Had a NIP late and other issues with it |
Had a NIP late and other issues with it |
Sat, 14 May 2022 - 22:52
Post
#1
|
|
New Member Group: Members Posts: 5 Joined: 14 May 2022 Member No.: 116,598 |
Hi all first post and first ever NIP!
There are a few Problems with this NIP and I’m not sure how best to contest it I received the NIP today for allegedly speeding at 39 in a 30 zone. I’m surprised to have a ticket at all because generally I’m a careful driver, never had a ticket in 20 years. I was possibly picking up speed on part of that road though, because where they park the van changes from a 30 to a 40 zone. The speed van was positioned well into the 40 zone. I believe that I waited til the 40 zone to speed up though, because that’s what I usually do and this is very familiar territory for me. I’m thinking I’m going to write in to ask for images just to be sure I was driving, the car is regd to me but I’m not the only regular driver. I think I can challenge the NIP on a few counts too 1. Service. Today is day 15 from the alleged offence, the letter is dated 7 days from the alleged offence but there’s no postmark. With the greatest of respect anyone can write any date in a letter and it has no bearing on when it’s posted let alone received. I’ve got the envelope it is ridiculous there’s no post mark which would save a lot of faffing. 2. Location. The location given on the NIP is actually in a 40 zone, I will double check this but it gives the location as the address for some houses on the road that are in the 40 zone. 3. Technical aspect. Where exactly on the stretch of road visible to the van was my car when they zapped me? I could well have been doing 39 in the 40 zone. 4. Position. The lay-by used by the vans is on the brow of a hill, I think I saw this being relevant on some website somewhere, maybe it’s not? Any advice on how to proceed would be great in case I have got this all wrong! |
|
|
Advertisement |
Sat, 14 May 2022 - 22:52
Post
#
|
Advertise here! |
|
|
|
Sun, 15 May 2022 - 07:36
Post
#2
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 258 Joined: 9 Aug 2020 Member No.: 109,369 |
Others will add their more expert perspective, but here are my initial thoughts on a couple of your points:
1) Are you sure you received it on 'day 15 after the alleged offence'? The countdown starts the day AFTER the offence, so for example if the alleged offence happened on Friday 15 April 2022, the countdown starts on Saturday 16 April, and the 14th day is Friday 29th April. 2) Worth double checking the van's location, but the radar device used to detect speed works over distances of several hundred yards. So it's likely that the van was parked in the 40 zone and targeting vehicles in the 30 zone. 3) See 2) 4) The fact the van was on the brow of a hill is irrelevant. By all means ask for photos to help identify the driver. Note that if you're in England or Wales, 39 in a 30 should see an offer of an awareness course (zero points on your license) providing the driver hasn't done a course in the past 3 years. |
|
|
Sun, 15 May 2022 - 08:07
Post
#3
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 622 Joined: 20 Oct 2007 Member No.: 14,668 |
|
|
|
Sun, 15 May 2022 - 09:14
Post
#4
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 4,746 Joined: 29 Oct 2008 Member No.: 23,623 |
If you do decide to challenge the matter on the basis of a late NIP, the onus will be on you to prove that it was indeed served late (not an easy task). By then, any out of court disposals (a course or fixed penalty) will be off the table. If you fail you will face an income related fine and prosecution costs which usually begin at £620.
|
|
|
Sun, 15 May 2022 - 10:36
Post
#5
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 41,505 Joined: 25 Aug 2011 From: Planet Earth Member No.: 49,223 |
If you do decide to challenge the matter on the basis of a late NIP And would be academic if the s172 request is not satisfied (as this is not subject to the ‘14 day rule’) -------------------- 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. |
|
|
Sun, 15 May 2022 - 11:23
Post
#6
|
|
New Member Group: Members Posts: 5 Joined: 14 May 2022 Member No.: 116,598 |
Thanks for the replies and info
Just a quick one to reply to all. Yes this is (was) day 15 not including the date of alleged offence. I’m completely unable to prove date of receipt, but equally there’s no proof of postage. I’ll get the photos / stills first and come back to you. My concern is that the location given on the NIP means that if I was indeed doing 39 at that location, then that’s not an offence anyway. Shouldn’t the details on the NIP be accurate? The hill positioning greatly reduces the opportunity for a clear line of sight on that stretch of road, it only really flattens out just before the 40 zone anyway. I understand that providing details is a separate responsibility and once I have the stills I will be able to do that. Ok I guess you can tell I’m new to all this as I had no idea that the course would be offered and also dodge points! It is frustrating though that if you attempt to defend yourself that the potential punishments get a lot worse. In my experience magistrates are bound to side with the greater authority and don’t care about the law. I can see why forums like this exist. Thanks again |
|
|
Sun, 15 May 2022 - 11:30
Post
#7
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 395 Joined: 17 May 2021 Member No.: 112,702 |
It's perfectly acceptable for the camera van to be in the higher limit looking back at the lower one. As long as they know the distance to the lower limit (usually done by "pinging" the sign with the device) any vehicle detected speeding at a greater distance must by inference be within the lower limit. This is all assuming the limit changes where the sign is located, not a given.
