[NIP Wizard] 5 months late Camera NIP |
[NIP Wizard] 5 months late Camera NIP |
Sat, 27 Jan 2018 - 10:32
Post
#1
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 16 Joined: 2 Aug 2015 Member No.: 78,661 |
NIP Details and Circumstances
What is the name of the Constabulary? - Date of the offence: - August 2017 Date of the NIP: - 149 days after the offence Date you received the NIP: - 151 days after the offence Location of offence (exact location as it appears on the NIP: important): - Upper Thames Street by Stew Lane, London 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? - 0 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 - Given the 5 months that have passed since the alleged offense, I have no recollection other than my fiancé was driving the car (I do not have a drivers license but am the registered keeper of the car). He has zero points and have never received a speeding conviction. We have lived at the address on this NIP letter for over 18 months. Given that my fiancé was driving, would I need to sign and complete the form AND write a note rejecting the NIP given the delay? Why would the City of London send a NIP so late? 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:
Generated by the PePiPoo NIP Wizard v3.3.2: Sat, 27 Jan 2018 10:32:23 +0000 This post has been edited by Screwdriva: Sat, 27 Jan 2018 - 10:35 |
|
|
Advertisement |
Sat, 27 Jan 2018 - 10:32
Post
#
|
Advertise here! |
|
|
|
Sat, 27 Jan 2018 - 14:55
Post
#21
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 33,610 Joined: 2 Apr 2008 From: Not in the UK Member No.: 18,483 |
On the 6 month rule, this article reads differently. It says: "Once the NIP has been returned and the driver identified, the police have 6 months to progress the case further, usually by issuing a fixed penalty notice or a court summons. Alternatively, they may decide to take no action. Once the 6 months has passed, it will be too late for the police to bring any charges against you." To me, this reads that the 6 month clock starts ticking from the time of identification of the driver and not the date of the alleged offense. https://www.lawontheweb.co.uk/personal/noti...ded-prosecution For speeding the six months runs from the offence date. No exceptions. -------------------- 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. |
|
|
Sat, 27 Jan 2018 - 15:36
Post
#22
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 56,198 Joined: 9 Sep 2003 From: Warwickshire Member No.: 317 |
Poorly worded article, the law is clear and it’s not what that article implies.
-------------------- 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 |
|
|
Sat, 27 Jan 2018 - 22:23
Post
#23
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 3,306 Joined: 4 Mar 2017 Member No.: 90,659 |
To be absolutly clear, 6 months from the date of the alleged offense, correct? Correct. Court proceedings have to be started by that date. They cannot begin proceedings for speeding until they have evidence of who was driving (provided by the driver returning the Section 172 request for information). Since they won't have that until after the six month cutoff date, no proceedings can succeed. They may make the offer of a course or even a fixed penalty but if you simply ignore those their only option is a prosecution and that will be time barred. The only thing you must ensure is that your S172 replies (giving driver's details) are received. It might be a good idea to photocopy the documents and get the letter "signed for". If your returns are not received you could face a more serious charge under S172. Although the same six month time limit applies to a prosecution for that offence, the six months does not begin until 28 days after the request was served on you (because it is only then that you commit an offence if you fail to reply). With the advent of camera phones I now just tend to video the form, putting it in the properly addressed envelope and then into the post box. Saves a trip to the post office. It has come in useful in the past with the ever useless DVLA, albeit they normally still try their "you should have told us you never received a confirmation" line. I don't see why this is any worse than a post office receipt which could be for any letter, albeit in this case the OP has no incentive not to send a correct S172 reply. |
|
|
Sat, 27 Jan 2018 - 23:38
Post
#24
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 2,356 Joined: 30 Jun 2008 From: Landan Member No.: 20,731 |
|
|
|
Sun, 28 Jan 2018 - 11:02
Post
#25
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 4,746 Joined: 29 Oct 2008 Member No.: 23,623 |
get the letter "signed for". No better than 1st class with free proof of posting receipt. The police are unlikely to refuse to sign for the delivery. --Churchmouse I do get Peter's point. In the event of the response being (genuinely) lost in the post, proof of posting leaves you in just the same position as if you'd gone for "signed for". You can show that you sent it but it didn't get there. However, should the response be delivered but lost (or not actioned) after that then "signed for" puts you in a better position in that it provides you with proof of delivery. But since both scenarios will see you facing a "failing to provide" allegation I suppose it makes little difference. Of course neither method provides proof of what was in the envelope so the idea of recording the process of the form going into the envelope and then posted is attractive. I think the problems arise when, five and a half months down the line, the driver receives a summons or SJPN for failing to provide details. Should he have followed up his response by saying he'd heard nothing? |
|
|
Sun, 28 Jan 2018 - 12:03
Post
#26
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 56,198 Joined: 9 Sep 2003 From: Warwickshire Member No.: 317 |
Except that for most bulk delivery addresses, signed for is rarely, erm, signed for.
-------------------- 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 |
|
|
Sun, 28 Jan 2018 - 12:41
Post
#27
|
||||
Webmaster Group: Root Admin Posts: 8,205 Joined: 30 Mar 2003 From: Wokingham, UK Member No.: 2 |
Except that for most bulk delivery addresses, signed for is rarely, erm, signed for. The theory is that they scan every signed-for item on delivery, but only take one electronic signature; that signature is then meant to be applied to every item scanned, but in practice it doesn't seem to work (not reliably, anyway). They will very generously refund the £1.10 signed-for fee if you complain (in stamps, naturally). -------------------- Regards,
Fredd __________________________________________________________________________
|
|||
|
||||
Sun, 28 Jan 2018 - 12:47
Post
#28
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 38,006 Joined: 3 Dec 2010 Member No.: 42,618 |
Except that for most bulk delivery addresses, signed for is rarely, erm, signed for. The theory is that they scan every signed-for item on delivery, but only take one electronic signature; that signature is then meant to be applied to every item scanned, but in practice it doesn't seem to work (not reliably, anyway). They will very generously refund the £1.10 signed-for fee if you complain (in stamps, naturally). Well it might work, and if it doesn't, you haven't lost the £1.10, so it sounds like a risk free option to me. If it does work and it gets signed for but the police lose it or don't act on it, you'll have a much stronger defence to a FtF charge. -------------------- If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
|
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: Thursday, 28th March 2024 - 20:01 |