[NIP Wizard] Appleofmyeye |
[NIP Wizard] Appleofmyeye |
Thu, 11 Oct 2018 - 11:19
Post
#1
|
|
New Member Group: Members Posts: 3 Joined: 11 Oct 2018 Member No.: 100,332 |
NIP Details and Circumstances
What is the name of the Constabulary? - Date of the offence: - July 2018 Date of the NIP: - 30 days after the offence Date you received the NIP: - 81 days after the offence Location of offence (exact location as it appears on the NIP: important): - A338 Wessex Way, Dean Park, Bournemouth 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 - 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 Is the NIP addressed to you personally? - Yes Although you are not the Registered Keeper, were you the keeper of the vehicle concerned (the person normally responsible for it) at the time of the alleged offence? - Yes Were you driving? - Unsure Do you know who was driving? - Unsure who was driving 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, 11 Oct 2018 11:19:33 +0000 Hello all I received a reminder for a notice of intended prosecution recently, and responded by writing immediately that I had not received the NIP in the first place, to which the police force concerned have responded to, with a stern response- a cover letter explaining that the first page of the original NIP is enclosed, but perhaps more pertinently, a request that within 7 days a response is sent from me in writing, either to confirm I was the driver at the time, or to provide the full details of the driver at the time. There are no alternatives to this. My questions are; should they first send the full NIP- all pages with the standard form on one of the pages- there is currently bits missing I am sure, or are they not obliged to provide this? Is 7 days a reasonable amount of time for me to respond? I do not know who was driving at the time; I can do some due diligence to find out. I am considering asking for assistance in identifying the driver, but don't want to kick the hornets nest. Your help would be appreciated. Regards This post has been edited by Appleofmyeye: Thu, 11 Oct 2018 - 11:21 |
|
|
Advertisement |
Thu, 11 Oct 2018 - 11:19
Post
#
|
Advertise here! |
|
|
|
Thu, 11 Oct 2018 - 11:59
Post
#2
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 56,198 Joined: 9 Sep 2003 From: Warwickshire Member No.: 317 |
should they first send the full NIP- all pages with the standard form on one of the pages- there is currently bits missing I am sure, or are they not obliged to provide this? No, from a legal perspective the only 'NIP' that matters is the one to the registered keeper, if they don't provide information you need to help you name the driver than that in effect helps any defece you may want to put forward to that charge. Is 7 days a reasonable amount of time for me to respond? I do not know who was driving at the time; I can do some due diligence to find out. I am considering asking for assistance in identifying the driver, but don't want to kick the hornets nest. Reasonability doesn't come into it, from receiving a valid S172 request to name the driver you have 28 days to provide the information, that said if it were an issue you'd need to convince the court the first request on you wasn't served. Why can't you name the driver? Any particular reason/circumstance? -------------------- 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, 11 Oct 2018 - 14:36
Post
#3
|
|
New Member Group: Members Posts: 3 Joined: 11 Oct 2018 Member No.: 100,332 |
Hi Rookie
Thanks for the reply. I run a small distribution company, we hire vans weekly to cover deliveries. We don't keep a record of who is delivering each week, and often a driver will go out with another helper who will assist in deliveries and do some driving on long trips. Would you suggest I have 28 days from when the copy of the original NIP was received? |
|
|
Thu, 11 Oct 2018 - 14:45
Post
#4
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 56,198 Joined: 9 Sep 2003 From: Warwickshire Member No.: 317 |
Would you suggest I have 28 days from when the copy of the original NIP was received? No, I'd suggest what I said above, the 28 days runs from the service of the first request that is served, as the first one sent wasn't served it wouldn't 'count'. However as I also said if they prosecute for the S172 based on a late nomination then you'd have to convince a court the first request wasn't served to have a defence. If you can't identify a driver you will then have to convince the court that despite exercising reasonable diligence you couldn't identify a driver, for a business you are expected to keep records and would have to convince the court that, in your particular case, it wasn't reasonable to keep records, that is effectively a higher bar you have to jump. -------------------- 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, 11 Oct 2018 - 16:40
Post
#5
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 13,572 Joined: 28 Mar 2010 Member No.: 36,528 |
Is your small distribution company run as a limited company or by you as a sole trader or partnership?
-------------------- |
|
|
Tue, 16 Oct 2018 - 11:11
Post
#6
|
|
New Member Group: Members Posts: 3 Joined: 11 Oct 2018 Member No.: 100,332 |
Yes- we are a limited company
|
|
|
Tue, 16 Oct 2018 - 16:22
Post
#7
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 13,572 Joined: 28 Mar 2010 Member No.: 36,528 |
Yes- we are a limited company In that case you need to be aware of two things: 1. If the driver is not named, the company will be fined but no one will get points. 2. The defence that the company did not know and could not with reasonable diligence have ascertained who the driver of the vehicle was, is not available unless the company can show that no record was kept of persons who drove the vehicle and the failure to keep a record was reasonable.. -------------------- |
|
|
Tue, 16 Oct 2018 - 18:36
Post
#8
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 38,006 Joined: 3 Dec 2010 Member No.: 42,618 |
FWIW I don't think you'll convince the court that the failure to keep records was reasonable.
-------------------- If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
|
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: Thursday, 28th March 2024 - 21:24 |