PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice Support health workers

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

[NIP Wizard] Speeding offence verbal NIP after the offence from speed camera
Ronnie1612
post Sun, 12 Jul 2020 - 13:17
Post #1


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 9
Joined: 12 Jul 2020
Member No.: 109,106



NIP Details and Circumstances
What is the name of the Constabulary? -
Date of the offence: - May 2020
Date of the NIP: - 3 days after the offence
Date you received the NIP: - 39 days after the offence
Location of offence (exact location as it appears on the NIP: important): - A172 Stokesley By Pass (south)
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? - 3
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 - I was caught speeding on 31 May 2020 alledgley doing 104mph in 60mph zone,
I was contacted by police on 3/07/2020 and apparently given a verbal NIP. The police officer said he was gathering evidence and wanted to know if I was the registered keeper and wanted to take picture of my motorcycle and helmet and leathers. He then said they police would be in touch. I then received a written NIP with court summons on 9th July which was dated 3rd June 2020 but I didn't receive this on the 3rd June.


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? - Unsure
Although you are the Registered Keeper, were you also the keeper of the vehicle concerned (the person normally responsible for it) at the time of the alleged offence? - Yes
Were you driving? - Yes
Which country did the alleged offence take place in? - England

NIP Wizard Recommendation
Based on these responses the Wizard suggested that this course of action should be considered:
  • The law requires you to provide the information requested in the Section 172 notice within the 28 day period, naming yourself as the driver. If you are considering obtaining formal legal advice, do so before returning the notice.

    You should note that there is nothing to be gained by responding any earlier than you have to at any stage of the process. You are likely to receive a Conditional Offer of a Fixed Penalty (COFP) and further reminder(s). If you want to continue the fight, you should ignore all correspondence from the police until you receive a summons. You need to understand from the outset that while you will receive much help and support from members on the forums, you will need to put time and effort into fighting your case and ultimately be prepared to stand up in court to defend yourself.

Generated by the PePiPoo NIP Wizard v3.3.2: Sun, 12 Jul 2020 13:17:34 +0000

This post has been edited by Ronnie1612: Sun, 12 Jul 2020 - 14:02
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
2 Pages V  < 1 2  
Start new topic
Replies (20 - 39)
Advertisement
post Sun, 12 Jul 2020 - 13:17
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
The Rookie
post Sun, 12 Jul 2020 - 19:15
Post #21


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 56,198
Joined: 9 Sep 2003
From: Warwickshire
Member No.: 317



QUOTE (NewJudge @ Sun, 12 Jul 2020 - 19:48) *
QUOTE (The Rookie @ Sun, 12 Jul 2020 - 19:21) *
... a NIP may have been served, or unable to be served despite using reasonable diligence.

And discovered and remedied within 3 days of the offence?

There could be a number of reasons, such as the vehicle having no registered keeper, despite being asked a f ew times the OP has not clarified.

He potentially has a defence indeed, but it’s impossible to say right now that he DOES have a defence.


--------------------
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
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
southpaw82
post Sun, 12 Jul 2020 - 19:22
Post #22


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 33,610
Joined: 2 Apr 2008
From: Not in the UK
Member No.: 18,483



QUOTE (TryOut @ Sun, 12 Jul 2020 - 20:15) *
BINGO! You have received a written NIP.

Ok...?


--------------------
Moderator

Any comments made do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon. No lawyer/client relationship should be assumed nor should any duty of care be owed.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Ronnie1612
post Sun, 12 Jul 2020 - 20:40
Post #23


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 9
Joined: 12 Jul 2020
Member No.: 109,106



QUOTE (TryOut @ Sun, 12 Jul 2020 - 19:15) *
QUOTE (Ronnie1612 @ Sun, 12 Jul 2020 - 16:49) *
QUOTE (NewJudge @ Sun, 12 Jul 2020 - 15:39) *
QUOTE (Ronnie1612 @ Sun, 12 Jul 2020 - 16:05) *
I was not stopped at the time Sunday 31st May , the police came to my house on the Wednesday 3rd June after the offence , I received a witness statement form in my SJP pack which said the officer gave me a verbal NIP on 3rd June. In the pack I also have a written NIP which is dated 3rd June this was not given to me at the time I only received this in the pack on 9th July.

Hope this helps and thanks for the replies

Then I don't think they have satisfied the requirement to properly serve you with a NIP. You were clearly not warned "at the time" ("at the time" cannot stretch to 3 days later). So you have to be served with a written NIP within 14 days. Of course you may have difficulty rebutting the evidence that it was handed to you on 3rd June. See what others think. There is also the question of the way the evidence that you were the driver was gathered. I haven't though that through, but were you given a "PACE" warning ("You do not have to say anything but it may harm your defence...etc)?

