[NIP Wizard] 79mph in 70mph temporary speed restriction |
[NIP Wizard] 79mph in 70mph temporary speed restriction |
Tue, 5 Jul 2022 - 06:28
Post
#1
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 60 Joined: 2 May 2017 From: London Member No.: 91,744 |
NIP Details and Circumstances
What is the name of the Constabulary? - Date of the offence: - June 2022 Date of the NIP: - 3 days after the offence Date you received the NIP: - 29 days after the offence Location of offence (exact location as it appears on the NIP: important): - A12, NR M/Post No 14/92, Northbound, Kelvedon, 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 - Ok definitely not recorded. I reckon 1st or 2nd class post. Received yesterday however the post has been redirected since we moved house so maybe a few more days. 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)? - Yes Did the first NIP arrive within 14 days? - No Was there a valid reason for the NIP's late arrival? - No 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: Tue, 05 Jul 2022 06:28:39 +0000 This post has been edited by Bestfootie: Tue, 5 Jul 2022 - 07:26 -------------------- ?מי ישמור על השומרים
|
|
|
Advertisement |
Tue, 5 Jul 2022 - 06:28
Post
#
|
Advertise here! |
|
|
|
Tue, 5 Jul 2022 - 06:35
Post
#2
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 56,198 Joined: 9 Sep 2003 From: Warwickshire Member No.: 317 |
The timing is off for this to be a late first NIP or a reminder.
The usual (like 99% of the time) answer is that you are NOT the registered keeper (or were not at the relevant time), check the V5c (registration document) and confirm the name and address are correct, also whether you just bought the car or changed the RK address such that it may not have been up to date at the time. Of course the car may be leased, hired, rental or on certain finance where you wouldn't be the registered keeper and we often see confusion over this. Once the driver is named (and you MUST still do that even if it is a late NIP, there is no such time limitation on the S172 request requiring you to name the driver) an awareness course is all but certain to be offered and you would want to be sure you have a solid defence before passing that opportunity up. This post has been edited by The Rookie: Tue, 5 Jul 2022 - 06:37 -------------------- 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 |
|
|
Tue, 5 Jul 2022 - 08:48
Post
#3
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 13,572 Joined: 28 Mar 2010 Member No.: 36,528 |
QUOTE 79mph in 70mph temporary speed restriction This headline makes no sense, there cannot be a temporary speed restriction of 70 mph, if you mean that the road is normally 70mph and a temporary restriction was in place, what was that restricted limit? A late NIP defence would be an uphill struggle with the postal redirection issue involved. -------------------- |
|
|
Tue, 5 Jul 2022 - 08:57
Post
#4
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 56,198 Joined: 9 Sep 2003 From: Warwickshire Member No.: 317 |
Aren't 70 limits still enforced under 'The 70 Miles Per Hour, 60 Miles Per Hour and 50 Miles Per Hour (Temporary Speed Limit) (Continuation) Order 1978' which the NIP may quote?
While not temporary in the plain English sense of the word, it does cause confusion amongst those who aren't familiar. This post has been edited by The Rookie: Tue, 5 Jul 2022 - 08:58 -------------------- 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 |
|
|
Tue, 5 Jul 2022 - 09:30
Post
#5
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 13,572 Joined: 28 Mar 2010 Member No.: 36,528 |
Possibly, we need clarification
-------------------- |
|
|
Tue, 5 Jul 2022 - 13:35
Post
#6
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 38,006 Joined: 3 Dec 2010 Member No.: 42,618 |
Aren't 70 limits still enforced under 'The 70 Miles Per Hour, 60 Miles Per Hour and 50 Miles Per Hour (Temporary Speed Limit) (Continuation) Order 1978' which the NIP may quote? Actually the limit is enforced under the The 70 miles per hour, 60 miles per hour and 50 miles per hour (Temporary Speed Limit) Order 1977, which is what is often cited on NIPs for national speed limit roads. The 1978 order is just a non-textual amendment. We've seen this before and it has caused confusion before, but it's nothing new. This post has been edited by cp8759: Tue, 5 Jul 2022 - 13:36 -------------------- If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
|
|
|
Tue, 5 Jul 2022 - 22:13
Post
#7
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 60 Joined: 2 May 2017 From: London Member No.: 91,744 |
QUOTE 79mph in 70mph temporary speed restriction This headline makes no sense, there cannot be a temporary speed restriction of 70 mph, if you mean that the road is normally 70mph and a temporary restriction was in place, what was that restricted limit? A late NIP defence would be an uphill struggle with the postal redirection issue involved. Sorry - you're absolutely right. It was just the statute that was quoted. It was an automatic camera device clocking the car doing 79mph on a dual carriageway that's per national speed limit 70mph. Thanks for noticing. QUOTE 79mph in 70mph temporary speed restriction This headline makes no sense, there cannot be a temporary speed restriction of 70 mph, if you mean that the road is normally 70mph and a temporary restriction was in place, what was that restricted limit? A late NIP defence would be an uphill struggle with the postal redirection issue involved. Sorry - you're absolutely right. It was just the statute that was quoted. It was an automatic camera device clocking the car doing 79mph on a dual carriageway that's per national speed limit 70mph. Thanks for noticing. Aren't 70 limits still enforced under 'The 70 Miles Per Hour, 60 Miles Per Hour and 50 Miles Per Hour (Temporary Speed Limit) (Continuation) Order 1978' which the NIP may quote? While not temporary in the plain English sense of the word, it does cause confusion amongst those who aren't familiar. Yes - correct, apologies! Simple 79mph on a 70mph dual carriageway. It was just the act of parliament. -------------------- ?מי ישמור על השומרים