So stating the location is in the higher limit is just saying where the camera van was located., not where the detection occurred. This post has been edited by FuzzyDuck: Sun, 15 May 2022 - 11:31 |
|
|
Sun, 15 May 2022 - 11:50
Post
#8
|
|
New Member Group: Members Posts: 5 Joined: 14 May 2022 Member No.: 116,598 |
Fuzzy Duck are you using common sense to work that out, or is that how the law is applied?
Because the NIP quite clearly states that an alleged speeding offence took place in a 40 mph zone by a car going 39, does any of that matter? At the very least I’d expect a new notice with accurate information on it |
|
|
Sun, 15 May 2022 - 11:53
Post
#9
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 395 Joined: 17 May 2021 Member No.: 112,702 |
Does it clearly state that?
If your so sure, name yourself as the driver, ignore the offer of a course or fixed penalty and plead not guilty. |
|
|
Sun, 15 May 2022 - 11:56
Post
#10
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 38,006 Joined: 3 Dec 2010 Member No.: 42,618 |
Because the NIP quite clearly states that an alleged speeding offence took place in a 40 mph zone by a car going 39, does any of that matter? Take a photo of the notice, redact your personal details and upload a copy on here so we can take a proper look. -------------------- If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
|
|
|
Sun, 15 May 2022 - 13:42
Post
#11
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 4,746 Joined: 29 Oct 2008 Member No.: 23,623 |
It is frustrating though that if you attempt to defend yourself that the potential punishments get a lot worse. Of course the converse could be argued. The punishments meted out in the event of a failed defence could be viewed as the norm. People readily accepting their guilt could be said to enjoy a discount. In my experience magistrates are bound to side with the greater authority and don’t care about the law. I don't know what your experience is, but magistrates must have a regard for the law. Some may say they don't always apply it correctly and there are remedies for that. A lengthy thread on here details a case where most people on here believe the law was wrongly applied by magistrates and detailed advice has been given to help the driver remedy that. As far as your possible late NIP is concerned, it is deemed served two working days after posting. That is the law. That presumption can be rebutted but unless and until it is, the magistrates are entitled to rely on it when considering a case. You suggest that there is no proof of posting, but the police will almost certainly be able to produce evidence showing when the NIP was posted. If they do they enjoy the presumption of service unless you can prove otherwise. As far as the speeding offence goes, the likelihood is that you were pinged a considerable distance from the camera. The photos might help you determine this. |
|
|
Sun, 15 May 2022 - 14:04
Post
#12
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 1,864 Joined: 2 Aug 2016 Member No.: 86,040 |
|
|
|
Sun, 15 May 2022 - 14:23
Post
#13
|
|
Member Group: Life Member Posts: 24,213 Joined: 9 Sep 2004 From: Reading Member No.: 1,624 |
S. 1 RTOA 1988 requires the notice to state the place where the alleged offence took place, not the place it was observed, or what the camera operator had for breakfast.
However, whilst the requirement to serve a NIP is mandatory (except when any of the statutory exceptions apply), the required details are "merely directory" - which means that if one or more of the details is wrong but that error does not defeat the purpose of the requirement to serve a NIP (to enable the accused to identify or recall the incident while it is still (relatively) fresh in his mind), then the error does not invalidate the notice. -------------------- Andy
Some people think that I make them feel stupid. To be fair, they deserve most of the credit. |
|
|
Sun, 15 May 2022 - 14:24
Post
#14
|
|
New Member Group: Members Posts: 5 Joined: 14 May 2022 Member No.: 116,598 |
I haven’t got a grip on quoting so thanks for some useful and amusing feedback.
