PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

[NIP Wizard] NIP Wizard - Scotland
shy
post Thu, 27 Jun 2019 - 17:21
Post #1


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 16
Joined: 5 Apr 2017
Member No.: 91,299



NIP Details and Circumstances
What is the name of the Constabulary? -
Date of the offence: - June 2019
Date of the NIP: - 5 days after the offence
Date you received the NIP: - 6 days after the offence
Location of offence (exact location as it appears on the NIP: important): - A956 North Esplanade West, Aberdeen, near Raik Road
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 -

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? - No
Do you know who was driving? - Yes

NIP Wizard Recommendation
Based on these responses the Wizard suggested that this course of action should be considered:
  • Complete the Section 172 statement naming the person you believe was driving.
    You aren't incriminating them - they'll receive a NIP to complete themselves in due course.

    (You might also like to let that person know that they can expect to receive one, and give them the link to this Wizard for when it arrives!)

Generated by the PePiPoo NIP Wizard v3.3.2: Thu, 27 Jun 2019 17:21:28 +0000
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
3 Pages V  < 1 2 3 >  
Start new topic
Replies (20 - 39)
Advertisement
post Thu, 27 Jun 2019 - 17:21
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
shy
post Tue, 16 Jul 2019 - 07:43
Post #21


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 16
Joined: 5 Apr 2017
Member No.: 91,299



QUOTE (Logician @ Tue, 16 Jul 2019 - 00:10) *
You say you have supplied the information requested. If they ask you to sign it, you decline to do so, and opine that Scots law does not require that.


Ok thanks Logician. For my own info, what is this law you speak of?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
southpaw82
post Tue, 16 Jul 2019 - 08:36
Post #22


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 30,163
Joined: 2 Apr 2008
From: Not in the UK
Member No.: 18,483



Section 172 of the Road Traffic Act 1988.


--------------------
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
The Rookie
post Tue, 16 Jul 2019 - 09:10
Post #23


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 42,436
Joined: 9 Sep 2003
From: Warwickshire
Member No.: 317



Statute
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/52/section/172

A description
https://www.pattersonlaw.co.uk/motoring-off...IBoCwQMQAvD_BwE


--------------------
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
TonyS
post Tue, 16 Jul 2019 - 09:38
Post #24


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 876
Joined: 24 Mar 2013
From: Scotland
Member No.: 60,732



QUOTE (Logician @ Tue, 16 Jul 2019 - 00:10) *
You say you have supplied the information requested. If they ask you to sign it, you decline to do so, and opine that Scots law does not require that.

If I understand correctly it's the missus who's returning this form, nominating herself but not signing. So it will be the missus that the cops will want to talk to. The OP's form was signed (I think). It's a little confusing because sometimes I think "I" means the OP himself and sometimes "I" means his missus.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
southpaw82
post Tue, 16 Jul 2019 - 11:14
Post #25


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 30,163
Joined: 2 Apr 2008
From: Not in the UK
Member No.: 18,483



QUOTE (TonyS @ Tue, 16 Jul 2019 - 10:38) *
QUOTE (Logician @ Tue, 16 Jul 2019 - 00:10) *
You say you have supplied the information requested. If they ask you to sign it, you decline to do so, and opine that Scots law does not require that.

If I understand correctly it's the missus who's returning this form, nominating herself but not signing. So it will be the missus that the cops will want to talk to. The OP's form was signed (I think). It's a little confusing because sometimes I think "I" means the OP himself and sometimes "I" means his missus.

It’s ever a confusion on here, when posters conflate individual responsibilities.


--------------------
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
shy
post Wed, 17 Jul 2019 - 16:57
Post #26


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 16
Joined: 5 Apr 2017
Member No.: 91,299



QUOTE (TonyS @ Tue, 16 Jul 2019 - 10:38) *
QUOTE (Logician @ Tue, 16 Jul 2019 - 00:10) *
You say you have supplied the information requested. If they ask you to sign it, you decline to do so, and opine that Scots law does not require that.

If I understand correctly it's the missus who's returning this form, nominating herself but not signing. So it will be the missus that the cops will want to talk to. The OP's form was signed (I think). It's a little confusing because sometimes I think "I" means the OP himself and sometimes "I" means his missus.


