[NIP Wizard] NIP - change of procedure |
[NIP Wizard] NIP - change of procedure |
Thu, 20 Jun 2019 - 10:17
Post
#1
|
|
New Member Group: Members Posts: 3 Joined: 20 Jun 2019 Member No.: 104,384 |
NIP Details and Circumstances
What is the name of the Constabulary? - Date of the offence: - April 2019 Date of the NIP: - 42 days after the offence Date you received the NIP: - 55 days after the offence Location of offence (exact location as it appears on the NIP: important): - A385 Ashburton Road, Totnes, Devon Was the NIP addressed to you? - Yes Was the NIP sent by first class post, second class or recorded delivery? - Not known 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 - None known 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)? - No Did the first NIP arrive within 14 days? - No Was there a valid reason for the NIP's late arrival? - 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:
Generated by the PePiPoo NIP Wizard v3.3.2: Thu, 20 Jun 2019 10:17:55 +0000 This post has been edited by Manzily: Thu, 20 Jun 2019 - 10:22 |
|
|
Advertisement |
Thu, 20 Jun 2019 - 10:17
Post
#
|
Advertise here! |
|
|
|
Thu, 20 Jun 2019 - 10:40
Post
#2
|
|
Member Group: Life Member Posts: 24,212 Joined: 9 Sep 2004 From: Reading Member No.: 1,624 |
Sorry mate, the crystal ball is on the blink again.
-------------------- Andy
Some people think that I make them feel stupid. To be fair, they deserve most of the credit. |
|
|
Thu, 20 Jun 2019 - 10:47
Post
#3
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 56,194 Joined: 9 Sep 2003 From: Warwickshire Member No.: 317 |
Alleged speed?
Limit? You know nothing AT ALL of the circumstances? Relationship to vehicle? Going from your answers, you weren't driving and know who was, so name them as required by the law. -------------------- 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 |
|
|
Thu, 20 Jun 2019 - 10:48
Post
#4
|
|
New Member Group: Members Posts: 3 Joined: 20 Jun 2019 Member No.: 104,384 |
Actual issue is that although the NIOP states that responses can be emailed, when I did so I received a repply stating "Due to a recent process change we are no longer able to accept completed Notices of Intended Prosecution which are returned to us by email. You are therefore required to return the hard copy of your completed form by post."
Does this invalidate the NIP? |
|
|
Thu, 20 Jun 2019 - 10:50
Post
#5
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 41,503 Joined: 25 Aug 2011 From: Planet Earth Member No.: 49,223 |
-------------------- 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. |
|
|
Thu, 20 Jun 2019 - 10:57
Post
#6
|
|
Member Group: Life Member Posts: 24,212 Joined: 9 Sep 2004 From: Reading Member No.: 1,624 |
Actual issue is that although the NIOP states that responses can be emailed, when I did so I received a repply stating "Due to a recent process change we are no longer able to accept completed Notices of Intended Prosecution which are returned to us by email. You are therefore required to return the hard copy of your completed form by post." Does this invalidate the NIP? Does not invalidate the NIP. Whether the email reply constitutes a lawful requirement to provide the information by post is another matter, although as you do not seem inclined to do any more than drip feed us what you think might be important, I guess we'll never know. -------------------- Andy
Some people think that I make them feel stupid. To be fair, they deserve most of the credit. |
|
|
Thu, 20 Jun 2019 - 11:28
Post
#7
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 4,744 Joined: 29 Oct 2008 Member No.: 23,623 |
Actual issue is that although the NIOP states that responses can be emailed, when I did so I received a repply stating "Due to a recent process change we are no longer able to accept completed Notices of Intended Prosecution which are returned to us by email. You are therefore required to return the hard copy of your completed form by post." Does this invalidate the NIP? No. In any case the information you have been provided with (above) is actually misleading. You do not complete the NIP (which is simply a notice). You complete the S172 request for driver's details. Even more than that, IIRC there is no requirement to serve you with a NIP at all provided one has been served on the Registered Keeper. |
|
|
Thu, 20 Jun 2019 - 11:38
Post
#8
|
|
New Member Group: Members Posts: 3 Joined: 20 Jun 2019 Member No.: 104,384 |
Thanks and apologies for the drip-feeding. I've only just joined the site and have struggled making the posts.
The wizard didn't appear to give me the opportunity to include the details. I even attempted to upload the NIP itself but failed in that endeavour also. However, I thank you for your response which confirms my own thoughts but I'd harboured the vain hope that this might constitute an effective loophole on a technical basis. In fact, I don't have the V5 as car is "owned" by leasing company and I'm assuming notice went to them originally, hence the 42 delay before NIP sent to us. Not sure how I can obtain V5 details. If registered keeper is correct on V5 then possibly the 42 day delay invalidates it anyway! Seems a little shambolic in any event. |
|
|
Thu, 20 Jun 2019 - 11:49
Post
#9
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 41,503 Joined: 25 Aug 2011 From: Planet Earth Member No.: 49,223 |
Only the 1st NIP has the 14 day requirement. If the first NIP was ‘late’ then it would give you a defence.
But the driver nomination is required regardless. -------------------- 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. |
|
|
Thu, 20 Jun 2019 - 12:05
Post
#10
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 56,194 Joined: 9 Sep 2003 From: Warwickshire Member No.: 317 |
Read the FAQ for hosting, but don't if its just for the query you have.
A Notice is just that, it requires no reply, the fact it's on the same piece of paper as the S172 request (to name the driver) makes no difference to it, so even IF there was an error in the S172 request it doesn't invalidate the notice, bearing in mind what you have may be A NIP but its not THE relevant NIP which is the one sent to the registered keeper. If the car is leased the RK may be a financing company, your notice may well be the third in the chain, no 'shambolic' needed. They would struggle, if challenged, to prove an email reply was sufficient evidence as to driver ID, so while it may have seemed a good idea I suspect they decided it was actually a really bad one. Statute allows them to dictate a written reply and signed. -------------------- 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 |
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: Thursday, 28th March 2024 - 08:59 |