PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Nip returned recorded delivery - failure to provide driver information court sunmons
Michaelknightkit...
post Fri, 9 Feb 2018 - 21:23
Post #1


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 14
Joined: 9 Feb 2018
Member No.: 96,448



Hello,
I got an NIP october 22nd for speeding. The nip didnt suggest what speed but said excessive speeding it was on a motorway and was received wihin a few daysof the alleged offence.
As i could not determine the driver i wrote a letter to the constabulary naming 4 drivers who it could have been with the nip asking for potential help in identifying a driver with perhaps a picture.
I have heard nothing until now where I have a court date set for march 9th.

The thing is i sent the nip back recorded delivery and i have found the slip. Just checked the royal mail sustem. And it shows that it was delivered to the post office but then no trace afterwards. I have not heard from the police since.

What should I do?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
3 Pages V  < 1 2 3  
Start new topic
Replies (40 - 52)
Advertisement
post Fri, 9 Feb 2018 - 21:23
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
Jlc
post Mon, 12 Feb 2018 - 22:00
Post #41


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 28,599
Joined: 25 Aug 2011
From: With Mickey
Member No.: 49,223



QUOTE (Michaelknightkitt @ Mon, 12 Feb 2018 - 21:09) *
So i’ll stand my ground in court and fight my corner as I believe I have done everything The NIP asked me to do.

...other than unequivocally name the driver.

It's not the Police's job to help you in your reasonable diligence to identify the driver. Indeed, many photo's are of the rear of the car.

Have you asked the RM why the letter didn't arrive?

If you believe you were driving after all then a plea bargain is a far safer option. Otherwise, you have to use the Statutory defence that you did not know and could not identify the driver after reasonable diligence - regardless of whether your nomination arrived or not.

Did you chase up the (non) delivery of the letter? These are questions the court may well consider.

This post has been edited by Jlc: Mon, 12 Feb 2018 - 22:02


--------------------
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
notmeatloaf
post Mon, 12 Feb 2018 - 22:38
Post #42


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,344
Joined: 4 Mar 2017
Member No.: 90,659



QUOTE (Jlc @ Mon, 12 Feb 2018 - 22:00) *
Did you chase up the (non) delivery of the letter? These are questions the court may well consider.

There are many questions to consider but legally once posted recorded delivery the letter has been irrefutably served.

It is DVLA-land to consider that everyone should chase letters they send.


--------------------
My username is notmeatloaf because I'm not made of meat loaf. I hope that clarifies things.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
henrik777
post Mon, 12 Feb 2018 - 22:44
Post #43


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,625
Joined: 16 Nov 2008
Member No.: 24,123



QUOTE (Jlc @ Mon, 12 Feb 2018 - 22:00) *
QUOTE (Michaelknightkitt @ Mon, 12 Feb 2018 - 21:09) *
So i’ll stand my ground in court and fight my corner as I believe I have done everything The NIP asked me to do.

...other than unequivocally name the driver.

It's not the Police's job to help you in your reasonable diligence to identify the driver. Indeed, many photo's are of the rear of the car.




An NIP does that ?

Wouldn't part of reasonable diligence be asking for help of those who may have information to give, including the police ?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
southpaw82
post Mon, 12 Feb 2018 - 22:45
Post #44


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 28,432
Joined: 2 Apr 2008
From: Not in the UK
Member No.: 18,483



QUOTE (notmeatloaf @ Mon, 12 Feb 2018 - 22:38) *
legally once posted recorded delivery the letter has been irrefutably served.

According to...?


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


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
Jlc
post Mon, 12 Feb 2018 - 23:04
Post #45


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 28,599
Joined: 25 Aug 2011
From: With Mickey
Member No.: 49,223



QUOTE (henrik777 @ Mon, 12 Feb 2018 - 22:44) *
Wouldn't part of reasonable diligence be asking for help of those who may have information to give, including the police ?

Possibly, but the OP knows that letter/request didn’t arrive. See the issue?


--------------------
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
andy_foster
post Mon, 12 Feb 2018 - 23:45
Post #46


Member
Group Icon

Group: Life Member
Posts: 20,284
Joined: 9 Sep 2004
From: Reading
Member No.: 1,624



QUOTE (southpaw82 @ Mon, 12 Feb 2018 - 22:45) *
QUOTE (notmeatloaf @ Mon, 12 Feb 2018 - 22:38) *
legally once posted recorded delivery the letter has been irrefutably served.

