PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

[NIP Wizard] Late NIP and Section 172 info
doc rich
post Sat, 18 Apr 2020 - 10:29
Post #1


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 7
Joined: 17 Apr 2020
From: Kent
Member No.: 108,502



NIP Details and Circumstances
What is the name of the Constabulary? -
Date of the offence: - March 2020
Date of the NIP: - 13 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): - A140 Coddenham Suffolk
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? -
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 - Snapped at 69 mph on dual carriageway with 50 mph limit. This road is mainly single carriageway with varying speed limits, much of it 50 mph. The dual carriageway was signposted from several miles ahead and I guess I just assumed it was NSP. The signage was probably OK just my expectation it would be NSP.

I received the NIP on day 19, it had been posted on day 13 by first class mail.

Having looked at this site & others, my understanding of the law is that the NIP must be mailed in sufficient time for it to be 'presumed' to be delivered by day 14. If mailed on day 13 by registered post or recorded delivery it is 'irrebuttably presumed' to have been served in time. If first class mail is used on day 13 it can only be 'presumed' that it was delivered after 2 working days, ie day 15, and even this can be 'rebutted' by evidence to the contrary.

Based on this I believe that there was little likelihood of this NIP being served in time and I have a good case to prove that it was time expired. I have drafted a letter based upon the RAC Legal Helpline template which I am about to send.

My questions are should I still complete the Section 172 information on the NIP. The advice on this seems to be mixed. One of my concerns is that if I do provide the information they may just ignore my letter and proceed with the speeding offence. If that happens can I then rely on the 'time expired' NIP defence against the speeding case in court?


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? - No
Was there a valid reason for the NIP's late arrival? - No

NIP Wizard Recommendation
Based on these responses the Wizard suggested that this course of action should be considered:
  • The first NIP to the Registered Keeper must arrive within 14 days unless there is a valid reason why that was not possible, for example a recent change of details.

    This link will take you to the advice provided by the RAC's legal team.

Generated by the PePiPoo NIP Wizard v3.3.2: Sat, 18 Apr 2020 10:29:43 +0000
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
2 Pages V   1 2 >  
Start new topic
Replies (1 - 19)
Advertisement
post Sat, 18 Apr 2020 - 10:29
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
cp8759
post Sat, 18 Apr 2020 - 10:50
Post #2


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 17,889
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



I'm guessing this is the A140. You are legally required to name the driver in response to the s172 request, failure to do so is a more serious offence that would lead to a court hearing, six points and a large fine, and you gain nothing at all by not replying.

However, if the NIP was sent on day 13 and you can prove it didn't arrive on day 14, then (assuming you are the registered keeper and have the V5C in your name and at your address) you cannot be convicted of speeding. The police can only rely on the 2 working day presumption and you can testify to the effect that the NIP arrived on day 19. The court will have no evidence whatsoever to conclude the NIP arrived on day 14, so it could not reasonably find the NIP was in time, and as a result you cannot be convicted.

The simple solution here would be to name yourself as the driver in a letter but also explain that the NIP was out of time, if the police have any sense this should see the matter dropped.


--------------------
I am not on the "motorists's side", nor am I on the "police/CPS/council's" side, I am simply in favour of the rule of law.
No, I am not a lawyer.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jlc
post Sat, 18 Apr 2020 - 10:52
Post #3


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 33,415
Joined: 25 Aug 2011
From: With Mickey
Member No.: 49,223



Yes, you must comply with the s172 request no matter what. (It's a separate offence if you don't name the driver)

Can you give us the exact dates of the offence and on the letter? The address on your v5 is definitely 100% correct and that you haven't moved/changed vehicle recently? Even better to dig out the v5 and check the doc ref date at the bottom of page 2 in DD MM YY format.

But it seems you do have a 'late' NIP defence.

This post has been edited by Jlc: Sat, 18 Apr 2020 - 10:53


--------------------
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
doc rich
post Sat, 18 Apr 2020 - 16:59
Post #4


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 7
Joined: 17 Apr 2020
From: Kent
Member No.: 108,502



Thanks for the clarification. I will complete the S172 information now.

The incident was on the A140 at a fixed camera, on the Friday 20 March. The NIP was dated Thursday 2 April and was delivered to me on Wednesday 8 April.

I emailed them to clarify when the NIP was actually posted, I thought it might have been later than 2 April, and they confirmed it was posted on 2 April. They also went on to say that they had until the 14th day to post the NIP. This is of course BS but perhaps they believe that?

