[NIP Wizard] NIP For Alleged Dangerous Driving Options

[Intrigued]

NIP Details and Circumstances
What is the name of the Constabulary? -
Date of the offence: - April 2017
Date of the NIP: - 20 days after the offence
Date you received the NIP: - 22 days after the offence
Location of offence (exact location as it appears on the NIP: important): - Hove sussex
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 - Alleged dangerous driving at 27mph in a 30

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? - No
Was there a valid reason for the NIP's late arrival? - No

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

• The first NIP to the Registered Keeper must arrive within 14 days unless there is a valid reason why that was not possible, for example a recent change of details.
  
  This link will take you to the advice provided by the RAC's legal team.

Generated by the PePiPoo NIP Wizard v3.3.2: Sun, 28 May 2017 10:00:30 +0000

[Advertisement]

[Ocelot]

A good discussion on this is in: http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showto...06334&st=20

[Intrigued]

Apologies for delayed response, just got back from holiday!

It's registered to me!

Are your name and address on your V5C correct. What is the date after the DocRef. No. at the bottom of page 2?

Name and address are correct on V5C

Date after Doc ref is 12/11/15




Bizarrely whilst I have been away I have had a reply back after completing the NIP and enclosing the 14 day letter, camera unit have stated that they sent a NIP within 4 days to the registered address (and have enclosed a copy of what they alledge is the original NIP) - It is addressed to Me, followed by my company name at an address that I have absolutely no knowledge of, in a town that I have never been to before


Letter States:

Thank you for returning your completed Notice of Intended Prosecution/Section 172 (NIP/Sec172) I note your comments in your enlosed letter regarding the 14 day rule.

However, a NIP/Sec172 was sent to the registerd keeper at the address as shown on the DVLA data base on xx/o4/2017, 4 days after the offence, and well within the prescribed 14 day period. I enclose a copy of this for your records. It is acknowledged that the address is incorrect but that is what the DVLA data base shows and therefore that is the address that the NIP/Sect172 was sent to. Any dispute regarding this information must be made to DVLA directly. Providing the notice has been sent on time, we cannot be held responsible for any delay by Royal Mail.

Having received a response from the recipient at that address, further enquiries were made in order to establish your correct address. A further NIP?Sec172 was then sent by first class post to your XXXXXXX address on the xx/xx/2017

Regading the 14 day rule, as previously mentione, the law requires the first NIP/Sec17, to have been served within 14 days. If as in this case the NIP/Sec172 was sent to someone other than yourself due to incorrect information on the DVLA database then this does not preclude a prosecution taking place. This is covered by a stated caseCLARKE 'V' MOULD.

You will appreciate that in many cases the registered keeper is not always the actual keeper or indeed the driver as in the case of hire vehicles for example. Therefore this prescribed time limit is not put in place for any subsequent NIP/Sec172 that may be issued.

In conclusion I can confirm that this matter will proceed. I can also confirm that a Police Officer, will be in touch with you in due course.


Is the above correct?

Confused as to how my vehicle can end up registered elsewhere without my knowledge, and whilst I'm still in possession of the Registration Document and ironically in my vehicle file I have a copy of a NIP from when one of my staff got caught speeding on a fixed camera by the same 'Safer Roads Unit' 9 months previously

Were you doing anything like eating or drinking juice... smoking... hands off the wheel?

Basically anything other than focussing 100% on driving?

The van may mention your speed, but they may have seen you doing something they've considered dangerous (or claim is dangerous and but will settle for due care etc)

Not that I am aware of. I dont actually recall seeing the van, but it's regularly there............

Is dangerous the only offence listed?

Yes

[The Rookie]

If that was the address returned by DVLA for whatever reason, then yes it is correct and your issue would be with DVLA.

[Intrigued]

Ok Thanks for the reply

I will have to await being contacted by a Police Officer I guess

[bill w]

If that was the address returned by DVLA for whatever reason, then yes it is correct and your issue would be with DVLA.

A question for someone more learned than me;
Do the police have direct access to the DVLA database, albeit maybe 24 hours out of date?

If that is the case. what would happen if the Police themselves accidentally entered the wrong registration when seeking the owner's details.
i.e. a typo which led to the initial NIP being sent to the wrong registered keeper, who actually owned a completely different vehicle.

Presumably that person could justifiably deny all knowledge to the satisfaction of the Police, who then used other means (MID?) to send the next NIP to the OP.

That is, if the Police entered the wrong info, rather than the DVLA supplying the wrong info, surely the NIP couldn't be viewed as correctly served, and the OP wouldn't have any beef with the DVLA.

Proving that however.................?

[The Rookie]

The police access the PNC which contains a duplicate of the DVLA database updated every night.

If they entered the wrong registration number then clearly that would be there fault and would arguably fall outside the reasonable dilligence defence they have for exceeding the 14 day deadline (when most would consider that them using the data returned which later is shown to be wrong would be reasonable).

[southpaw82]

IIRC, the PNC takes a download of the DVLA database overnight.

The simple answer is to ask the DVLA what address was showing for the vehicle throughout the period between the date of the offence and the date the NIP was printed.

[m1cksacc]

Could this be the result of a video submitted to Sussex Police's operation crackdown website? Although they only tend to write letters to people who have comitted offences, occasionally they may go that one step further, hence 'an officer will be in touch'

OP - Do you remember having any incidents happen with another motorist? Could it be that something has been caught on a dashcam and that footage has been submitted.

[andy_foster]

Letter States:

Regading the 14 day rule, as previously mentione, the law requires the first NIP/Sec17, to have been served within 14 days. If as in this case the NIP/Sec172 was sent to someone other than yourself due to incorrect information on the DVLA database then this does not preclude a prosecution taking place. This is covered by a stated caseCLARKE 'V' MOULD.



Is the above correct?

As far as is relevant, the law requires a NIP to be served on the driver or RK within the 14 days unless it was not possible with reasonable diligence to obtain the details of the driver or RK in time to serve a NIP within the 14 days.

If the DVLA provided incorrect information for whatever reason (other than a lack of diligence on the part of the police), then unless the police ought to have had reason to suspect that the information was wrong in time to obtain the correct information, the reasonable diligence exception would seem to apply.

This post has been edited by andy_foster: Tue, 20 Jun 2017 - 22:01

[The Rookie]

Just to add to Andy's point above, there is an argument that the reasonable diligence would apply to the DVLA as well (it's not restricted to the Police/other prosecution authority) but that would be very hard to argue in court.

[andy_foster]

Particularly as case law says that if doesn't.