she has received (hence how we knew about this SJPN).

What I'm trying to say is that, although it's unconventional, she always receives her mail in a timely manner, either by getting it herself whilst she's at home or by her mother letting her know via the phone.

Is there a defence for the SJPN for her? Especially with this weird mail set up.

Logician, do you have any advice on how I would go about getting to the right person? Where do I even begin to look?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
peterguk
post Thu, 8 Feb 2018 - 15:21
Post #6


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 13,130
Joined: 22 Oct 2007
Member No.: 14,720



QUOTE (CheshireMatt123 @ Thu, 8 Feb 2018 - 15:17) *
Is there a defence for the SJPN for her? Especially with this weird mail set up.


If partner does not live at V5C address, it is going to be difficult for her to say under oath the NIP was never delivered, since she doesn't actually know that.

Her mother OTOH, can say the NIP was not delivered. It is quite possible there were no other letters since reminders do not have to be sent.

This post has been edited by peterguk: Thu, 8 Feb 2018 - 15:22


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
CheshireMatt123
post Thu, 8 Feb 2018 - 15:32
Post #7


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 13
Joined: 8 Feb 2018
Member No.: 96,413



So in this scenario it would be a case of Not Guilty for both offences.

Go to court and both her mother and her say under oath that no other letter made it to the address.

Then the speeding charge is automatically Not Guilty because they can't prove it was her because she wasn't given the chance to say it was me who was driving (by no one's fault really if the letter was actually sent).

Is this correct?

Would it be prudent to contact the constabulary to get proof of them being sent? more just to find out if they sent a reminder as well. I feel it may be easier to defend the fact that we didn't receive 1 out of 2 rather than 2 out of 3?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jlc
post Thu, 8 Feb 2018 - 15:49
Post #8


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 29,315
Joined: 25 Aug 2011
From: With Mickey
Member No.: 49,223



Presuming the Police can evidence the letter entering the postal system (for which we will have to assume they can) then the burden falls upon the defendant to show it didn't arrive. They don't always send reminders.


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

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
CheshireMatt123
post Thu, 8 Feb 2018 - 15:53
Post #9


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 13
Joined: 8 Feb 2018
Member No.: 96,413



And the only way she can prove that it didn't arrive is for her and her mother to swear on oath that it did not arrive?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mdann52
post Thu, 8 Feb 2018 - 15:59
Post #10


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 173
Joined: 19 Aug 2016
Member No.: 86,499



QUOTE (CheshireMatt123 @ Thu, 8 Feb 2018 - 15:53) *
And the only way she can prove that it didn't arrive is for her and her mother to swear on oath that it did not arrive?


In this case, it comes down to the court as to how good a witness they feel her mother is. Bear in mind the bench may well feel she has somewhat of a conflict of interest in protecting her daughter.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jlc
post Thu, 8 Feb 2018 - 16:11
Post #11


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 29,315
Joined: 25 Aug 2011
From: With Mickey
Member No.: 49,223



QUOTE (CheshireMatt123 @ Thu, 8 Feb 2018 - 15:53) *
And the only way she can prove that it didn't arrive is for her and her mother to swear on oath that it did not arrive?

Was it addressed correctly? (Is the v5 spot on for starters)

Any general issues with mail delivery? (e.g. complaints to Royal Mail)


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

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
CheshireMatt123
post Thu, 8 Feb 2018 - 18:24
Post #12


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 13
Joined: 8 Feb 2018
Member No.: 96,413



According to the evidence they submitted it was addressed correctly.

As for issue's with the mail, I'll have to check with her mother. She does live in a block of 3 flats which has a fob entrance so I'll have to see if that has ever been an issue.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Logician
post Thu, 8 Feb 2018 - 23:09
Post #13


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 11,594
Joined: 28 Mar 2010
Member No.: 36,528



QUOTE (CheshireMatt123 @ Thu, 8 Feb 2018 - 15:17) *
Logician, do you have any advice on how I would go about getting to the right person? Where do I even begin to look?


