PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

620 Pages V   1 2 3 > » 

andy_foster
Posted on: Wed, 13 Jun 2018 - 21:04


Member
Group Icon

Group: Life Member
Posts: 20,266
Joined: 9 Sep 2004
From: Reading
Member No.: 1,624


QUOTE (id66 @ Tue, 12 Jun 2018 - 19:27) *
That could be it.. we bought the car on the 24th April but (I think) the V5 was produced on the 14th May (found this date as part of the document ref no)..
Didn't even occur to me, feels like we've had the car for longer..


What is the date of the offence? Did you buy the car privately or from a dealer?
  Forum: Speeding and other Criminal Offences · Post Preview: #1390289 · Replies: 9 · Views: 850

andy_foster
Posted on: Tue, 12 Jun 2018 - 14:26


Member
Group Icon

Group: Life Member
Posts: 20,266
Joined: 9 Sep 2004
From: Reading
Member No.: 1,624


QUOTE (southpaw82 @ Tue, 12 Jun 2018 - 15:08) *
What policy documents? Your vehicle’s V5C will tell you who the registered keeper is.


Err, no it won't because he does not have the V5C as he is not the RK (despite explicitly telling us that he is in his first post).
  Forum: Speeding and other Criminal Offences · Post Preview: #1389871 · Replies: 11 · Views: 450

andy_foster
Posted on: Mon, 11 Jun 2018 - 20:03


Member
Group Icon

Group: Life Member
Posts: 20,266
Joined: 9 Sep 2004
From: Reading
Member No.: 1,624


Having asserted that you were not the keeper of the vehicle involved in the alleged offence, unless the police can prove otherwise your obligations under s. 172 RTA 1988 are those of "any other person" - to give any information that is in your power to give and that might lead to the identification of the driver (if so required by or on behalf of the CHief Officer of Police), and to do so within 28 days beginning with the date of service of the notice.

Whilst it would generally be up to the prosecution to prove that you had further information in your power to give, it is assumed that anybody would have some information to give even if it was simply that they had no knowledge of such a vehicle (or in your case that your vehicle was not the one involved). Providing such information after the expiration of the 28 days would generally be evidence that you had such information in your power to give (unless it can be shown that it was not reasonably practicable to provide such information any sooner).

Whilst the police can make reasonable requirements as to the manner in which the information should be provided (e.g in writing, and signed by the addressee), substantial compliance is good compliance (a covering letter providing all the relevant information is as good as the form provided (and in many cases more appropriate)).

Technically, you could well be guilty due to failing to provide any information within the original 28 days, and not providing information that was in your power to give until after the expiration of the 28 days beginning with the date of service of the notice to your current address. The former ought not to be a major problem as the police effectively gave you a specified extension, but the latter might be more problematic.
  Forum: Speeding and other Criminal Offences · Post Preview: #1389596 · Replies: 29 · Views: 2,148

andy_foster
Posted on: Mon, 11 Jun 2018 - 18:50


Member
Group Icon

Group: Life Member
Posts: 20,266
Joined: 9 Sep 2004
From: Reading
Member No.: 1,624


QUOTE (666 @ Mon, 11 Jun 2018 - 15:32) *
The law requires a NIP to be served to the registered keeper within 14 days, which it seems it was. There is no time limit to any subsequent NIPS, so no, you don't seem to have an argument.


Please don't make things up.

The law requires a NIP to be served on the RK or the driver within 14 days unless it was not reasonably practicable to determine their details in time to serve a NIP within the 14 days.

If the DVLA/PNC was showing the vehicle as "in trade" and one force used the MIB database to find the OP, and the other force simply couldn't be bothered, then he would seem to have a defence.
However, if the DVLA/PNC was showing the previous keeper as still being the RK, and they had no reason to doubt that information, the exemption would seem to apply.
  Forum: Speeding and other Criminal Offences · Post Preview: #1389567 · Replies: 4 · Views: 379

andy_foster
Posted on: Sun, 10 Jun 2018 - 02:19


Member
Group Icon

Group: Life Member
Posts: 20,266
Joined: 9 Sep 2004
From: Reading
Member No.: 1,624


QUOTE (davetheraver @ Sun, 10 Jun 2018 - 02:39) *
I received a speeding ticket this morning from Thames Valley police saying I was doing 53 in a 30 at 23.54 on 3/6/2018


I very much doubt that.

