PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice Support health workers

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

[NIP Wizard] Addesed to me, almost?
Northern
post Sat, 18 May 2019 - 08:54
Post #1


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 433
Joined: 21 Jun 2008
From: Hawkinge
Member No.: 20,514



NIP Details and Circumstances
What is the name of the Constabulary? -
Date of the offence: - April 2019
Date of the NIP: - 17 days after the offence
Date you received the NIP: - 19 days after the offence
Location of offence (exact location as it appears on the NIP: important): - A406 West of Bounds Green Rd N11 to A406 east of A1000 N12
Was the NIP addressed to you? - Yes
Was the NIP sent by first class post, second class or recorded delivery? - First
If your are not the Registered Keeper, what is your relationship to the vehicle? - Company 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 - I have received a NIP however, it has been addresses rather oddly?
It doesn't have a first name on it, only has my surname on it and where my first name should be, it has the name on my house?
For example if my house was called "Wintondale" and my surname was "Robertson" then it's addressed to "Wintondale Robertson" followed by the rest of my address.
There are two people at this adress with this surname.
I know its a technicality but it could be meant for either of us, or neither of us.
We are both insured to drive the car in question, however we know who was driving, at the time.


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? - 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: Sat, 18 May 2019 08:54:20 +0000


--------------------
http40My Case! My other Case! Don't let the bastards grind you down!Hi.
http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=118175&hl=
http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=87923&hl=
http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=110125&hl=
My score card: Me 3-0 Camera partnerships.
Me 5-0 Local Authorities.
Me 8-0 Private parking Companies.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
 
Start new topic
Replies (1 - 15)
Advertisement
post Sat, 18 May 2019 - 08:54
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
Jlc
post Sat, 18 May 2019 - 09:48
Post #2


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 41,510
Joined: 25 Aug 2011
From: Planet Earth
Member No.: 49,223



Perhaps the information the company has provided has been transposed or provided ‘incorrectly’.

Have they not said anything?


--------------------
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, SAR=Subject Access Request

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
Northern
post Sat, 18 May 2019 - 09:56
Post #3


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 433
Joined: 21 Jun 2008
From: Hawkinge
Member No.: 20,514



My company hasn't said anything to me but that in itself isnt unusual, as it's dealt with by a lease company who haven't said anything to me either.


--------------------
http40My Case! My other Case! Don't let the bastards grind you down!Hi.
http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=118175&hl=
http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=87923&hl=
http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=110125&hl=
My score card: Me 3-0 Camera partnerships.
Me 5-0 Local Authorities.
Me 8-0 Private parking Companies.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
andy_foster
post Sat, 18 May 2019 - 10:23
Post #4


Member
Group Icon

Group: Life Member
Posts: 24,213
Joined: 9 Sep 2004
From: Reading
Member No.: 1,624



If the name was correct, and the address was incorrect due to being provided incorrectly, the s. 172 requirement would have been deemed served (at the accused's last known address).
If the name is wrong to the extent that there could be real ambiguity, then IMHO it has not been properly served.

Obviously the error in the name would not create a defence under s. 1 RTOA 1988 - as the requirement to serve a NIP within the 14 days would have presumably already been satisfied, but without evidence that the OP was the driver (generally in the form of a signed s. 172 response in response to a notice addressed to him) he cannot be convicted of the speeding offence.

The question would seem to be what would happen if he were to simply ignore the notice on the basis that it is not addressed to him.
Would they instigate proceedings against the non-existent person named in the notice (generally leaving it too late to send a correctly addressed notice to the OP and continue the process)?
Would they perform diligence at a late stage before instigating proceedings against the fictional character and therefore not instigate proceedings at all?
Would they notice the error somewhat sooner after no response was received and then issue a correctly addressed notice to the OP?
Could the OP himself somehow be successfully prosecuted for not providing the information in response to the requirement which was not specifically in his name?



--------------------
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
Northern
post Sat, 18 May 2019 - 11:34
Post #5


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 433
Joined: 21 Jun 2008
From: Hawkinge
Member No.: 20,514





Above is the name and address (slightly edited) the Met have used.

I'm tempted to ignore this and see what happens!?


--------------------
http40My Case! My other Case! Don't let the bastards grind you down!Hi.
http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=118175&hl=
http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=87923&hl=
http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=110125&hl=
My score card: Me 3-0 Camera partnerships.
Me 5-0 Local Authorities.
Me 8-0 Private parking Companies.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Redivi
post Sat, 18 May 2019 - 11:47
Post #6


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 4,126
Joined: 31 Jan 2018
Member No.: 96,238



I suppose this depends how much the potential hassle of no reply is worth

The option that cannot possibly result in an S172 prosecution for the OP is to return a copy of the form with an explanation that he doesn't know who it's addressed to
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Northern
post Sat, 18 May 2019 - 12:04
Post #7


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 433
Joined: 21 Jun 2008
From: Hawkinge
Member No.: 20,514



Redivi
QUOTE
The option that cannot possibly result in an S172 prosecution for the OP is to return a copy of the form with an explanation that he doesn't know who it's addressed to


If I did that, it might prompt them to issue another NIP with the correct name on it, so I'd rather not help them if I can help it.

I don't believe I have any obligation to correct their errors for them?

It does, after all, state on the notice "Only fill this form in if you are the person it is addressed to."


