PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice Support health workers

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Dilemma: Passed Mobile Camera Van but Expected NIP hasn't arrived
Lettuce
post Sat, 24 Oct 2020 - 09:09
Post #1


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 3
Joined: 23 Oct 2020
Member No.: 110,270



The scenario is this. NOTE in case the rules are any different, this takes place in Scotland.


Driver sees a mobile speed camera over the brow of a hill. Driver is doing perhaps 10-15 miles over the limit (estimated - could be higher but unsure) when the van first comes into view.

Driver slows down to the speed limit before reaching the camera van, but figures it is too late by then.

Driver anxiously awaits the required 14 days, but no NIP arrives in the post. To the driver's knowledge, no other letters are missing although the driver does not get a great deal of mail so isn't certain. Driver works each day so does not see the postman actually arrive / go past.

It is now over three weeks since 'the incident' and still nothing has been received in the post.


Driver now has a dilemma and can think of two possible reasons:
1) NIP has been lost in the post - if so, the driver is worried about getting charged with failing to provide driver details (how can he respond to something he hasn't received?)
2) Mobile camera van didn't actually 'catch' the driver - but how could this be so? The window for the camera was open.


Facts.
Driver is the registered keeper of the car. The V5 is in his name with correct address. Doc Ref date on V5 (both on driver's paper copy and on DVLA Vehicle Enquiry online) is dated circa. 18 months previously, i.e. when the driver purchased the car.
Driver last moved house circa 3 years before.
Car is not a lease/hire/motability etc and is wholly owned by the driver.
So driver has no reason to believe the police could have sent a NIP to the wrong address.


So the reason for this post is, what should the Driver do now?
a) do nothing - must have got away with it (how?)
b) contact someone (who? safety camera partnership? police?) to ask if the car in question was in fact caught.


Please note that the driver is not looking to 'get out of' a potential speeding charge, he is more concerned with avoiding any potential 'failure to provide driver details' charge which he understands would be quite serious.


Any and all advice will be welcome.

This post has been edited by Lettuce: Sat, 24 Oct 2020 - 09:22
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
 
Start new topic
Replies (1 - 7)
Advertisement
post Sat, 24 Oct 2020 - 09:09
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
TMC Towcester
post Sat, 24 Oct 2020 - 09:29
Post #2


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 3,074
Joined: 17 Nov 2015
Member No.: 80,686



If the car is CERTAINLY properly recorded at an address where the RK can receive mail, /he need do nothing until something arrives. Highly unlikely after 14 days - most of those on here are where the car (vehicle) isn't actually registered at the RK's address, despite protestations to the contrary!!

The camera vehicle/operator could have been:

- Not actually a camera vehicle
- Broken down and not in use
- Operator on a break
- Operator catching someone else
- Pointing in the opposite direction
etc etc
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
TryOut
post Sat, 24 Oct 2020 - 09:31
Post #3


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 601
Joined: 7 May 2019
Member No.: 103,734



If you have no ticket just get on with your life and forget about it. Apart from perhaps not to do 10-15 mph above the limit. It works like magic.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Lettuce
post Sat, 24 Oct 2020 - 09:48
Post #4


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 3
Joined: 23 Oct 2020
Member No.: 110,270



QUOTE (TMC Towcester @ Sat, 24 Oct 2020 - 10:29) *
If the car is CERTAINLY properly recorded at an address where the RK can receive mail, /he need do nothing until something arrives. Highly unlikely after 14 days - most of those on here are where the car (vehicle) isn't actually registered at the RK's address, despite protestations to the contrary!!

The camera vehicle/operator could have been:

- Not actually a camera vehicle
- Broken down and not in use
- Operator on a break
- Operator catching someone else
- Pointing in the opposite direction
etc etc



Thank you. That is most interesting.


The driver knows (from frantic googling when he returned home from the trip) that it was most certainly a 'safety camera' vehicle.
It was on the driver's side of the road, parked at 90-degrees to the road (so rear of van facing road) with the camera visible in the side of the van.

In this type of van would there have been a camera facing out of the other side of the van as well? (i.e. do these types have a camera at both sides?)

There was more traffic coming in the opposite direction at the time, but would it catch drivers on the other side of the road? If so this is a potential explanation for why the driver has not been caught and is something the driver had not considered.


Finally, going back to the driver's main concern - there is no discernible risk at this stage, of a 'failure to provide driver details' ? The driver is best simply doing nothing?

This post has been edited by Lettuce: Sat, 24 Oct 2020 - 10:46
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
southpaw82
post Sat, 24 Oct 2020 - 10:51
Post #5


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 33,610
Joined: 2 Apr 2008
From: Not in the UK
Member No.: 18,483



QUOTE (TryOut @ Sat, 24 Oct 2020 - 10:31) *
If you have no ticket just get on with your life and forget about it. Apart from perhaps not to do 10-15 mph above the limit. It works like magic.

This.


--------------------
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
DancingDad
post Sat, 24 Oct 2020 - 10:53
Post #6


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 25,726
Joined: 28 Jun 2010
From: Area 51
Member No.: 38,559



Simple explanation is that the camera "default" trip speed was higher then the vehicles, even though driver reckons 10-15 OTT.
A lot depends on the road and speed limits.
70mph road.... theoretical enforcement level (10%+2) 79mph but nothing to say operator or force guidance doesn't use higher.
30mph road.....far less likely but who knows for sure?

Bottom line, no NIP, good chance of having got away with it.
Remember the old adage about the guilty fleeing where no man pursuith.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Lettuce
post Sat, 24 Oct 2020 - 12:57
Post #7


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 3
Joined: 23 Oct 2020
Member No.: 110,270



QUOTE (TryOut @ Sat, 24 Oct 2020 - 10:31) *
If you have no ticket just get on with your life and forget about it. Apart from perhaps not to do 10-15 mph above the limit. It works like magic.

Thanks - and yes, good point.


QUOTE (DancingDad @ Sat, 24 Oct 2020 - 11:53) *
Simple explanation is that the camera "default" trip speed was higher then the vehicles, even though driver reckons 10-15 OTT.
A lot depends on the road and speed limits.
70mph road.... theoretical enforcement level (10%+2) 79mph but nothing to say operator or force guidance doesn't use higher.
30mph road.....far less likely but who knows for sure?

Bottom line, no NIP, good chance of having got away with it.
Remember the old adage about the guilty fleeing where no man pursuith.

Thanks - in this case the Driver was on an NSL road which had a temporary 30mph limit. Driver was doing below the NSL but above the temporary limit.

This post has been edited by Lettuce: Sat, 24 Oct 2020 - 12:58
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
southpaw82
post Sat, 24 Oct 2020 - 16:05
Post #8


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 33,610
Joined: 2 Apr 2008
From: Not in the UK
Member No.: 18,483



“The driver” rolleyes.gif

This isn’t a private parking ticket.


--------------------
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

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: Thursday, 28th March 2024 - 18:24
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.
IPS Driver Error

IPS Driver Error

There appears to be an error with the database.
You can try to refresh the page by clicking here