QUOTE
I have a high performance car, so its normal for me to whizz around London, but I wasn't expecting anything.


Don't lead with that argument.

QUOTE
I saw it was in Slough on the the A355 Farnham Road, I have never driven there.

I also noticed the date, I have been abroad for over 2 weeks and came back on 7/6/2018.

So my first thought was someone had access to my car whilst I was away, but no one does unless they have a cloned key or hacked into my vehicle. Which I doubt they would do that just for a drive, they would steal it.

Plus when I drove the vehicle I could tell it had not been driven as it was stiff and the breaks dirty etc.

So second thought is either cloned plates or a mistake, maybe the offender has a similar number plate and a bit of dirt made the camera think it was mine?

Either way I am pretty P'd off.


Other than that cameras are not generally capable of thought, you seem to have grasped that logically either your plate has been cloned or misread.

QUOTE
I can prove I was away, but some w****r has cloned my plates I now have to prove its not my vehicle.


Apparently you have managed to discount the possibility of a misread and are helpfully explaining the law to us (which is most helpful as many of us were under the misapprehension that it is up to the prosecution to prove their case).

QUOTE
Whats the procedure with this? Anyone had any experience with this?


If we assume that logically either your plate has been cloned or misread, the first thing that any rational person would do would be to contact the SCP and ask them to confirm whether or not the plate was misread.
  Forum: Speeding and other Criminal Offences · Post Preview: #1389116 · Replies: 5 · Views: 589

andy_foster
Posted on: Sun, 27 May 2018 - 19:29


Member
Group Icon

Group: Life Member
Posts: 20,266
Joined: 9 Sep 2004
From: Reading
Member No.: 1,624


QUOTE (prospectusside @ Sun, 27 May 2018 - 19:36) *
Just got my confirmation of the accept-the-points-and-fine-or-contest-in-court letter and noticed that the registration is wrong - they've typed in an S instead a 5.

Having just re-checked the Traffic Offence Report given to me by the policeman at the time, I can see the S/5 is ambiguous, but has the correct make, model and colour of my car.

Could I possibly reply with "I've received a FPN for a vehicle I have no connection to" or are they allowed a bit of leeway?

Is it at least worth a try?


There is no legal requirement to issue a COFP and any error contained within a COFP would not prevent subsequent prosecution after the end of the suspended enforcement period.
Even if the error was carried over into court proceedings, it would not constitute a defence.

N.B. Finding an exploiting errors and loopholes generally requires a great deal of attention to detail. If you can't tell the difference between an FPN and a COFP, I would suggest that you are not really cut out for this. The same sadly applies to a number of our regular posters.
  Forum: Speeding and other Criminal Offences · Post Preview: #1385440 · Replies: 5 · Views: 681

andy_foster
Posted on: Fri, 25 May 2018 - 06:21


Member
Group Icon

Group: Life Member
Posts: 20,266
Joined: 9 Sep 2004
From: Reading
Member No.: 1,624


QUOTE (stewpots @ Thu, 24 May 2018 - 14:50) *
My court case is pending (28 June) and my view (and a barristers) is that the SJPC was issued out of time.
Can I ask pre trial ie now via email to their solicitor how many SJPC has the force issued after 6 months and 1 day in the last year ? and how many before.


You (or your barrister) put the prosecution to proof that it was issued in time (or whatever other requirements they might not have complied with - or even might have complied with but might not prove) and it is up to them to prove that they have complied with such requirements.
  Forum: Speeding and other Criminal Offences · Post Preview: #1384838 · Replies: 80 · Views: 7,462

andy_foster
Posted on: Thu, 24 May 2018 - 01:37


Member
Group Icon

Group: Life Member
Posts: 20,266
Joined: 9 Sep 2004
From: Reading
Member No.: 1,624