I think more opinions would be interesting.



I was read my rights, I definetly did not get a written NIP though the police officer says in his statement which was in the SJP pack that he gave me a verbal NIP when he came to my house and the written NIP was only given to me via post on 9th July. So I the verbal NIP was 3 days later not at the time of incident.

BINGO! You have received a written NIP.


Yes I was given a written NIP on 9th July for an offence on 31st May not within 14 days of the offence!


QUOTE (The Rookie @ Sun, 12 Jul 2020 - 19:15) *
QUOTE (NewJudge @ Sun, 12 Jul 2020 - 19:48) *
QUOTE (The Rookie @ Sun, 12 Jul 2020 - 19:21) *
... a NIP may have been served, or unable to be served despite using reasonable diligence.

And discovered and remedied within 3 days of the offence?

There could be a number of reasons, such as the vehicle having no registered keeper, despite being asked a f ew times the OP has not clarified.

He potentially has a defence indeed, but it’s impossible to say right now that he DOES have a defence.



I have been registered keeper at same address as previously stated this is why they were able to find me within 3 days!



I think the it is strange that I didn't get a NIP through the post, I was caught doing 104mph in a 60mph so I understand I would probably have to go to court. It seems strange they found me in 3 days but then didn't issue a written NIP until 9th July.

I have seen the S172 which I signed when the police visited me but this was not the NIP. The NIP was another document which came in the SJP pack on 9th July which is over 14 days from the offence.

In the SJP pack there is 2 witness statements one from the camera operator and one from the policeman who came to my house and in the statement from the policeman its says he gave me a verbal NIP. I thought a verbal NIP can only be given at the time of the offence not 3 days later?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
The Rookie
post Sun, 12 Jul 2020 - 20:48
Post #24


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 56,198
Joined: 9 Sep 2003
From: Warwickshire
Member No.: 317



As stated earlier, the statute says warning (you need to get out of the habit of calling it a verbal NIP so you get it right in court) at the time of the offence, now courts have been known to be fairly generous in their interpretation of ‘at the time’ but for me 3 days isn’t it.

You say there is a NIP in with the SJPN, that would be highly irregular, normally they will include a copy of one they claim to be sent, so what is the date on it?

Just to be sure, get out your V5c and confirm all the details are correct, don’t assume.

If you plead not guilty and they find you guilty it will add over £500 to the costs and you’ll loose the 1/3 discount for a guilty plea, so you really need to be sure before heading down that road.


--------------------
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
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Ronnie1612
post Sun, 12 Jul 2020 - 21:04
Post #25


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 9
Joined: 12 Jul 2020
Member No.: 109,106



Thanks for the replies, I have instructed a solicitor to reply on my behalf as I am out of country working for next 8 weeks and I have to reply within 21 days,

It all seems very unusual I would of expected to hear from Police through post not get a visit. I don't know if I would plead not guilty I just want to check that all procedures have been followed correctly by Police before I plead guilty or not guilty.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
The Rookie
post Mon, 13 Jul 2020 - 05:46
Post #26


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 56,198
Joined: 9 Sep 2003
From: Warwickshire
Member No.: 317



It is highly irregular, which is why I urge you to check your V5c.

You don’t need a solicitor to send a plea!


--------------------
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
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
gilan02
post Mon, 13 Jul 2020 - 09:46
Post #27


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 233
Joined: 28 Jun 2011
Member No.: 47,856



QUOTE
I then received a written NIP with court summons on 9th July which was dated 3rd


So they think a NIP was served within 14 days, it may have been lost in the post.

This post has been edited by gilan02: Mon, 13 Jul 2020 - 10:07
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Logician
post Mon, 13 Jul 2020 - 10:31
Post #28


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 13,572
Joined: 28 Mar 2010
Member No.: 36,528



QUOTE (gilan02 @ Mon, 13 Jul 2020 - 10:46) *
QUOTE
I then received a written NIP with court summons on 9th July which was dated 3rd
So they think a NIP was served within 14 days, it may have been lost in the post.


But 3rd June was the day that an officer called on the OP in person, stating that he was carrying out a s.172 request, and the OP says that he then signed something for the officer but it was not a NIP. It would be strange for the police to prepare a document other than the normal NIP response form, so I am not entirely convinced that the OP was not in fact given a NIP on 3rd June, even if he did not realise it.