According to...?


As you well know, NML has, whether directly or through some other well-meaning idiot, conflated the specific provision of service by recorded delivery of NIPs under s. 1 RTOA 1988 with things that are not NIPs being served under the provisions of s. 1 RTOA 1988.

As much as it can be fun to play with your food, I'm not convinced that the thread or the OP are likely to benefit from it.


--------------------
Andy

Millenial (noun): a person who is offended at being told "Suck it up, buttercup"
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
southpaw82
post Tue, 13 Feb 2018 - 00:10
Post #47


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 28,432
Joined: 2 Apr 2008
From: Not in the UK
Member No.: 18,483



QUOTE (andy_foster @ Mon, 12 Feb 2018 - 23:45) *
As you well know, NML has, whether directly or through some other well-meaning idiot, conflated the specific provision of service by recorded delivery of NIPs under s. 1 RTOA 1988 with things that are not NIPs being served under the provisions of s. 1 RTOA 1988.

As much as it can be fun to play with your food, I'm not convinced that the thread or the OP are likely to benefit from it.

I suspected that was the case. However, I’m prepared to be shown something new, which is why I asked the question.


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


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
Michaelknightkit...
post Tue, 13 Feb 2018 - 07:01
Post #48


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 14
Joined: 9 Feb 2018
Member No.: 96,448



QUOTE (Jlc @ Mon, 12 Feb 2018 - 23:04) *
QUOTE (henrik777 @ Mon, 12 Feb 2018 - 22:44) *
Wouldn't part of reasonable diligence be asking for help of those who may have information to give, including the police ?

Possibly, but the OP knows that letter/request didn’t arrive. See the issue?


I only knew this once id received a court summons by which point it was too late. Not my issue that the royal mail postal service failed me.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jlc
post Tue, 13 Feb 2018 - 07:40
Post #49


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 28,599
Joined: 25 Aug 2011
From: With Mickey
Member No.: 49,223



And the gap between sending the reply and the summons arriving?

It sounds like you ‘sent and forgot’ which seems bizarre that you didn’t supply the driver and requested a response.

The bench will find it hard to believe that 4 adults couldn’t between them work it out. What other diligence did you undertake? (Other than asking them and the police)


--------------------
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
peterguk
post Tue, 13 Feb 2018 - 08:45
Post #50


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 12,593
Joined: 22 Oct 2007
Member No.: 14,720



QUOTE (peterguk @ Fri, 9 Feb 2018 - 23:32) *
OP.

Out of interest, what is your relationship to the car? Are you the RK?


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jlc
post Tue, 13 Feb 2018 - 09:21
Post #51


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 28,599
Joined: 25 Aug 2011
From: With Mickey
Member No.: 49,223



QUOTE (peterguk @ Tue, 13 Feb 2018 - 08:45) *
QUOTE (peterguk @ Fri, 9 Feb 2018 - 23:32) *
OP.

Out of interest, what is your relationship to the car? Are you the RK?


Fair point - the NIP Wizard would have teased out this for sure. But the presumption is the OP is the person keeping the vehicle.


--------------------
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
peterguk
post Tue, 13 Feb 2018 - 09:37
Post #52


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 12,593
Joined: 22 Oct 2007
Member No.: 14,720



QUOTE (Jlc @ Tue, 13 Feb 2018 - 09:21) *
QUOTE (peterguk @ Tue, 13 Feb 2018 - 08:45) *
QUOTE (peterguk @ Fri, 9 Feb 2018 - 23:32) *
OP.

Out of interest, what is your relationship to the car? Are you the RK?


Fair point - the NIP Wizard would have teased out this for sure. But the presumption is the OP is the person keeping the vehicle.


I agree on the presumption, but you never know...


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
samthecat
post Tue, 13 Feb 2018 - 14:18
Post #53


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 303
Joined: 21 Apr 2016
Member No.: 83,881



[/quote]
Possibly, but the OP knows that letter/request didn’t arrive. See the issue?
[/quote]

I only knew this once id received a court summons by which point it was too late. Not my issue that the royal mail postal service failed me.
[/quote]

..... But it is now your issue, you are the one going to court.

You need to read through what has already been asked on this thread and start getting a decent defence together.


--------------------
If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck.
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, 16th August 2018 - 23:20
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.