How do your insurers define "commuting" in your policy documents?
  Forum: The Flame Pit · Post Preview: #1384555 · Replies: 11 · Views: 456

andy_foster
Posted on: Wed, 23 May 2018 - 19:45


Member
Group Icon

Group: Life Member
Posts: 20,266
Joined: 9 Sep 2004
From: Reading
Member No.: 1,624


No NIP is required if the accused was involved in an accident (which can include causing an accident without yourself colliding with anything). However, that does not apply if the accused was not aware of the incident.
  Forum: Speeding and other Criminal Offences · Post Preview: #1384509 · Replies: 23 · Views: 2,111

andy_foster
Posted on: Wed, 23 May 2018 - 19:11


Member
Group Icon

Group: Life Member
Posts: 20,266
Joined: 9 Sep 2004
From: Reading
Member No.: 1,624


Can your son post here himself, instead of you potentially playing chinese whispers?
What does "He was in his street" mean (in the context of the notice)? Was he, and more importantly was his car at the location stated in the notice at or around the time stated?


QUOTE (The Rookie @ Wed, 23 May 2018 - 20:08) *
He has to name the driver or face a slam dunk 6 points and large fine for failing to do so as it should tell you on the letter.


That depends on what exactly daddy's chinese whispers equate to.
  Forum: Speeding and other Criminal Offences · Post Preview: #1384496 · Replies: 23 · Views: 2,111

andy_foster
Posted on: Tue, 22 May 2018 - 20:05


Member
Group Icon

Group: Life Member
Posts: 20,266
Joined: 9 Sep 2004
From: Reading
Member No.: 1,624


QUOTE (nosferatu1001 @ Tue, 22 May 2018 - 11:45) *
You have to nominate the driver of the vehicle, to satisfy the obligations under S172.


If you don't know what you're talking about, please refrain from making stuff up.
If the OP's vehicle was not involved in the alleged offence, then he is not the person keeping the vehicle that was. His obligation is merely to provide any information that is in his power to give and that might lead to the identification of the driver.
  Forum: Speeding and other Criminal Offences · Post Preview: #1384213 · Replies: 19 · Views: 1,870

andy_foster
Posted on: Thu, 17 May 2018 - 23:31


Member
Group Icon

Group: Life Member
Posts: 20,266
Joined: 9 Sep 2004
From: Reading
Member No.: 1,624


QUOTE (Michael Gibson @ Thu, 17 May 2018 - 17:34) *
I've got a 2015 Dacia Sandero


Good news!
  Forum: The Flame Pit · Post Preview: #1383052 · Replies: 9 · Views: 422

andy_foster
Posted on: Tue, 15 May 2018 - 21:21


Member
Group Icon

Group: Life Member
Posts: 20,266
Joined: 9 Sep 2004
From: Reading
Member No.: 1,624


QUOTE (friablebanana @ Tue, 15 May 2018 - 19:30) *
Said email contained contents from the police of an intent to prosecute over a speeding offence along with a PCN number date and time.


I very much doubt that a NIP had a PCN number.
  Forum: Speeding and other Criminal Offences · Post Preview: #1382438 · Replies: 13 · Views: 850

andy_foster
Posted on: Sun, 13 May 2018 - 21:42


Member
Group Icon

Group: Life Member
Posts: 20,266
Joined: 9 Sep 2004
From: Reading
Member No.: 1,624


Presumably you are asking whether it was "a road or other public place" at the time of the incident, and implying that it is not?
  Forum: The Flame Pit · Post Preview: #1381891 · Replies: 28 · Views: 1,225

andy_foster
Posted on: Wed, 2 May 2018 - 20:16


Member
Group Icon

Group: Life Member
Posts: 20,266
Joined: 9 Sep 2004
From: Reading
Member No.: 1,624


QUOTE (45azam @ Wed, 2 May 2018 - 20:44) *
Question: is there any grounds to retrospectively appeal the prosecution based on it being time barred? or has the ship sailed as I accepted it at the time?


No, no, no and no.