I don't beleive there would have been a problem with DVLA. The car was new in December, I'm the first owner. When I came to insure the car the week after I bought it there was no problem identifying the vehicle on th the various websites. The whole process is now done online from the dealers desk and I received the V5 a few days later. I've just checked on the Honest John website, put the reg in and immediate came up with my vehicle.

Hopefully once I've sent my letter I will hear no more. I'll just be more careful if I'm on this section of the A140 in future.

Regards

doc
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
BaggieBoy
post Sat, 18 Apr 2020 - 17:08
Post #5


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 6,498
Joined: 3 Apr 2006
From: North Hampshire
Member No.: 5,183



QUOTE (doc rich @ Sat, 18 Apr 2020 - 17:59) *
Hopefully once I've sent my letter I will hear no more.

Unfortunately I suspect the police will ignore your letter and will insist if you want to pursue late a delivery defence, then you would have to take it to court.

This post has been edited by BaggieBoy: Sat, 18 Apr 2020 - 17:09
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jlc
post Sat, 18 Apr 2020 - 17:38
Post #6


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 33,415
Joined: 25 Aug 2011
From: With Mickey
Member No.: 49,223



QUOTE (doc rich @ Sat, 18 Apr 2020 - 17:59) *
They also went on to say that they had until the 14th day to post the NIP. This is of course BS but perhaps they believe that?

Yes, they are mistaken... But don't necessarily expect them to go silent - they will send you a fixed penalty offer regardless.


--------------------
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
andy_foster
post Sat, 18 Apr 2020 - 20:00
Post #7


Member
Group Icon

Group: Life Member
Posts: 20,925
Joined: 9 Sep 2004
From: Reading
Member No.: 1,624



QUOTE (Jlc @ Sat, 18 Apr 2020 - 11:52) *
The address on your v5 is definitely 100% correct and that you haven't moved/changed vehicle recently? Even better to dig out the v5 and check the doc ref date at the bottom of page 2 in DD MM YY format.



QUOTE (doc rich @ Sat, 18 Apr 2020 - 17:59) *
I don't beleive there would have been a problem with DVLA. The car was new in December, I'm the first owner. When I came to insure the car the week after I bought it there was no problem identifying the vehicle on th the various websites. The whole process is now done online from the dealers desk and I received the V5 a few days later. I've just checked on the Honest John website, put the reg in and immediate came up with my vehicle.


It is exceptionally rare for the original NIP to be issued late without a good reason. According to certain members from the 'darkside' it is impossible for it to happen without intervention to override the safeguards (although I have my doubts). In the vast majority of cases where the NIP to the 'RK' was issued late, desp[ite glib assurances to the contrary, the recipient was either not the RK at all, or there was some issue with the V5C (or the NIP was actually a COFP and the f**kwit neglected to mention having been stopped by the police at the time of the offence).

If your V5C is correct, etc.. and there is nothing significant that you neglected to mention to us, then you would seem to have what used to be referred to as a 'lead pipe solid' defence. However, if there is some issue regarding your V5C which negates the requirement to serve a NIP within the 14 days, then pursuing such a defence would be both expensive and a waste of everyone's time.





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

"Whatever the intention of Parliament was, or was not, the law is quite clear." - The Rookie
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Mon, 20 Apr 2020 - 09:19
Post #8


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 17,889
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



andy_foster assuming there is a system safeguard to stop a NIP going out late, I suspect it won't stop NIPs going out on day 13, as in theory they can be served in time.


--------------------
I am not on the "motorists's side", nor am I on the "police/CPS/council's" side, I am simply in favour of the rule of law.
No, I am not a lawyer.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
NewJudge
post Mon, 20 Apr 2020 - 09:45
Post #9


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 2,501
Joined: 29 Oct 2008
Member No.: 23,623



QUOTE (cp8759 @ Mon, 20 Apr 2020 - 10:19) *
andy_foster assuming there is a system safeguard to stop a NIP going out late, I suspect it won't stop NIPs going out on day 13, as in theory they can be served in time.

Possibly. But then they could not rely on the presumption of service as that would give service at day 15. Surely in those circumstances the burden would therefore fall to them to prove that it had been served on day 14 rather than on the recipient to prove that it hadn't.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
The Rookie
post Mon, 20 Apr 2020 - 10:04
Post #10


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 44,869
Joined: 9 Sep 2003
From: Warwickshire
Member No.: 317



I agree, if you have such a system in place it would be very easy for it to add the 2 working days in to the calculation and work out the last 'safe' date for sending. We still need the OP to confirm the V5c is all correct (and like AF I have my 'concerns').