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



Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
The Rookie
post Mon, 13 Jul 2020 - 10:37
Post #29


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 56,198
Joined: 9 Sep 2003
From: Warwickshire
Member No.: 317



I agree, what does the OP think a NIP looks like?


--------------------
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
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
disgrunt
post Mon, 13 Jul 2020 - 10:51
Post #30


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 634
Joined: 8 Dec 2012
Member No.: 58,778



Can you post the statement from the police officer. If it says “I gave mr/mrs x a verbal nip...” Or does it say something different (such as “I delivered the notice of intended prosecution”) Because if it says “a verbal NIP” then you might have a case.

This post has been edited by disgrunt: Mon, 13 Jul 2020 - 10:52
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Ronnie1612
post Mon, 13 Jul 2020 - 12:20
Post #31


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 9
Joined: 12 Jul 2020
Member No.: 109,106



QUOTE (disgrunt @ Mon, 13 Jul 2020 - 11:51) *
Can you post the statement from the police officer. If it says “I gave mr/mrs x a verbal nip...” Or does it say something different (such as “I delivered the notice of intended prosecution”) Because if it says “a verbal NIP” then you might have a case.


In the witness statement from the police officer it says

"I informed them verbally of the intention to prosecute the rider at the time of the alleged speeding offence and requested under S172 of the Road Traffic Act that he tell who the rider was"

It then goes on to say he handed me a S172 rider statement which I completed stating I was the rider at the time.

In his statement he then says he provides evidence in still images from original footage and copy of S172 rider admission document

In the SJP pack I have a separate document titled "Notice of Intended Prosecution" this is dated the 3rd June when he visited me, This is the first time I have seen this document and he did not leave any documents with me when he visited the house. I signed the S172 and put my details in and then he left.

This post has been edited by Ronnie1612: Mon, 13 Jul 2020 - 12:20
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
The Rookie
post Mon, 13 Jul 2020 - 12:44
Post #32


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 56,198
Joined: 9 Sep 2003
From: Warwickshire
Member No.: 317



In that case you certainly have the makings of a defence, but please be aware that some courts have been remarkably generous with their interpretation of 'at the time' and may still convict.


--------------------
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
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
disgrunt
post Mon, 13 Jul 2020 - 12:55
Post #33


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 634
Joined: 8 Dec 2012
Member No.: 58,778



That potentially collaborates your claim that you were never served the NIP. It is interesting that the statement mentions the verbal NIP and handing you the S172. Surely the officer’s statement would mention handing over the NIP.

Pure speculation on my part but. Wonder if both NIP and S172 were prepared at the time but they left The NIP at the station so they tried to wing it.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
NewJudge
post Mon, 13 Jul 2020 - 14:55
Post #34


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 4,746
Joined: 29 Oct 2008
Member No.: 23,623



Were you given any documentation that you were permitted to retain during the visit on 3rd June? If so, posting it up here (with details redacted) would be helpful. If you were not given anything at all, or anything that says it is a "Notice of Intended Prosecution" describing the nature of the offence and the time and date of the allegation, then I believe you may have the makings of a defence. It is interesting that the officer says he informed you verbally of the intention to prosecute. As I understand it that does not meet the requirements of the Road Traffic Offenders' Act (which I posted earlier). If you were not verbally warned "at the time" then a notice must be provided. The RTOA actually describes how such a notice can be served and it is fairly clear the intention is that it is a written notice. However, one option for service is by "delivering it" and it may be argued that a warning can be delivered verbally. But otherwise it makes no mention of a verbal notice. I cannot see a court stretching "at the time the offence was committed" to include a visit three days later.

However, I do see a potential problem. The purpose of the NIP requirement is to ensure that either the driver or the Registered Keeper is warned, within 14 days, of the possibility of prosecution. If such a warning is not provided then it could be said that the driver could be put at a disadvantage (that said, it does not seem to matter where the RK is not the driver and the driver is eventually warned some weeks or months later after the paperwork has gone round the houses, but that's another argument). However, a Magistrates' Court may concentrate on the intention of the Act and conclude that the visit on 3rd June provided you with adequate warning and that you were not disadvantaged.

This post has been edited by NewJudge: Mon, 13 Jul 2020 - 14:59
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
southpaw82
post Mon, 13 Jul 2020 - 17:54
Post #35


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 33,610
Joined: 2 Apr 2008
From: Not in the UK
Member No.: 18,483



QUOTE (NewJudge @ Mon, 13 Jul 2020 - 15:55) *
However, a Magistrates' Court may concentrate on the intention of the Act and conclude that the visit on 3rd June provided you with adequate warning and that you were not disadvantaged.