And please don't start new threads for existing cases.
  Forum: Speeding and other Criminal Offences · Post Preview: #1379244 · Replies: 10 · Views: 1,639

andy_foster
Posted on: Sun, 29 Apr 2018 - 08:44


Member
Group Icon

Group: Life Member
Posts: 20,266
Joined: 9 Sep 2004
From: Reading
Member No.: 1,624


QUOTE (Strongbowpeter @ Fri, 27 Apr 2018 - 07:49) *
Hi a truck hit a car and pushed 2 cars together and into the front of mine then drive off,the cctv shows the CZ registered number plate of the trailer but not the polish plate of the the tractor number,the car that was pushed into mine was on PL number plates and my car cam shows her returning to her car looking at the damage to hers and my car then driving off without leaving her details,I have her reg number,who do I claim from?the truck that hit her car or her for hitting my car even though she wasn’t in it.


The fact that her car hit yours is largely irrelevant. Liability would be under negligence, and on the face of it she was not negligent.
  Forum: The Flame Pit · Post Preview: #1378328 · Replies: 15 · Views: 915

andy_foster
Posted on: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 - 21:21


Member
Group Icon

Group: Life Member
Posts: 20,266
Joined: 9 Sep 2004
From: Reading
Member No.: 1,624


QUOTE (The Rookie @ Wed, 25 Apr 2018 - 12:58) *
Its scientifically illiterate to suggest its the case, maybe they could speak to people that actually work on cars and controlling pollution to establish facts!


It's
  Forum: News / Press Articles · Post Preview: #1377419 · Replies: 32 · Views: 1,578

andy_foster
Posted on: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 - 21:49


Member
Group Icon

Group: Life Member
Posts: 20,266
Joined: 9 Sep 2004
From: Reading
Member No.: 1,624


QUOTE (ljwats @ Tue, 24 Apr 2018 - 22:29) *
QUOTE
You sent off the s. 172 form naming your partner. They received and processed that form.
An s. 172 requirement was sent to your partner. We do not know whether it was sent to the correct address, whether it was lost in the post, or whether he simply buried his head in the sand.


They received it, but nothing was sent to his address. He assures me he did not just ignore it ( I have asked)


Please don't 'invent' facts. How can you know that nothing was sent to his address? There is a clue in my comment above.

QUOTE
Who would send the s172? would it be the same people as the court letter?


The s. 172 requirement (NIP) would be sent by the police (CTO or SCP).

QUOTE
I am confused why the MS90 is failing to give information on the identity of the driver, which is incorrect as we did give the details of the driver or how else would they have fined him?


There is no "we". You received a requirement under s. 172 to name the driver, which you apparently did. A subsequent and separate requirement was apparently sent to your partner, and he didn't. The system requires the driver to admit to being the driver in order to prove that he was driving.



QUOTE
QUOTE
They would have his address and his name as the original NIP was sent to me.. so they must have had his details to fine him.. as I got nothing after that
“They" don’t just fine him though, he needs to accept it first.


The have, the only correspondence he has has was the original NIP which was address to me as the car in in my name. This was sent back with his name on... unless they have taken that as acceptance? I thought that they would have to issue a new NIP in his name ??


There are too many "they"s. Presumably Southpaw is talking about accepting a fixed penalty from the police - which would have required him to accept it by paying the fixed penalty and sending off his licence. The court can and did fine him after convicting him in his absence.
  Forum: Speeding and other Criminal Offences · Post Preview: #1377083 · Replies: 24 · Views: 1,823

andy_foster
Posted on: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 - 21:07


Member
Group Icon

Group: Life Member
Posts: 20,266
Joined: 9 Sep 2004
From: Reading
Member No.: 1,624


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RybNI0KB1bg
  Forum: The Flame Pit · Post Preview: #1377065 · Replies: 55 · Views: 2,732

andy_foster
Posted on: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 - 21:05


Member
Group Icon

Group: Life Member
Posts: 20,266
Joined: 9 Sep 2004
From: Reading
Member No.: 1,624


QUOTE (ljwats @ Tue, 24 Apr 2018 - 21:50) *
They would have his address and his name as the original NIP was sent to me.. so they must have had his details to fine him.. as I got nothing after that


Based on what you have told us...

