PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

NIP receivied
john1234567
post Wed, 15 May 2019 - 11:11
Post #1


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 55
Joined: 29 Jun 2016
Member No.: 85,287



Hi all.

Got flagged down by a hidden policewoman with a radar gun on the weekend. She gave me the NIP and told me what would happen.

Just wondered, looking at the piece of paper, it has had a large bit of the corner torn off so bits of the text are missing where she tore it off her pad.

It's also badly filled in with a lot of the letters and numbers looking confusing and not entirely legible.

Is there any mileage from the point of view of exonerating myself in a badly completed, illegible and damaged NIP? Is there any standard for that?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
2 Pages V  < 1 2  
Start new topic
Replies (20 - 30)
Advertisement
post Wed, 15 May 2019 - 11:11
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
The Slithy Tove
post Thu, 16 May 2019 - 06:44
Post #21


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 2,325
Joined: 5 Jan 2012
Member No.: 52,178



In some ways, let's hope there's a bit of a gap before you get the actual fine through the post. That'll give you a chance to move off the denial/anger part of the Change Curve and move on to acceptance. Your current position is quite natural and understandable, but when you look back on it, it'll also appear somewhat futile.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Kickaha
post Thu, 16 May 2019 - 06:45
Post #22


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 2,369
Joined: 10 Jun 2010
Member No.: 38,126



QUOTE (john1234567 @ Thu, 16 May 2019 - 07:35) *
It would help if the alleged offence was a breach of a 60mph limit. The paperwork would be incorrect and all the previous penalties issued to other motorists would have to be overturned.

I've been thinking overnight about the business of acquiring the evidence they have for issuing the fixed penalty. I'm thinking it must be possible to see it. For other similar situations like bus lane fines or parking fines the evidence is often sent together with the PCN. So isn't it the same for speeding? Wouldn't they explain the basis for their action and then give you the option to appeal it?

On the issue of the speed detection device in play here. I believe it was a ProLaser III. The Home Office guidelines for use of that device explains that it can't reliably target a brace of moving vehicles, as in this case. I was targeted during overtaking. So it must be beyond reasonable doubt that the gun wasn't reflecting off one of the other moving vehicles. If the gun is pointed straight at one moving vehicle it is reliable, but if there are two vehicles side-by-side it's less clear cut.

Not wanting to sound rude but your thoughts are inconsequential.

The reality is that can offer a fixed penalty without providing any evidence and the only way you can “appeal” is by opting to go to court. Only after you opt for court (and plead NG) is there any requirement for them to provide the evidence they have.

You should also be aware that trying to question the reliability of the device can be VERY expensive if you lose as it will involve expert witnesses.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
NewJudge
post Thu, 16 May 2019 - 08:10
Post #23


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,910
Joined: 29 Oct 2008
Member No.: 23,623



QUOTE (john1234567 @ Thu, 16 May 2019 - 07:35) *
I've been thinking overnight about the business of acquiring the evidence they have for issuing the fixed penalty. I'm thinking it must be possible to see it.

It isn't. The idea of a fixed penalty is that the driver accepts the allegation as it stands and wants to dispose of the matter at the minimum cost. There's nothing preventing you declining the offer and having the matter heard in court (where it will cost you a lot more even if you plead guilty).

QUOTE (john1234567 @ Thu, 16 May 2019 - 07:35) *
On the issue of the speed detection device in play here. I believe it was a ProLaser III. The Home Office guidelines for use of that device explains that it can't reliably target a brace of moving vehicles, as in this case. I was targeted during overtaking. So it must be beyond reasonable doubt that the gun wasn't reflecting off one of the other moving vehicles. If the gun is pointed straight at one moving vehicle it is reliable, but if there are two vehicles side-by-side it's less clear cut.

Then start saving even more cash. You have virtually no chance of running a successful defence on those lines without expert help. Even if you are successful you will not recover the considerable sum you will pay for that help.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jlc
post Thu, 16 May 2019 - 08:14
Post #24


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 30,713
Joined: 25 Aug 2011
From: With Mickey
Member No.: 49,223



QUOTE (john1234567 @ Thu, 16 May 2019 - 07:35) *
It would help if the alleged offence was a breach of a 60mph limit. The paperwork would be incorrect and all the previous penalties issued to other motorists would have to be overturned.