I would start by asking the police which CPS office will prosecute the case, then ring them and see if you can speak to the lawyer concerned. The problem will probably be that your case is at the bottom of a big pile of similar cases, so you have to persuade some busy person to look out the right file and read it up. Good luck.



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



Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
CheshireMatt123
post Fri, 9 Feb 2018 - 09:16
Post #14


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 13
Joined: 8 Feb 2018
Member No.: 96,413



QUOTE (Logician @ Thu, 8 Feb 2018 - 23:09) *
QUOTE (CheshireMatt123 @ Thu, 8 Feb 2018 - 15:17) *
Logician, do you have any advice on how I would go about getting to the right person? Where do I even begin to look?


I would start by asking the police which CPS office will prosecute the case, then ring them and see if you can speak to the lawyer concerned. The problem will probably be that your case is at the bottom of a big pile of similar cases, so you have to persuade some busy person to look out the right file and read it up. Good luck.


Thanks Logician, we're going to start going down this route and if that doesn't work we'll have to go down the other one.

Our main concern here is incriminating me to the CPS and them still pursuing my partner for the S172. You don't happen to have any clue's on how we can avoid this / approach the actual conversation (if we do manage to get in touch)?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Fri, 9 Feb 2018 - 22:18
Post #15


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 5,661
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



QUOTE (CheshireMatt123 @ Fri, 9 Feb 2018 - 09:16) *
Our main concern here is incriminating me to the CPS and them still pursuing my partner for the S172. You don't happen to have any clue's on how we can avoid this / approach the actual conversation (if we do manage to get in touch)?

Well anything you tell them on the phone won't be used as evidence in court, it's also current CPS policy that where the underlying offence can be proceeded with, the section 172 prosecution will not be pursued. If the CPS were to pursue this offence contrary to their established policy, you could look at having the prosecution stayed as an abuse of process (but the chances of you needing to go down this route are close to zero).

This post has been edited by cp8759: Fri, 9 Feb 2018 - 22:19


--------------------
I am not on the "motorists's side", nor am I on the "police/CPS/council's" side, I am simply in favour of the rule of law.
No, I am not a lawyer.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Logician
post Sat, 10 Feb 2018 - 14:15
Post #16


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 11,594
Joined: 28 Mar 2010
Member No.: 36,528



+1


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



Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
notmeatloaf
post Sun, 11 Feb 2018 - 17:46
Post #17


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,472
Joined: 4 Mar 2017
Member No.: 90,659



You don't need to say you were the driver/you were speeding to the CPS anyway. You simply say you wish to plea guilty to the speeding. Lots of people intend to make a plea but later change it before court anyway, it doesn't provide irrefutable evidence either way.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
CheshireMatt123
post Mon, 12 Feb 2018 - 10:36
Post #18


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 13
Joined: 8 Feb 2018
Member No.: 96,413



Thanks for the advice everyone. I tried calling them on Friday but couldn't get through. Going to try pretty much all day today to get through. I'll update when I get more info.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
CheshireMatt123
post Mon, 12 Feb 2018 - 12:02
Post #19


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 13
Joined: 8 Feb 2018
Member No.: 96,413



So I just got through to the CPS and explained the situation. She said that unfortunately this is not something the CPS can help with and I need to reply to the letter I was provided to explain the situation.

Not sure what to do next. Should I do what she said?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
The Rookie
post Mon, 12 Feb 2018 - 12:44
Post #20


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 39,979
Joined: 9 Sep 2003
From: Warwickshire
Member No.: 317



You'r partner either pleads guilty to the S172 offence (bad idea in my opinion) and not guilty to the speeding and gets sentenced accordingly, or not guilty to both and go's to court and defends that allegation as mentioned right at the top of the thread,


--------------------
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 8-0 PPC's
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

2 Pages V   1 2 >
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: Tuesday, 20th November 2018 - 12:35
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.