What I’m getting at with the 40/ 30 thing is a bit confusing I think, I’m not saying the van can’t be in a 40 zone while looking at a 30 at all …. There’s 2 different matters as I see it. Is the notice correct and does it matter how it’s worded? Are the police allowed to serve s NIP alleging an offence at X location that technically isn’t an offence at X location? I’ll see if I can upload the notice in a bit now. And yeah, it’s probs unlikely that they would be zapping people in the 40 zone for doing 40? and risking arguments about it, but you never know and I think once I get the stills I’ might know more. Cheers all |
|
|
Sun, 15 May 2022 - 15:18
Post
#15
|
|
New Member Group: Members Posts: 5 Joined: 14 May 2022 Member No.: 116,598 |
Just seen your post Andy Foster, thanks I think it answers my question but it’s beyond belief how this all works! Be accurate but if you’re not then carry on anyway!
|
|
|
Sun, 15 May 2022 - 22:28
Post
#16
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 720 Joined: 11 May 2014 Member No.: 70,566 |
Just seen your post Andy Foster, thanks I think it answers my question but it’s beyond belief how this all works! Be accurate but if you’re not then carry on anyway! Do post a redacted copy of the notice giving the 39 in a 40. While strictly not fatal, the police might cancel the ticket out of embarrassment. But do it in a timely manner -you'd likely want to keep the option of a speed awareness course should you decide fighting the late service onerous. There was a case on here (Peter Gidden) where he had the postman as witness and still had to appear to get his conviction quashed. -------------------- I reserve the right to be wrong.
|
|
|
Mon, 16 May 2022 - 14:46
Post
#17
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 38,006 Joined: 3 Dec 2010 Member No.: 42,618 |
Just seen your post Andy Foster, thanks I think it answers my question but it’s beyond belief how this all works! Be accurate but if you’re not then carry on anyway! Do post a redacted copy of the notice giving the 39 in a 40. While strictly not fatal... I'm not so sure that's correct, s172 only applies "Where the driver of a vehicle is alleged to be guilty of an offence", so arguably where the driver is not alleged to have committed any offence the obligation to name the driver does not arise. If I receive a NIP alleging I did 50 in a 50, or that I was wearing a blue t-shirt, or that I was driving whilst listening to radio 4, am I require to name myself as the driver? I certainly wouldn't have thought so. Hence why I asked to see the notice. This post has been edited by cp8759: Mon, 16 May 2022 - 14:46 -------------------- If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
|
|
|
Mon, 16 May 2022 - 15:58
Post
#18
|
|
Member Group: Life Member Posts: 24,213 Joined: 9 Sep 2004 From: Reading Member No.: 1,624 |
I received the NIP today for allegedly speeding at 39 in a 30 zone. I’m surprised to have a ticket at all because generally I’m a careful driver, never had a ticket in 20 years. <...> 2. Location. The location given on the NIP is actually in a 40 zone Because the NIP quite clearly states that an alleged speeding offence took place in a 40 mph zone by a car going 39, does any of that matter? Posters get upset when accused of making things up. They think that the cause is nasty people calling them out, not them making things up. In your initial post, you stated that the alleged offence was speeding at 39mph in a 30mph limit (the NIP doesn't say zone, but that is largely irrelevant), and that it provides a fairly precise location which is actually within a 40mph limit. You then go on to claim (above) that the NIP "*clearly* states" that "the alleged offence took place in a 40mph zone by a car going 39". It states to contradictory things as you stated in your initial post. Does it clearly state that? Hmm. I'm not so sure that's correct, s172 only applies "Where the driver of a vehicle is alleged to be guilty of an offence", so arguably where the driver is not alleged to have committed any offence the obligation to name the driver does not arise. If I receive a NIP alleging I did 50 in a 50, or that I was wearing a blue t-shirt, or that I was driving whilst listening to radio 4, am I require to name myself as the driver? I certainly wouldn't have thought so. Hence why I asked to see the notice. The only thing more frustrating that posters misleading us with "artistic licence" is regulars who ought to know better pandering to them. -------------------- Andy
Some people think that I make them feel stupid. To be fair, they deserve most of the credit. |
|
|
Tue, 17 May 2022 - 13:54
Post
#19
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 38,006 Joined: 3 Dec 2010 Member No.: 42,618 |
The only thing more frustrating that posters misleading us with "artistic licence" is regulars who ought to know better pandering to them. I like to give everyone the benefit of the doubt, after all I cannot assume that the opening post was correct and post 8 was incorrect. Post 8 stated that "the NIP quite clearly states that an alleged speeding offence took place in a 40 mph zone by a car going 39, does any of that matter?" and the answer to that is obviously yes it does matter, if that is what the notice really says. I accept it is somewhat unlikely, but unlikely things do occasionally happen, hence why the next step is for Longonjonson to show us the notice. I don't accept that asking to see the notice and explaining the reasons why this may be important amounts to "pandering" to anyone. Of course Longonjonson might refuse to show us the notice or respond with a deafening silicene, and we could all draw our own conclusions about that. But I'm at least going to give him the chance to substantiate his assertions, and whether he takes that up is up to him. This post has been edited by cp8759: Tue, 17 May 2022 - 13:57 -------------------- 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: Thursday, 28th March 2024 - 14:48 |