|
|
|
Wed, 6 Jul 2022 - 06:57
Post
#8
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 60 Joined: 2 May 2017 From: London Member No.: 91,744 |
When the RK moved they changed address on driving licence but didn't have a log book with the car so never did it. Went online and tried to do it but needed to order another log book. 🤦🏽♂️
How does this affect things? -------------------- ?מי ישמור על השומרים
|
|
|
Wed, 6 Jul 2022 - 07:25
Post
#9
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 4,746 Joined: 29 Oct 2008 Member No.: 23,623 |
How does this affect things? I would say it simply provides justification for the late delivery of the NIP. The police must serve a NIP on "...the person, if any, registered as the keeper of the vehicle at the time of the commission of the offence." They can do so by "..by sending it by registered post, recorded delivery service or first class post addressed to him at his last known address." I imagine that's what they did and the 26 days it took to reach him was a result of him not being at his last known address. Note there is a difference between "served" and "delivered." A notice is deemed served two days after posting (provided it is sent by one of the methods allowed). It may be received late or even not at all but it is still deemed served unless the contrary can be proved. |
|
|
Wed, 6 Jul 2022 - 09:09
Post
#10
|
|
Member Group: Life Member Posts: 24,213 Joined: 9 Sep 2004 From: Reading Member No.: 1,624 |
As an academic question, service by postal redirect would be an interesting concept - for the purposes of s. 1 RTOA 1988 and s. 172 RTA 1988 a notice is served when it is delivered to the last known address, albeit that is deemed to be 2 working days after posting unless the contrary were proven. There is a distinction between deemed service and actual delivery, but that appears to be solely the burden of proof, not a distinction between service and delivery. Receipt and delivery are different - if a notice lies on your door mat for a month before you pick it up, it was served when it landed.
The NIP was presumably not delivered to the address on the envelope (or the V5C for that matter), so was it served/delivered to the OP's last known address. and if so, when? Arguably yes, and when it was actually delivered. For the purposes of s. 1 RTOA 1988, it would appear that the police have 2 get outs - the OP failed to register the vehicle to his current address - the delay was due to his own actions, and the police were not able to obtain the RK's details in time to serve a NIP within the 14 days with reasonable diligence - variously the redirect (the OP's actions) prevented timely service to the last known address, or they had no way of knowing that posting to the last known address would invariably be problematic. If the above seems somewhat confused, it is in part due to the law's predilection for putting things in tightly defined pigeon-holes, regardless of whether or not they fit. There may (or may not) be case law regarding service and postal redirection which may show greater or less common sense interpretation of the relevant statute, or simply great pragmatism towards whatever outcome the judges sought. As regards s. 172 - naming the driver - on the face of it the 27 days (28 days beginning with...) were all but up on the day the notice was delivered, based on the deemed service (to an address the notice was not actually delivered to due to the redirect). Does the OP have the 27 days in which to name the driver, or must he provide the information as soon as is reasonably practicable? As the speed is at the start of the SAC range (and enforcement range for that matter), and he has already lost a month, I would suggest that a timely response is most likely to result in an offer of an SAC - if eligible (not done the same course for an offence committed with the 3 years previous to the current offence). -------------------- Andy
Some people think that I make them feel stupid. To be fair, they deserve most of the credit. |
|
|
Wed, 27 Jul 2022 - 14:54
Post
#11
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 60 Joined: 2 May 2017 From: London Member No.: 91,744 |
As an academic question, service by postal redirect would be an interesting concept - for the purposes of... to the current offence). Thank you, very helpful. 🙏🏼 -------------------- ?מי ישמור על השומרים
|
|
|
Fri, 29 Jul 2022 - 21:29
Post
#12
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 1,215 Joined: 1 Jul 2012 From: Roaming the South Member No.: 55,802 |
Is this the average speed camera section?
-------------------- |
|
|
Sat, 30 Jul 2022 - 11:13
Post
#13
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 938 Joined: 24 Sep 2014 Member No.: 73,212 |
Is this the average speed camera section? Several average speed cameras in that area. Marker post 14/92 and camera on GSV |
|
|
Wed, 3 Aug 2022 - 21:31
Post
#14
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 105 Joined: 17 Jun 2021 Member No.: 113,081 |
AFAIK the only speed cameras on the A12 between the M25 and Ipswich are average speed cameras; most between Kelvedon and Marks Tey, so I presume your average speed was 79mph?
|
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: Thursday, 28th March 2024 - 14:59 |