Is this more “common sense” from the magistrates that has nothing to do with the law?

A warning can be oral and must be given at the time. I too can’t see “at the time” being 3 days later. A notice is in writing.


--------------------
Moderator

Any comments made do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon. No lawyer/client relationship should be assumed nor should any duty of care be owed.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Mon, 13 Jul 2020 - 17:58
Post #36


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 38,006
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



QUOTE (southpaw82 @ Mon, 13 Jul 2020 - 18:54) *
QUOTE (NewJudge @ Mon, 13 Jul 2020 - 15:55) *
However, a Magistrates' Court may concentrate on the intention of the Act and conclude that the visit on 3rd June provided you with adequate warning and that you were not disadvantaged.

Is this more “common sense” from the magistrates that has nothing to do with the law?

A warning can be oral and must be given at the time. I too can’t see “at the time” being 3 days later. A notice is in writing.

Quite, a conviction on that basis should be overturned with an appeal by way of case stated. Just cos they're a lay bench doesn't mean they can make it up as they go along.


--------------------
If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
NewJudge
post Mon, 13 Jul 2020 - 18:33
Post #37


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 4,746
Joined: 29 Oct 2008
Member No.: 23,623



QUOTE (southpaw82 @ Mon, 13 Jul 2020 - 18:54) *
A warning can be oral and must be given at the time. I too can’t see “at the time” being 3 days later. A notice is in writing.


QUOTE (cp8759 @ Mon, 13 Jul 2020 - 18:58) *
Quite, a conviction on that basis should be overturned with an appeal by way of case stated. Just cos they're a lay bench doesn't mean they can make it up as they go along.


I quite agree with you both and a Bench properly directed (should they be in any doubt) by their Legal Advisor should acquit (so long as the facts are as we have been told). I'm just trying to envisage, for the OP, what might possibly happen. There is a likelihood that the OP may have to go to appeal or a "case stated" and he needs to be aware of that. The penalty for 104 in a 60 is likely to be quite severe and he may consider it well worth the risk.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
andy_foster
post Mon, 13 Jul 2020 - 18:51
Post #38


Member
Group Icon

Group: Life Member
Posts: 24,214
Joined: 9 Sep 2004
From: Reading
Member No.: 1,624



Unless the OP has contributed to the failure to serve a NIP on him, the V5C would appear to be largely irrelevant (unless a NIP was served on some other person registered as the keeper). If the police were able to visit the OP in person at his home address 4 days after the alleged offence, then even the most sympathetic bench would have difficulty in finding that they had not been able to ascertain his details in time to serve a (written) NIP within the 14 days.

The absurd claim that the occifer issued a 'verbal NIP' should be enough to raise serious doubts about any implication that a written NIP was served (particularly as there appears to be no evidence of one actually being sent).

For sh*ts and giggles, I would also be minded to challenge the admissibility of the s. 172 response - see s. 12 RTOA 1988.


--------------------
Andy

Some people think that I make them feel stupid. To be fair, they deserve most of the credit.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
blackcross
post Mon, 13 Jul 2020 - 19:58
Post #39


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 78
Joined: 26 Jun 2019
Member No.: 104,487



[/quote]
Is this more “common sense” from the magistrates that has nothing to do with the law?
[/quote]

As it is open season on the players - during my sittings I have been asked to prefer common sense, and some vague sense of fairness, over the law by the defence but never by the prosecution...

However, I don’t see how on the facts provided the police could make their case this time. The driver was warned verbally, but a few days too late. Unless there was a NIP that was lost in the post the late verbal warning was not backed up by a valid notice in writing.

This post has been edited by blackcross: Mon, 13 Jul 2020 - 20:30
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Mon, 13 Jul 2020 - 20:03
Post #40


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 38,006
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



QUOTE (andy_foster @ Mon, 13 Jul 2020 - 19:51) *
For sh*ts and giggles, I would also be minded to challenge the admissibility of the s. 172 response - see s. 12 RTOA 1988.

Quite, also see CrimPR 4.7(2)(a):

(2) For the purposes of section 12 of the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988(a), a notice of a requirement under section 172 of the Road Traffic Act 1988(b) or under section 112 of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984© to identify the driver of a vehicle may be served—
(a) on an individual, only by post under rule 4.4(1) and (2)(a);
(b) on a corporation, only by post under rule 4.4(1) and (2)(b).


--------------------
If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
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: Friday, 29th March 2024 - 06:49
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.
IPS Driver Error

IPS Driver Error

There appears to be an error with the database.
You can try to refresh the page by clicking here