As an aside the 'askthepolice' website used to state the NIP only had to be posted by day 14, they refused my request to correct it (saying i couldn't read the statute....) but after Gidden they acquiesced to my new request and corrected it. maybe the BiB at this office are still working in 2009!
https://www.askthe.police.uk/content/Q557.htm

Yeah this bit is still 'dubious' "A notice shall be deemed to have been served on a person if it was posted to them at their last known address, notwithstanding that the notice was returned as undelivered".


--------------------
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
cp8759
post Mon, 20 Apr 2020 - 10:09
Post #11


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 17,889
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



QUOTE (NewJudge @ Mon, 20 Apr 2020 - 10:45) *
QUOTE (cp8759 @ Mon, 20 Apr 2020 - 10:19) *
andy_foster assuming there is a system safeguard to stop a NIP going out late, I suspect it won't stop NIPs going out on day 13, as in theory they can be served in time.

Possibly. But then they could not rely on the presumption of service as that would give service at day 15. Surely in those circumstances the burden would therefore fall to them to prove that it had been served on day 14 rather than on the recipient to prove that it hadn't.

Sure, but some people won't know about the 14 day rule, some will believe the police when they say they have up to 14 days to post the letter, and others will be silly enough to admit the letter arrived on day 14 (for example on the s172 response, or by contacting the police about the notice on day 14). So from the police's perspective, for the sake of a stamp, it's worth a punt.

After all, we know some forces send out CoFPs after 5+ months in the hope that some people will accept them without realising the six month prosecution time limit will be up before the 28 day suspended enforcement period.

QUOTE (The Rookie @ Mon, 20 Apr 2020 - 11:04) *
Yeah this bit is still 'dubious'

The whole website is dubious, it would be far better if they shut it down and left legal advice to the CPS.


--------------------
I am not on the "motorists's side", nor am I on the "police/CPS/council's" side, I am simply in favour of the rule of law.
No, I am not a lawyer.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
NewJudge
post Mon, 20 Apr 2020 - 10:36
Post #12


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 2,501
Joined: 29 Oct 2008
Member No.: 23,623



QUOTE (The Rookie @ Mon, 20 Apr 2020 - 11:04) *
Yeah this bit is still 'dubious' "A notice shall be deemed to have been served on a person if it was posted to them at their last known address, notwithstanding that the notice was returned as undelivered".


It's not "dubious". It's incorrect because it omits a crucial phrase. The RTOA says this:

A notice shall be deemed for the purposes of subsection (1)© above to have been served on a person if it was sent by registered post or recorded delivery service addressed to him at his last known address, notwithstanding that the notice was returned as undelivered or was for any other reason not received by him.

It is to cover the eventuality where a recipient refuses to accept and sign for a letter sent by those services. Since few if any notices are sent Registered or Recorded deliver it would rarely be applicable and the website gives totally misleading information which would discourage people from challenging late NIPs. The website also says that "The registered keeper then has an obligation to identify the driver." which is also incorrect if he is not the person keeping the vehicle. As suggested, best it was taken down entirely.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
The Rookie
post Mon, 20 Apr 2020 - 12:14
Post #13


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 44,869
Joined: 9 Sep 2003
From: Warwickshire
Member No.: 317



That's why I put 'dubious', it's right for recorded but not first class, which is what they all use.

I queried it and they defended it on that basis.

This post has been edited by The Rookie: Mon, 20 Apr 2020 - 12:15


--------------------
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
NewJudge
post Mon, 20 Apr 2020 - 12:18
Post #14


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 2,501
Joined: 29 Oct 2008
Member No.: 23,623



Sorry, Rookie, didn't quite get your point. I blame the lockdown. wink.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
doc rich
post Mon, 20 Apr 2020 - 20:03
Post #15


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 7
Joined: 17 Apr 2020
From: Kent
Member No.: 108,502



I think the lockdown has something to do with this.

I am certain the V5C is fine but the lockdown could well have cause them problems, short of staff, missing experienced staff, just get out the NIPs and hope for the best?

The excessive delay to the delivery, ie day 19 rather day 15, I believe was due Royal Mail lockdown problems. I think we had a delivery on day 14, a Friday but then nothing until day 19, the following Wednesday. I've looked at the Royal Mail website and they were flagging possible disruption from 1 April, day 12, and possibly earlier. But of course this is no excuse for the late delivery of the NIP thanks to Gidden, unless there's something hidden in the lockdown legislation.

