37/30 at 20.30 Trap Van doing overtime! |
37/30 at 20.30 Trap Van doing overtime! |
Thu, 22 Feb 2018 - 10:37
Post
#1
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 31 Joined: 12 Nov 2016 Member No.: 88,400 |
NIP Details and Circumstances
What is the name of the Constabulary? - Date of the offence: - February 2018 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): - Annesley 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? - 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 - speed camera van hidden behind stationary cars parked to the left. this was at 8.30pm 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: Thu, 22 Feb 2018 10:37:01 +0000 So back here after driving like Miss daisy for over 8 years. Last time i was here the PACE witness statement was all the rage. for which i used. and got summoned for both. (failing thrown out) 37/30 at 8.30 pm at night. Only defense for me is Vage Locust "Annesley road" this road is about 2 miles long. and the sneakiness of the cash cow van. parked behind stationary vehicles, in a "permit holders only" bay I am sure you will recommend incriminating myself and hoping i get the offer to "go to speed school" This post has been edited by Mozzer1975: Thu, 22 Feb 2018 - 10:47 |
|
|
Advertisement |
Thu, 22 Feb 2018 - 10:37
Post
#
|
Advertise here! |
|
|
|
Thu, 22 Feb 2018 - 10:42
Post
#2
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 38,007 Joined: 3 Dec 2010 Member No.: 42,618 |
Just in case that's what you're asking, whether the speed camera van was hidden or not is irrelevant.
-------------------- If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
|
|
|
Thu, 22 Feb 2018 - 10:53
Post
#3
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 31 Joined: 12 Nov 2016 Member No.: 88,400 |
So a non Permit holder in a permit bay is Perfectly acceptable to do is work? commit an offence to catch an offender. cant make it up
|
|
|
Thu, 22 Feb 2018 - 10:53
Post
#4
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 13,735 Joined: 22 Oct 2007 Member No.: 14,720 |
I am sure you will recommend incriminating myself and hoping i get the offer to "go to speed school" Bang on! -------------------- |
|
|
Thu, 22 Feb 2018 - 10:56
Post
#5
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 1,548 Joined: 17 May 2010 Member No.: 37,614 |
So a non Permit holder in a permit bay is Perfectly acceptable to do is work? commit an offence to catch an offender. cant make it up It is a separate issue - and not one that affects the measurement of your speed. The PACE statement argument went out about 10 years ago, so realistically the offer of a speed awareness course is about as good as it is going to get. |
|
|
Thu, 22 Feb 2018 - 11:03
Post
#6
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 31 Joined: 12 Nov 2016 Member No.: 88,400 |
So a non Permit holder in a permit bay is Perfectly acceptable to do is work? commit an offence to catch an offender. cant make it up It is a separate issue - and not one that affects the measurement of your speed. The PACE statement argument went out about 10 years ago so realistically the offer of a speed awareness course is about as good as it is going to get. Christ 10 years is it!! ive made over a decade, that's unbelievable. Okay so if ive not got a vague location case. ill take it on the chin. and sharpen my pencils. Good to see your still going, but seemingly it a forgone conclusion with these offences like mine where your going at a brisk walk speed over the limit. |
|
|
Thu, 22 Feb 2018 - 11:23
Post
#7
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 350 Joined: 18 Mar 2015 Member No.: 76,324 |
Oh, the Police can park in places that I'd get a ticket (I've seen them on private land with a speed camera van, and regularly in one particular bus stop until average speed cameras were put up recently), I presume they have permission, but who knows...
|
|
|
Thu, 22 Feb 2018 - 11:23
Post
#8
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 1,548 Joined: 17 May 2010 Member No.: 37,614 |
As you saw the van and noted where it was parked, I'm not sure how you think you could argue you have been disadvantaged by a vague locus ?
Reality is, any loopholes which may have existed have been closed long ago - speed measurement is deemed to be very accurate, and the law/admin processes tightened up so that challenging any speed case is a difficult, and potentially expensive thing to do (given the high costs of losing a contested trial) ....not to say it can't be done, but you need a clear and strong defence to take it on. |
|
|
Thu, 22 Feb 2018 - 11:44
Post
#9
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 31 Joined: 12 Nov 2016 Member No.: 88,400 |
As you saw the van and noted where it was parked, I'm not sure how you think you could argue you have been disadvantaged by a vague locus ? Reality is, any loopholes which may have existed have been closed long ago - speed measurement is deemed to be very accurate, and the law/admin processes tightened up so that challenging any speed case is a difficult, and potentially expensive thing to do (given the high costs of losing a contested trial) ....not to say it can't be done, but you need a clear and strong defence to take it on. yeh ive not got any defense to be honest. i did notice the van as i went past but not going to tell them that! the "vague Locus" bit comes from just putting a road name on the NIP that's over 2 miles long as the location. I thought the NIP has to state precise location? or be a little more specific where the LTI20:20 was rather than "Annesley road" This post has been edited by Mozzer1975: Thu, 22 Feb 2018 - 11:46 |
|
|
Thu, 22 Feb 2018 - 12:23
Post
#10
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 13,735 Joined: 22 Oct 2007 Member No.: 14,720 |
As you saw the van and noted where it was parked, I'm not sure how you think you could argue you have been disadvantaged by a vague locus ? Reality is, any loopholes which may have existed have been closed long ago - speed measurement is deemed to be very accurate, and the law/admin processes tightened up so that challenging any speed case is a difficult, and potentially expensive thing to do (given the high costs of losing a contested trial) ....not to say it can't be done, but you need a clear and strong defence to take it on. yeh ive not got any defense to be honest. i did notice the van as i went past but not going to tell them that! the "vague Locus" bit comes from just putting a road name on the NIP that's over 2 miles long as the location. I thought the NIP has to state precise location? or be a little more specific where the LTI20:20 was rather than "Annesley road" Precise location not necessary. And if you saw the van then you have not been disadvantaged by ther location given. -------------------- |
|
|
Thu, 22 Feb 2018 - 12:29
Post
#11
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 31 Joined: 12 Nov 2016 Member No.: 88,400 |
Thanks for all responses!! confirmed what i thought, See you in another 10 years .....touch wood!
|
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: Tuesday, 16th April 2024 - 22:27 |