--------------------
http40My Case! My other Case! Don't let the bastards grind you down!Hi.
http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=118175&hl=
http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=87923&hl=
http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=110125&hl=
My score card: Me 3-0 Camera partnerships.
Me 5-0 Local Authorities.
Me 8-0 Private parking Companies.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Redivi
post Sat, 18 May 2019 - 12:14
Post #8


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 4,126
Joined: 31 Jan 2018
Member No.: 96,238



It depends what you're trying to achieve

No right answer

If you're trying to avoid a penalty, not returning the notice has a chance of success but it's small
If there's no reply the police might try and prosecute Dunroamin Smith without success
They might instead however see who's insured to drive the car and send S172 notices to all parties

If you want to end the risk of any serious consequences or hassle, sorting the error early achieves the objective

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jlc
post Sat, 18 May 2019 - 12:23
Post #9


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 41,510
Joined: 25 Aug 2011
From: Planet Earth
Member No.: 49,223



What's the alleged offence?


--------------------
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, SAR=Subject Access Request

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 Sat, 18 May 2019 - 12:41
Post #10


Member


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



QUOTE
There are two people at this adress with this surname.
I know its a technicality but it could be meant for either of us, or neither of us.


But only one of those two people has that company car allocated to them, so you know that actually it is meant for you.
The mistake over your name could be down to the police, or could be an error by your company or leasing company in supplying the details. There is a downside to trying to take advantage of this, in that the police might go back to your company to complain that they have supplied the wrong name and, although unlikely, might even try to prosecute them for that. That might not be career enhancing for you.


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



Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Northern
post Sat, 18 May 2019 - 13:08
Post #11


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 433
Joined: 21 Jun 2008
From: Hawkinge
Member No.: 20,514



QUOTE
What's the alleged offence?

Jlc, Speeding 58mph in a 50 mph limit.


QUOTE
But only one of those two people has that company car allocated to them, so you know that actually it is meant for you

We are both insured to drive this car under my company insurance policy, althoiugh I know I was driving.

Yes I know it`s meant for me but if the Met issue a NIP, surely the name and address should be clearly stated?



--------------------
http40My Case! My other Case! Don't let the bastards grind you down!Hi.
http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=118175&hl=
http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=87923&hl=
http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=110125&hl=
My score card: Me 3-0 Camera partnerships.
Me 5-0 Local Authorities.
Me 8-0 Private parking Companies.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
NewJudge
post Sat, 18 May 2019 - 13:34
Post #12


Member


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



QUOTE (Northern @ Sat, 18 May 2019 - 14:08) *
Yes I know it`s meant for me but if the Met issue a NIP, surely the name and address should be clearly stated?

Indeed it should. But sometimes a pragmatic rather than a dogmatic approach if best. The various pitfalls of ignoring this request have been pointed out. There is a very good chance that should you simply ignore the notice the police will make further enquiries which will eventually lead, unequivocally, to you. You can find examples on this forum where S172 notices have been ignored (either by accident or design or in circumstances similar to yours). You will find that very often the police "get their man".

Provided you have not done one in the last three years you will almost certainly be offered a speed awareness course for that excess. If you don't fancy that a fixed penalty of £100 and three points will await. If you ignore the notice and it takes a while to properly catch up with you it may be too late for either of those to be offered and you will face having the matter heard in court. A guilty plea will see a much heavier bill unless you can convince the court that administrative difficulties outside your control meant a fixed penalty could not be offered. I don't fancy your chances with that based on what you have said. Should you choose to defend the matter on the basis of the deficient address issue you run a very real risk of being convicted of Failing to Provide driver's details (a hefty fine and six points).

It all depends how much you are prepared to risk escaping a hundred quid against suffering an unattractive outcome. Personally I'd simply return the request and either take the course or fixed penalty.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
southpaw82
post Sat, 18 May 2019 - 13:37
Post #13


Member


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



The Met might have got it “right” in so far as the details they were supplied with are concerned. You don’t know who made the error.

A prosecution for the 172 offence appears difficult because (a) who will they prosecute and (b) a precondition to the obligation to respond arising is that a notice has been served correctly. It is difficult to see how a notice directed to an individual who does not exist is properly addressed or served but there is some case law on this issue (that I’ve not taken the time to read).

The OP needs to decide what his objective is: avoid a speeding course/fixed penalty and potentially have a technical fight in court or simply deal with the issue and take the course/fixed penalty.


--------------------
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
Northern
post Sat, 18 May 2019 - 15:12
Post #14


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 433
Joined: 21 Jun 2008
From: Hawkinge
Member No.: 20,514



All great advice from you guys, as always.
This leaves me in a real dilema, as I know I should take the easy way out and hope I get the offer of a course, however I keep reading the instruction on the NIP (Pic Below) saying "Only fill this form in if you are the person it is addressed to." I would love to take this to Court and see what the magistrate makes of it?



One question I still have is: would they be able to see who is specifically able to drive my vehicle using the insurance database when it's a company insurance policy which insures several hundred people to drive its fleet.
Whilst I have been issued a specific vehicle I am insured to drive any company vehicle, so only the company would know who would be driving what vehicle at any given, time not the Insurance database, or so I believe??


--------------------
http40My Case! My other Case! Don't let the bastards grind you down!Hi.
http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=118175&hl=
http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=87923&hl=
http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=110125&hl=
My score card: Me 3-0 Camera partnerships.
Me 5-0 Local Authorities.
Me 8-0 Private parking Companies.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
The Rookie
post Sat, 18 May 2019 - 17:43
Post #15


Member


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



The instruction/guidance on the form is an irrelevance, IF you decide to take the ‘easy’ route they aren’t going to complain at you helping them out.

You have the choices given by SP above.


--------------------
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 Sat, 18 May 2019 - 20:58
Post #16


Member


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



QUOTE (The Rookie @ Sat, 18 May 2019 - 18:43) *
The instruction/guidance on the form is an irrelevance

That's not what the Administrative Court thinks.


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

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: Thursday, 28th March 2024 - 23:49
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