I'll wait and see how they react to my letter. It's quite possible they will issue a fixed penalty and put the ball back in my court, excuse the pun. I made it quite clear in my letter that 'I know my rights' so it will depend if they really want to waste everyone's time. The lockdown is already having a big impact on the courts so it's possible that this could time out along with many other cases.

doc
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
The Rookie
post Tue, 21 Apr 2020 - 06:10
Post #16


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 44,869
Joined: 9 Sep 2003
From: Warwickshire
Member No.: 317



QUOTE (doc rich @ Mon, 20 Apr 2020 - 21:03) *
I am certain the V5C is fine

Have you not checked it? I would certainly check it before potentially making myself look an ass.

To clarify, you are returning it with the completed driver nomination form?

This post has been edited by The Rookie: Tue, 21 Apr 2020 - 06:12


--------------------
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
doc rich
post Tue, 21 Apr 2020 - 09:35
Post #17


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 7
Joined: 17 Apr 2020
From: Kent
Member No.: 108,502



QUOTE (The Rookie @ Tue, 21 Apr 2020 - 07:10) *
QUOTE (doc rich @ Mon, 20 Apr 2020 - 21:03) *
I am certain the V5C is fine

Have you not checked it? I would certainly check it before potentially making myself look an ass.

How do you think I can be certain about the V5C unless I have checked it????? Of course I have, doesn't mean to say they won't come up with some pretext about DVLA delays. There are enough examples on here of cock ups and falsehoods around that.

To clarify, you are returning it with the completed driver nomination form?


Why would I return the V5C with the driver nomination form.?? It stays with me at all times!!

doc
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Fredd
post Tue, 21 Apr 2020 - 09:40
Post #18


Webmaster
Group Icon

Group: Root Admin
Posts: 8,068
Joined: 30 Mar 2003
From: Wokingham, UK
Member No.: 2



QUOTE (doc rich @ Tue, 21 Apr 2020 - 09:35) *
QUOTE (The Rookie @ Tue, 21 Apr 2020 - 07:10) *

To clarify, you are returning it with the completed driver nomination form?


Why would I return the V5C with the driver nomination form.?? It stays with me at all times!!

doc

The "it" he's talking about is your late NIP letter, not the V5C.


--------------------
Regards,
Fredd

__________________________________________________________________________
Pepipoo relies on you
to keep this site running!
Donate to Pepipoo now using your
Visa, Mastercard, debit card or PayPal account
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
BertB
post Tue, 21 Apr 2020 - 09:46
Post #19


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 232
Joined: 14 Nov 2011
Member No.: 51,087



QUOTE (doc rich @ Tue, 21 Apr 2020 - 10:35) *
QUOTE (The Rookie @ Tue, 21 Apr 2020 - 07:10) *
QUOTE (doc rich @ Mon, 20 Apr 2020 - 21:03) *
I am certain the V5C is fine

Have you not checked it? I would certainly check it before potentially making myself look an ass.


How do you think I can be certain about the V5C unless I have checked it????? Of course I have, doesn't mean to say they won't come up with some pretext about DVLA delays. There are enough examples on here of cock ups and falsehoods around that.

QUOTE (The Rookie @ Tue, 21 Apr 2020 - 07:10) *
To clarify, you are returning it with the completed driver nomination form?


Why would I return the V5C with the driver nomination form.?? It stays with me at all times!!

doc


For the first point, I read it the same way The Rookie has. "I am certain" sounds a lot like you think you know. "I have checked" is probably a better term to use when talking about absolutely confirming the V5 is correct.

Second point I think you have just misread the post. You say you are sending them a letter. The question is are you sending the letter with the completed driver nomination form?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
speedfighter23
post Tue, 21 Apr 2020 - 09:51
Post #20


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 240
Joined: 29 Jul 2019
Member No.: 104,999



If your V5C is up to date with your name as the RK and it is on the letter that they sent it 13 days after the incident took place, then return the S172 with your name and a cover note saying that the NIP is too late, and you are home and dry, but may have to go to court to defend it.

Is there a chance the Police try to proceed anyway only to back down at the last minute when the prosecutor realises the error? Would the OP get costs for winning the case but having to go to court to defend it?

This post has been edited by speedfighter23: Tue, 21 Apr 2020 - 09:52
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: Tuesday, 2nd June 2020 - 02:18
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.