[NIP Wizard] NIP - 89 MPH on the motorway |
[NIP Wizard] NIP - 89 MPH on the motorway |
Fri, 22 Sep 2017 - 18:37
Post
#1
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 43 Joined: 4 Aug 2010 Member No.: 39,531 |
NIP Details and Circumstances
What is the name of the Constabulary? - Date of the offence: - September 2017 Date of the NIP: - 5 days after the offence Date you received the NIP: - 7 days after the offence Location of offence (exact location as it appears on the NIP: important): - M180, Beltoft, United Kingdom 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 - Noticed camera van (probably too late at this point) on the side of the motorway. Was drizzling. Camera "hatch" shut. Multiple trips were made in opposite directions on that section motorway on the day 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? - Yes Which country did the alleged offence take place in? - England NIP Wizard Recommendation Based on these responses the Wizard suggested that this course of action should be considered:
Generated by the PePiPoo NIP Wizard v3.3.2: Fri, 22 Sep 2017 18:37:57 +0000 |
|
|
Advertisement |
Fri, 22 Sep 2017 - 18:37
Post
#
|
Advertise here! |
|
|
|
Fri, 22 Sep 2017 - 18:50
Post
#2
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 43 Joined: 4 Aug 2010 Member No.: 39,531 |
Hopefully, imgur won't change the URL:
This is the first NIP I am contesting. I have three points from a prior incident. There's nothing obviously wrong on the NIP that I can see. I do note that the direction of travel has not been mentioned, unlike other NIPs I have seen. I spotted the van going in one direction. There was light rain at the time and I distinctly remember the windows on the back of the van were shut. Speed indicated on NIP was below 90 MPH. The vehicle in question made multiple trips on that motorway in different directions on the day. Can the lack of direction be queried along with requesting photographic evidence? A hypothetical situation being that one party may have been driving in one direction, but the car later travelled in the opposite direction being driven by another party. Thanks in advance. |
|
|
Fri, 22 Sep 2017 - 18:52
Post
#3
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 13,735 Joined: 22 Oct 2007 Member No.: 14,720 |
Time was early in morning. Can't be that tricky to work out who was driving!
Write and ask for photos to "assist in identification of driver." They are not obliged to supply them, but normally do. Whether they arrive or not, you are legally obliged to name the driver within 28 days. -------------------- |
|
|
Fri, 22 Sep 2017 - 18:58
Post
#4
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 43 Joined: 4 Aug 2010 Member No.: 39,531 |
Appreciate the reply, Peter. Am aware of the obligations.
The direction and the photos could be helpful. To elaborate on the scenario I mentioned earlier: quick stint down a couple of junctions to pick up third party, drivers swapped, immediately returning in the other direction. |
|
|
Fri, 22 Sep 2017 - 19:02
Post
#5
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 33,634 Joined: 2 Apr 2008 From: Not in the UK Member No.: 18,483 |
You may want to consider replying "If the vehicle was travelling in [direction] the driver was [full details]. If the vehicle was travelling in [direction] the driver was [full details]."
-------------------- 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. |
|
|
Mon, 9 Oct 2017 - 17:24
Post
#6
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 43 Joined: 4 Aug 2010 Member No.: 39,531 |
I presume there was nothing vexatious in filling in the S172 form (I left email and mobile fields blank) with my own details, duly signed, with a note along the lines of "please see attached". On a separate sheet, stapled, a signed note stating 'Driver details provided are correct if the vechicle was travelling (direction) at the time of the alleged offence'.
It's been over a week since I sent my response using recorded delivery, online tracking confirms receipt. I'm slightly paranoid about my note rubbing them the wrong way... This post has been edited by K.I.T.T.: Mon, 9 Oct 2017 - 17:25 |
|
|
Mon, 9 Oct 2017 - 17:34
Post
#7
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 41,587 Joined: 25 Aug 2011 From: Planet Earth Member No.: 49,223 |
I'm slightly paranoid about my note rubbing them the wrong way... But if you supplied details for both directions then what's there to worry about? -------------------- 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. |
|
|
Mon, 9 Oct 2017 - 19:18
Post
#8
|
|
Member Group: Life Member Posts: 24,220 Joined: 9 Sep 2004 From: Reading Member No.: 1,624 |
A hypothetical situation being that... I have a bad feeling about this... We generally deal with the actual facts, not 'hypothetical' ones - tends to avoid perverting the course of justice, and other inconveniences. -------------------- Andy
Some people think that I make them feel stupid. To be fair, they deserve most of the credit. |
|
|
Mon, 9 Oct 2017 - 19:41
Post
#9
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 43 Joined: 4 Aug 2010 Member No.: 39,531 |
A hypothetical situation being that... I have a bad feeling about this... We generally deal with the actual facts, not 'hypothetical' ones - tends to avoid perverting the course of justice, and other inconveniences. No intentions on perjuring myself. I was merely curious about such a scenario where direction was involved, where there could have been different drivers. Mutliple trips were done on the carriageway in both directions that day, however, it would have indeed been myself driving at that time (upon checking, that would have been the first trip of the day). I have named myself as the driver, albeit with the caveat that the car was travelling in the direction I was driving at at the time. It would not have been possible for the car to be going in the opposite direction at the time, regardless of who the driver was. |
|
|
Tue, 10 Oct 2017 - 07:57
Post
#10
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 1,423 Joined: 15 Apr 2009 From: Winnersh, UK Member No.: 27,840 |
Hmm... I see that this could go horribly wrong. The fact that you put any caveat at all could be taken as equivocation and result in a summons for FtF. Since you know by the timing that the vehicle was travelling in a particular direction and that you would have been driving, the caveat was totally unnecessary. Hopefully those processing your response will be pragmatic and accept that you have unequivocally nominated yourself, but I wouldn't want to get on it
|
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: Wednesday, 17th April 2024 - 14:19 |