[NIP Wizard] Speeding offence verbal NIP after the offence from speed camera |
[NIP Wizard] Speeding offence verbal NIP after the offence from speed camera |
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:
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 |
|
|
Advertisement |
Sun, 12 Jul 2020 - 13:17
Post
#
|
Advertise here! |
|
|
|
Sun, 12 Jul 2020 - 19:15
Post
#21
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 56,198 Joined: 9 Sep 2003 From: Warwickshire Member No.: 317 |
... 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 |
|
|
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 |
-------------------- 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. |
|
|
Sun, 12 Jul 2020 - 20:40
Post
#23
|
|
New Member Group: Members Posts: 9 Joined: 12 Jul 2020 Member No.: 109,106 |
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! ... 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? |
|
|
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 |
|
|
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. |
|
|
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 |
|
|
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 |
|
|
Mon, 13 Jul 2020 - 10:31
Post
#28
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 13,572 Joined: 28 Mar 2010 Member No.: 36,528 |
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. -------------------- |
|
|
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 |
|
|
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 |
|
|
Mon, 13 Jul 2020 - 12:20
Post
#31
|
|
New Member Group: Members Posts: 9 Joined: 12 Jul 2020 Member No.: 109,106 |
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 |
|
|
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 |
|
|
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. |
|
|
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 |
|
|
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 |
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. |
|
|
Mon, 13 Jul 2020 - 17:58
Post
#36
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 38,006 Joined: 3 Dec 2010 Member No.: 42,618 |
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
|
|
|
Mon, 13 Jul 2020 - 18:33
Post
#37
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 4,746 Joined: 29 Oct 2008 Member No.: 23,623 |
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. 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. |
|
|
Mon, 13 Jul 2020 - 18:51
Post
#38
|
|
Member 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. |
|
|
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 |
|
|
Mon, 13 Jul 2020 - 20:03
Post
#40
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 38,006 Joined: 3 Dec 2010 Member No.: 42,618 |
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
|
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: Friday, 29th March 2024 - 06:49 |