The allegation would be exceeding the prescribed limit. No mileage there I'm afraid. Additionally, the 'paperwork' doesn't change the facts.

QUOTE (john1234567 @ Thu, 16 May 2019 - 07:35) *
I've been thinking overnight about the business of acquiring the evidence they have for issuing the fixed penalty. I'm thinking it must be possible to see it. For other similar situations like bus lane fines or parking fines the evidence is often sent together with the PCN. So isn't it the same for speeding? Wouldn't they explain the basis for their action and then give you the option to appeal it?

They could but don't have to. As I explained earlier the fixed penalty system is for those that want to dispose of the matter without a prosecution (effectively accept their guilt). If not, off to court you go and you can see the evidence they intend to rely upon. (But the fixed penalty fine is gone)

QUOTE (john1234567 @ Thu, 16 May 2019 - 07:35) *
On the issue of the speed detection device in play here. I believe it was a ProLaser III. The Home Office guidelines for use of that device explains that it can't reliably target a brace of moving vehicles, as in this case. I was targeted during overtaking. So it must be beyond reasonable doubt that the gun wasn't reflecting off one of the other moving vehicles. If the gun is pointed straight at one moving vehicle it is reliable, but if there are two vehicles side-by-side it's less clear cut.

The signal must have been coming from one vehicle. Indeed, you were obviously travelling faster than the vehicle being overtaken so either it was you doing 76 or the vehicle being overtaken was doing 76 and you were going even faster.

You can indeed try and cast RD at court. But for the sake of a fixed penalty I'd think very carefully as you know you were speeding.

QUOTE (Kickaha @ Thu, 16 May 2019 - 07:45) *
Only after you opt for court (and plead NG) is there any requirement for them to provide the evidence they have.

You do not have to plead NG to have the evidence they intend to rely upon.

This post has been edited by Jlc: Thu, 16 May 2019 - 08:14


--------------------
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

Private Parking - remember, they just want your money and will say almost anything to get it.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
john1234567
post Thu, 16 May 2019 - 12:38
Post #25


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 55
Joined: 29 Jun 2016
Member No.: 85,287



Slithy, I was actually at the acceptance stage 1/2 a mile down the road. I find the process of appealing these arbitrary penalties entertaining. If you look through my posting history on here you'll see I'm mostly successful. I have a clean license, I could just take it.

Jlc, I did spot the officer despite only a slither of her yellow jacket around her arm being visible. So rapidly slowed down, I'm not certain of our speed or the vehicles we were passing. If the reflections to the laser were bouncing off a slower and faster car at the same time that could give the appearance of a much faster speed than would otherwise be recorded under normal circumstances.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jlc
post Thu, 16 May 2019 - 12:43
Post #26


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 30,713
Joined: 25 Aug 2011
From: With Mickey
Member No.: 49,223



QUOTE (john1234567 @ Thu, 16 May 2019 - 13:38) *
If the reflections to the laser were bouncing off a slower and faster car at the same time that could give the appearance of a much faster speed than would otherwise be recorded under normal circumstances.

Look up to the 'slip' effect but I think it's unlikely to apply here. I still think you'll struggle to cast sufficient doubt but at least you know the costs involved should you want to challenge. (If expert witnesses are rolled in by the prosecution then your bill could be £2-3k)

Remember, the officer will state in their opinion you were speeding and this was corroborated by the reading on the device.

This post has been edited by Jlc: Thu, 16 May 2019 - 12:44


--------------------
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

Private Parking - remember, they just want your money and will say almost anything to get it.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Logician
post Thu, 16 May 2019 - 19:40
Post #27


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 11,997
Joined: 28 Mar 2010
Member No.: 36,528



QUOTE (john1234567 @ Thu, 16 May 2019 - 12:38) *
Slithy, I was actually at the acceptance stage 1/2 a mile down the road. I find the process of appealing these arbitrary penalties entertaining. If you look through my posting history on here you'll see I'm mostly successful. I have a clean license, I could just take it. Jlc, I did spot the officer despite only a slither of her yellow jacket around her arm being visible. So rapidly slowed down, I'm not certain of our speed or the vehicles we were passing. If the reflections to the laser were bouncing off a slower and faster car at the same time that could give the appearance of a much faster speed than would otherwise be recorded under normal circumstances.