Yeah you’re right. I’m doing it on her behalf. So the first form was for me. Second for missus to be returned unsigned.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
The Rookie
post Thu, 18 Jul 2019 - 12:07
Post #27


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 42,436
Joined: 9 Sep 2003
From: Warwickshire
Member No.: 317



Unfortunately had we had the full picture at the start we would have advised delaying the driver nomination from you to the full 28 days permitted to buy more time.


--------------------
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
shy
post Tue, 23 Jul 2019 - 18:57
Post #28


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 16
Joined: 5 Apr 2017
Member No.: 91,299



QUOTE (The Rookie @ Thu, 18 Jul 2019 - 13:07) *
Unfortunately had we had the full picture at the start we would have advised delaying the driver nomination from you to the full 28 days permitted to buy more time.


Isn’t enough of the picture is in the first wizard post?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
The Rookie
post Wed, 24 Jul 2019 - 05:22
Post #29


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 42,436
Joined: 9 Sep 2003
From: Warwickshire
Member No.: 317



No, it gave no indication at all you would be naming someone you would then seek to help avoid penalty, in fact where you can enter information you gave us nothing at all. It appeared you had a NIP and weren’t driving, you could have worked for a company or anything.

Still what is done is done.


--------------------
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
shy
post Tue, 13 Aug 2019 - 16:36
Post #30


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 16
Joined: 5 Apr 2017
Member No.: 91,299



So I returned the document unsigned with a day left in the clock. I've today received a 'final reminder' along with a copy of the unsigned document. Along with it came a covering letter which is attached.

What's next?

This post has been edited by shy: Thu, 15 Aug 2019 - 11:11
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Tue, 13 Aug 2019 - 17:17
Post #31


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 13,190
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



They've kindly confirmed the response was received, and they will now use scare tactics to pressure you into signing the form. If you take the view that under Scots law the original reply you sent discharged your duties under section 172, further correspondence can be ignored.

Standard practice seems to be that Police Scotland will charge you with the offence under section 172, but the PF will drop the case before it goes to trial.


--------------------
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
The Rookie
post Tue, 13 Aug 2019 - 18:22
Post #32


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 42,436
Joined: 9 Sep 2003
From: Warwickshire
Member No.: 317



QUOTE (shy @ Tue, 13 Aug 2019 - 17:36) *
So I returned the document unsigned with a day left in the clock. I've today received a 'final reminder' along with a copy of the unsigned document. Along with it came a covering letter which is attached.

What's next?

By ‘I returned’ do you mean that or that the missus returned?

By I’ve received do you again me not you?

If the driver sent it and the driver has received the reply, then the usual advice is to reply politely declining their kind invitation, letter to arrive after about 3-4 weeks to hopefully put them off for a bit.


--------------------
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
shy
post Tue, 13 Aug 2019 - 19:20
Post #33


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 16
Joined: 5 Apr 2017
Member No.: 91,299



QUOTE (The Rookie @ Tue, 13 Aug 2019 - 19:22) *
QUOTE (shy @ Tue, 13 Aug 2019 - 17:36) *
So I returned the document unsigned with a day left in the clock. I've today received a 'final reminder' along with a copy of the unsigned document. Along with it came a covering letter which is attached.

What's next?

By ‘I returned’ do you mean that or that the missus returned?

By I’ve received do you again me not you?

If the driver sent it and the driver has received the reply, then the usual advice is to reply politely declining their kind invitation, letter to arrive after about 3-4 weeks to hopefully put them off for a bit.


Yes to both although again I’m doing it on her behalf so for purposes of asking advice at this stage does it matter too much? . She’s now getting twitchy after this letter coming in wacko.gif

Is there a standard format to respond with? The worst thing that can happen is the cops come and she starts flapping so wouldn’t want to wind them up too much. rolleyes.gif

Also, is it the norm to get this far and get that letter?

Cheers
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Tue, 13 Aug 2019 - 19:37
Post #34


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 13,190
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



The police rely on people getting twitch and rolling over. It's not unheard of for them to turn up at the door to make a verbal s172 request.


