NIP>Failing to Provide Driver>Not Guilty >Court |
NIP>Failing to Provide Driver>Not Guilty >Court |
Mon, 11 Jun 2018 - 19:17
Post
#1
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 12 Joined: 11 Jun 2018 Member No.: 98,377 |
Hi
Any assistance here would be great, I will try my best to condense the summary, its my first ever post, thx for any help I get. Augast last year a nip was sent to the registered address of the vehicle in relation to speeding, 42mph in a 30 mph zone, offence happened at 2am, myself and wife are the only people with keys to the vehicle, we were not driving, car was at home, I have no points, wifey has 3. NIP went to the registered address, I had failed to change the address on the log book!.....I then receive the NIP at my new address on the 12th October after the concerned police force track down my address due to insurance being at current address. In haste/stupidly I completed part B of the form wrong, I completed it from the view point of me not being the driver, after reviewing the form before I sent it off I realised my mistake and had to cross through the sections, I had to write on the form that I wasnt the driver, the reply was within the 28 days, be it some what messy. I followed up with a letter stating that I wasnt the driver and the car was located at my address, this was sent recorded delivery, the police accept receipt, they received the letter on the 24th November, later than the 28 days. At this point I believed the issue was closed, I had returned the forms and sent off a covering letter, in my view a mistake had been made ie a misread plate and they had rectified........... On the 28 November a cloned car form was allegedly sent, although I have never received. On the 20th December I receive a charge sheet of speeding and failing to provide driver information, I responded not guilty to both charges, fast forward to today and i receive disclosure info from the police, seems the speeding charge has been dropped, however the failing to provide driver information still stands. The disclosure form shows the reason for the charge is incomplete form provided and failing to return the cloned car form. I assumed that given I had sent a covering letter that would be sufficient, the police insisting that I respond/complete NIP section with A or B of the form was clearly not fit for purpose in this scenario, I could not of returned either part correctly. My concern is that I failed to change address on the logbook, hence the failure to provide driver information charge is dated in September, a month after the initial NIP was sent, does this mean that anything that happened after September is irrelevant? Also, how does the cloned car form fit in, in the discloure doc its showing that it was sent on the 28th November, it doesnt actually show it being posted, ive checked all of my paperwork, (which I file before shredding in bulk) and I definately havent received. If per the disclosure form all I had to do was take a handful of photos on my phone and send over to an e mail address it would have taken 5 mins to complete. Ive been far to complacent here as I belived the issue would resolve itself as I clearly wasnt the driver, low and behold im now off to court on Friday, any suggestions please, any assistance grealtly appreciated? Oh btw i'm self employed so losing a days pay to boot..... |
|
|
Advertisement |
Mon, 11 Jun 2018 - 19:17
Post
#
|
Advertise here! |
|
|
|
Thu, 14 Jun 2018 - 05:45
Post
#21
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 12 Joined: 11 Jun 2018 Member No.: 98,377 |
Ok, but what does that mean, is it relevant to this charge?
|
|
|
Thu, 14 Jun 2018 - 07:49
Post
#22
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 28,687 Joined: 27 Nov 2007 Member No.: 15,642 |
It might explain the reasno they are certain (or appear to be certain) it was your vehicle.
|
|
|
Thu, 14 Jun 2018 - 08:29
Post
#23
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 56,263 Joined: 9 Sep 2003 From: Warwickshire Member No.: 317 |
although they are not providing photo evidence, according to the disclosure pack anyway. Once you plead not guilty you will be asked the basis of your defence, that will be that your car wasn't at the specified location at the time and date specified and you have informed the Police of this fact (all be it some information was sent late so you could still be found guilty on that technicality). the fact you were not driving is wholly irrelevant and isn't even worth mentioning, the offence you are alleged to have committed is as a keeper of the vehicle not the driver of the vehicle. The Police will have to prove to the courts satisfaction that your car was there, for that they will need photo's and/or witness evidence but I'd be very surprised if photo's weren't used, prima facie a photo of a car matching the description of yours and bearing the correct Vehicle Registration Mark will satisfy the court, so the burden will then fall on you to show that it wasn't (or wasn't at the time/date). -------------------- 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, 14 Jun 2018 - 12:10
Post
#24
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 196 Joined: 23 Aug 2013 Member No.: 64,667 |
And if the date/time stamp on the photos doesn't match?
Which time/date will he be expected to prove he wasn't there at? The photo date? That would be difficult. The NIP date? The prosecution won't have any evidence that he 'was' there, if the photo is from a different day. If the date on the photo doesnt match the date on your paperwork, I think Rookie's advice is off the mark. But I'm sure he'll correct me if I've missed something... |
|
|
Thu, 14 Jun 2018 - 12:58
Post
#25
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 12 Joined: 11 Jun 2018 Member No.: 98,377 |
How would that apply to this case ?
|
|
|
Thu, 14 Jun 2018 - 14:09
Post
#26
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 4,126 Joined: 31 Jan 2018 Member No.: 96,238 |
Let's say for example that the OP received a NIP for 12 August at 2 am when the car was at home
The photos might show that the alleged offence was at 2 pm If they have the same date/time but show daylight, it's obvious that there's been a mistake His answer to the S172 question that was asked was perfectly correct He has no obligation to guess what date and time the police might have had in mind He can't be prosecuted for any offence regarding the correct date/time because : 1 A valid NIP was never served 2 An S172 was never served and there is no evidence of the driver 3 It's more than six months and no prosecution is possible If the mistake was the result of a clock setting, I'm surprised that the police aren't aware of it from other cases It makes me wonder if this situation has been caused by nothing more than a typo on the original documents This post has been edited by Redivi: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 - 14:12 |
|
|
Fri, 15 Jun 2018 - 15:16
Post
#27
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 12 Joined: 11 Jun 2018 Member No.: 98,377 |
Police produced today a very bad picture of a car, despite them never providing the pic to me when originally asked or in disclosure, as such an angry magistrate concludes no further action.
Thanks All, your feedback here was a great help |
|
|
Fri, 15 Jun 2018 - 15:27
Post
#28
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 41,586 Joined: 25 Aug 2011 From: Planet Earth Member No.: 49,223 |
Good (or right) result!
-------------------- 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. |
|
|
Fri, 15 Jun 2018 - 19:49
Post
#29
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 21,015 Joined: 22 Apr 2012 Member No.: 54,455 |
|
|
|
Sat, 16 Jun 2018 - 07:30
Post
#30
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 4,126 Joined: 31 Jan 2018 Member No.: 96,238 |
If the photograph was so bad, how did they read a registration number in the first place ?
|
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: Wednesday, 17th April 2024 - 09:32 |