Your previous posts concerned parking and bus lane penalties which are a very different matter from speeding, and more difficult to overturn on technicalities of the paperwork.

When disputing the measurement it is no good just raising the possibility that something has gone wrong, you need to be able to show that it has. Search for the case of Dr Science on here. He was an expert physicist but failed to avoid his wife being convicted.



--------------------



Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
seank
post Thu, 16 May 2019 - 22:03
Post #28


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 341
Joined: 15 Apr 2013
Member No.: 61,183



QUOTE (Logician @ Thu, 16 May 2019 - 20:40) *
QUOTE (john1234567 @ Thu, 16 May 2019 - 12:38) *
Slithy, I was actually at the acceptance stage 1/2 a mile down the road. I find the process of appealing these arbitrary penalties entertaining. If you look through my posting history on here you'll see I'm mostly successful. I have a clean license, I could just take it. Jlc, I did spot the officer despite only a slither of her yellow jacket around her arm being visible. So rapidly slowed down, I'm not certain of our speed or the vehicles we were passing. If the reflections to the laser were bouncing off a slower and faster car at the same time that could give the appearance of a much faster speed than would otherwise be recorded under normal circumstances.


Your previous posts concerned parking and bus lane penalties which are a very different matter from speeding, and more difficult to overturn on technicalities of the paperwork.

When disputing the measurement it is no good just raising the possibility that something has gone wrong, you need to be able to show that it has. Search for the case of Dr Science on here. He was an expert physicist but failed to avoid his wife being convicted.

You what?
Iain Fielden is a personal friend of mine.
He was employed as a lab technician at Sheffield Polytechnic, now known as Hallam University.
His wife, Vikki, and my wife are great friends. This was 10 years ago and she's now 62. He is 53.
Iain was no expert physicist. Your comment is outrageous. He is now on the dole, jobless, and claiming benefits. He very much regrets the schoolboy errors he made, which led precisely to his or her conviction ( I can't remember which). It doesn't really matter as they both have no money. He says, which I don't dispute, that he was "rather stupid".

This post has been edited by seank: Thu, 16 May 2019 - 22:11
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Starworshipper12
post Thu, 16 May 2019 - 22:39
Post #29


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 224
Joined: 29 Sep 2016
Member No.: 87,439



I’d never heard of Dr Science, but I’m googling him now... lots to read and all very fascinating. He was a fairly prolific poster on here too right, so I guess the older members know of him?

He seems to talk the talk, but was he just ‘rather stupid’, or somewhere between that and an expert (at something)??

Are we not supposed to learn anything from his previous posts?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
seank
post Thu, 16 May 2019 - 22:56
Post #30


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 341
Joined: 15 Apr 2013
Member No.: 61,183



QUOTE (Starworshipper12 @ Thu, 16 May 2019 - 23:39) *
I’d never heard of Dr Science, but I’m googling him now... lots to read and all very fascinating. He was a fairly prolific poster on here too right, so I guess the older members know of him?

He seems to talk the talk, but was he just ‘rather stupid’, or somewhere between that and an expert (at something)??

Are we not supposed to learn anything from his previous posts?

Yes, he was an avid poster here.
Offline, he had a few friends. Not many.
He was just a lab technician in a Polytechnic, which dropped him like a stone when his (or probably his wife's) criminal activity was exposed.
Amazed that Logician described him thus, as he now regrets his actions. Not Vikki's.
Iain, it's me, Sean. Sorry, mate.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Logician
post Thu, 16 May 2019 - 23:22
Post #31


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 11,997
Joined: 28 Mar 2010
Member No.: 36,528



Well, that is what he portrayed himself as. Anyway, the point stands, do not try to dispute the speed measurement on technical grounds, you are very unlikely to win and it can be very expensive.

This post has been edited by Logician: Thu, 16 May 2019 - 23:23


--------------------



Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

2 Pages V  < 1 2
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



Advertisement

Advertise here!

RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: Monday, 24th June 2019 - 20:32
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.