--------------------
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
The Rookie
post Wed, 14 Aug 2019 - 06:39
Post #35


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 42,436
Joined: 9 Sep 2003
From: Warwickshire
Member No.: 317



QUOTE (shy @ Tue, 13 Aug 2019 - 20:20) *
Yes to both although again I’m doing it on her behalf so for purposes of asking advice at this stage does it matter too much? . She’s now getting twitchy after this letter coming in wacko.gif

Is there a standard format to respond with? The worst thing that can happen is the cops come and she starts flapping so wouldn’t want to wind them up too much. rolleyes.gif

Also, is it the norm to get this far and get that letter?

Please stick to what is accurate to avoid confusion, its her case, say what she did, otherwise we end up checking.

No standard format and absolutely no need for one, if in doubt post a proposed reply here before sending it.

If they turn up point out that a reply naming the driver has bean sent, the law is the law, winding them up (you/she won't unless you are unnecessarily obnoxious) won’t change anything.

That letter was pretty much guaranteed as you would know if you had read other threads as suggested.

This post has been edited by The Rookie: Wed, 14 Aug 2019 - 09:37


--------------------
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
shy
post Thu, 15 Aug 2019 - 08:14
Post #36


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 16
Joined: 5 Apr 2017
Member No.: 91,299



QUOTE (The Rookie @ Wed, 14 Aug 2019 - 07:39) *
QUOTE (shy @ Tue, 13 Aug 2019 - 20:20) *
Yes to both although again I’m doing it on her behalf so for purposes of asking advice at this stage does it matter too much? . She’s now getting twitchy after this letter coming in wacko.gif

Is there a standard format to respond with? The worst thing that can happen is the cops come and she starts flapping so wouldn’t want to wind them up too much. rolleyes.gif

Also, is it the norm to get this far and get that letter?

Please stick to what is accurate to avoid confusion, its her case, say what she did, otherwise we end up checking.

No standard format and absolutely no need for one, if in doubt post a proposed reply here before sending it.

If they turn up point out that a reply naming the driver has bean sent, the law is the law, winding them up (you/she won't unless you are unnecessarily obnoxious) won’t change anything.

That letter was pretty much guaranteed as you would know if you had read other threads as suggested.


Ok.

Proposed response:-

Dear Madam,

With reference to your letter dated xxx. Under Scots law, the NIP previously returned naming the driver discharged my duties under section 172.

Regards
X


So just to be clear on timeline:
-Me, RK, received NIP naming driver. I returned signed within the 28day window due to not following advice.
-Driver received NIP. Returned unsigned on day 27.
-Letter received to driver in post stating a signature is required.

A lot of the historical posts are from many years ago...is it still the case that going this route has never reached court?

This post has been edited by shy: Thu, 15 Aug 2019 - 11:12
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
The Rookie
post Thu, 15 Aug 2019 - 09:16
Post #37


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 42,436
Joined: 9 Sep 2003
From: Warwickshire
Member No.: 317



I'd just go with
Dear Madam,

With reference to your letter dated xxx. The NIP previously returned naming the driver discharged my duties under section 172.

Regards
X

The bit about Scots law (should write Scottish anyway) isn't relevant nor necessarily correct.


--------------------
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
shy
post Thu, 15 Aug 2019 - 11:14
Post #38


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 16
Joined: 5 Apr 2017
Member No.: 91,299



Will do. Funny how there's no deadline. "ASAP" rolleyes.gif

Should driver roll over out of fear, is the penalty fine worst than signing the form?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
The Rookie
post Thu, 15 Aug 2019 - 11:17
Post #39


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 42,436
Joined: 9 Sep 2003
From: Warwickshire
Member No.: 317



Well either an offence is already committed by going past 28 days unsigned or it has not, there is no time frame they can then impose.

In theory they could refer it to court (where the penalty will b e higher) rather than offering a fixed penalty, in reality we've not seen that happening.


--------------------
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
666
post Thu, 15 Aug 2019 - 11:21
Post #40


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,310
Joined: 17 Jun 2011
Member No.: 47,602



QUOTE (The Rookie @ Thu, 15 Aug 2019 - 10:16) *
I'd just go with
Dear Madam,

With reference to your letter dated xxx. The NIP previously returned naming the driver discharged my duties under section 172.

Regards
X

The bit about Scots law (should write Scottish anyway) isn't relevant nor necessarily correct.

"Scots law" is the correct term. But, as you say, it's irrelevant.
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: Wednesday, 18th September 2019 - 05:55
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.