You sent off the s. 172 form naming your partner. They received and processed that form.
An s. 172 requirement was sent to your partner. We do not know whether it was sent to the correct address, whether it was lost in the post, or whether he simply buried his head in the sand.
A reminder is likely to have been sent when no response was received. We still don't know what we didn't know previously.
An SJPN would have been issued for the s. 172 offence (and possibly the red light offence). We still don't know what we didn't know previously.

In general, we find that having an intermediary give their version of what they think the person concerned told them does not help as much as the intermediary might think. A first hand account is often far better. (Send three and fourpence, we're going to a dance).
  Forum: Speeding and other Criminal Offences · Post Preview: #1377064 · Replies: 24 · Views: 1,823

andy_foster
Posted on: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 - 20:53


Member
Group Icon

Group: Life Member
Posts: 20,266
Joined: 9 Sep 2004
From: Reading
Member No.: 1,624


QUOTE (The Rookie @ Tue, 24 Apr 2018 - 21:29) *
He should be able to do a plea bargain to the red light offence in lieu of the MS90 which will be a lower fine, less points, and less impact on insurance costs.

I’m guessing a mistake was made in transcribing the adddress somewhere, not that it’s relevant.


The OP's partner has been convicted in his absence of failing to provide the driver's details. If the NIP/s. 172 was sent to the wrong address, that would seem to be kinda relevant.
*If* he has a solid defence to the s. 172 charge, I would not recommend a plea bargain. If he does not have a viable defence, I would.

And you owe me a new irony meter - a mistake in transcibing the adddress...

BTW, for discrete quantities, it is "fewer", not "less".
  Forum: Speeding and other Criminal Offences · Post Preview: #1377057 · Replies: 24 · Views: 1,823

andy_foster
Posted on: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 - 16:45


Member
Group Icon

Group: Life Member
Posts: 20,266
Joined: 9 Sep 2004
From: Reading
Member No.: 1,624


QUOTE (notmeatloaf @ Tue, 24 Apr 2018 - 14:09) *
In many years of driving I cannot ever remember inadvertently driving into a bus lane.


Is this a commentary on your excellent observation skills, or your poor memory?

I have once inadvertently illegally driven in a bus lane. I knew that it was a bus lane, I just forgot that I wasn't on my bike (proper one for grown ups).
  Forum: The Flame Pit · Post Preview: #1376981 · Replies: 22 · Views: 979

andy_foster
Posted on: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 - 09:07


Member
Group Icon

Group: Life Member
Posts: 20,266
Joined: 9 Sep 2004
From: Reading
Member No.: 1,624


QUOTE (Fredd @ Mon, 23 Apr 2018 - 21:54) *
I do wonder what world you live in if you think it's exceptional to encounter a vehicle travelling at 100mph on a motorway, or that it could never be safe.


The clue is in his avatar (and the stuff he posts).
  Forum: The Flame Pit · Post Preview: #1376831 · Replies: 55 · Views: 2,732

andy_foster
Posted on: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 - 07:33


Member
Group Icon

Group: Life Member
Posts: 20,266
Joined: 9 Sep 2004
From: Reading
Member No.: 1,624


The point of SRNTE is that otherwise the court would be required by statute to endorse the filthy crminal's licence, even if they found that he was only 'technically' guilty and did not deserve to be punished. There is no requirement to fine the accused - they could give an absolute discharge if they felt that that was appropriate.
  Forum: Speeding and other Criminal Offences · Post Preview: #1376810 · Replies: 11 · Views: 1,567

andy_foster
Posted on: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 - 20:26


Member
Group Icon

Group: Life Member
Posts: 20,266
Joined: 9 Sep 2004
From: Reading
Member No.: 1,624


On the face of it, the OP does not have a defence. However, that was not the question he asked.

The real question is whether or not he has a realistic chance of the court finding special reasons not to endorse.
  Forum: Speeding and other Criminal Offences · Post Preview: #1376747 · Replies: 11 · Views: 1,567

620 Pages V   1 2 3 > » 

New Posts  New Replies
No New Posts  No New Replies
Hot topic  Hot Topic (New)
No new  Hot Topic (No New)
Poll  Poll (New)
No new votes  Poll (No New)
Closed  Locked Topic
Moved  Moved Topic
 

RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: Monday, 18th June 2018 - 02:08
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.