PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

NIP - Impossible to have been at location stated, Location is approx 30 miles away from where we were at given date/time
Biscay
post Tue, 15 Sep 2020 - 12:37
Post #1


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 5
Joined: 15 Sep 2020
Member No.: 109,760



NIP Details and Circumstances
What is the name of the Constabulary? - Dorset Police
Date of the offence: - 03/09/2020
Date of the NIP: - 09/09/2020
Date you received the NIP: - ~11/09/2020
Location of offence (exact location as it appears on the NIP: important): - A35 Winterbourne Abbas
Was the NIP addressed to you? - My wife
Was the NIP sent by first class post, second class or recorded delivery? - Not sure
If your are not the Registered Keeper, what is your relationship to the vehicle? - My wife is
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 -

"At 17:22 hours on 03/09/2020
at A35 Winterborune Abbas
Contrary to:Restricted Road (TRAV S81 (1) & 89 (1) RTRA 1984)
Recorded Speed: 36mph

You have been identified.....blah blah blah... lead to the driver's identification.

THE ALLEGATION IS SUPPORTED BY VIDEO &/OR PHOTOGRAPHIC EVIDENCE"

This approximate location is 30 miles from my home address near Poole, Dorset. At 17:29 we arrived home having travelled from Chichester (the complete opposite direction) from my mothers. We know the time because my teenage daughter had asked what time we were likely to get home and me driving said 17:30.... we were sat on our drive laughing at 'Dadnav' as the car clocked ticked over to 17:30.

This road where the offence is alleged to have happened we have not probably travelled on for over 12 months.

Around 17:22 we would have been likely to have been in the Westbourne/Branksome area between Bournemouth & Poole. There are several fixed speed cameras we have to negotiate but they are all 40 limits. Indeed it is highly likely that the police can use ANPR to track us through the average speed cameras on the A338 immediately prior to Bournemouth which I estimate to be around 17:10.

Clearly this is wrong on so many possible levels.

The majority of fixed cameras in this area have recently been through an upgrade to digital so it could be an incorrect cloned configuration that is reporting wrong meta data?

I am of a mind to get my wife to respond (after 14 days) to state this cannot possibly be us or our car and that perhaps the numberplate has been misread. I would hope that they may discover their error and not be in a position to issue a corrected one/if I was caught elsewhere at that time. What is the opinion of the forum?

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
 
Start new topic
Replies (1 - 18)
Advertisement
post Tue, 15 Sep 2020 - 12:37
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
Logician
post Tue, 15 Sep 2020 - 13:37
Post #2


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 12,730
Joined: 28 Mar 2010
Member No.: 36,528



Your wife must respond and name you as the driver and give all the details required or she will committing the s.172 offence. There is no harm in her adding that at the time stated she was in the vehicle with you and can verify that it was many miles away from the location given, but they will probably send another NIP out to you anyway. By all means wait until after 14 days have passed.


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



Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
TryOut
post Tue, 15 Sep 2020 - 15:40
Post #3


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 246
Joined: 7 May 2019
Member No.: 103,734



QUOTE (Logician @ Tue, 15 Sep 2020 - 14:37) *
Your wife must respond and name you as the driver and give all the details required or she will committing the s.172 offence. There is no harm in her adding that at the time stated she was in the vehicle with you and can verify that it was many miles away from the location given, but they will probably send another NIP out to you anyway. By all means wait until after 14 days have passed.

Not so. The OP says his wife's vehicle was not at the location so no need to name the driver at all.

The OP's wife simply needs to write exactly what the OP has put in here to Dorset police. Then see what the police have to say on the matter.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
TheDisapprovingB...
post Tue, 15 Sep 2020 - 16:06
Post #4


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 275
Joined: 16 Jul 2015
Member No.: 78,371



QUOTE (TryOut @ Tue, 15 Sep 2020 - 16:40) *
Not so. The OP says his wife's vehicle was not at the location so no need to name the driver at all.

The OP's wife simply needs to write exactly what the OP has put in here to Dorset police. Then see what the police have to say on the matter.


Given that an s.172 conviction is 6 points while the speeding is three points at worst, I'd suggest that this isn't the hill to die on in a case where the vehicle absolutely wasn't in the location specified. By all means the wife should include a cover letter noting that the vehicle wasn't in the location specified at that time, but she should also name the driver on the form to discharge her s.172 requirements.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
TryOut
post Tue, 15 Sep 2020 - 17:07
Post #5


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 246
Joined: 7 May 2019
Member No.: 103,734



QUOTE (TheDisapprovingBrit @ Tue, 15 Sep 2020 - 17:06) *
QUOTE (TryOut @ Tue, 15 Sep 2020 - 16:40) *
Not so. The OP says his wife's vehicle was not at the location so no need to name the driver at all.

The OP's wife simply needs to write exactly what the OP has put in here to Dorset police. Then see what the police have to say on the matter.


Given that an s.172 conviction is 6 points while the speeding is three points at worst, I'd suggest that this isn't the hill to die on in a case where the vehicle absolutely wasn't in the location specified. By all means the wife should include a cover letter noting that the vehicle wasn't in the location specified at that time, but she should also name the driver on the form to discharge her s.172 requirements.

Why?
The OP's wife wasn't driving at the location at that time, neither was the OP. Just because he was driving somewhere else means nothing, it could equally be that the OP wasn't driving at that time if the clock on the camera was 7 minutes out, the car was parked with possibly no driver.
The specified place and time is wrong...according to the OP.
A simple letter will do.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
disgrunt
post Tue, 15 Sep 2020 - 17:21
Post #6


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 302
Joined: 8 Dec 2012
Member No.: 58,778



QUOTE (TheDisapprovingBrit @ Tue, 15 Sep 2020 - 16:06) *
QUOTE (TryOut @ Tue, 15 Sep 2020 - 16:40) *
Not so. The OP says his wife's vehicle was not at the location so no need to name the driver at all.

The OP's wife simply needs to write exactly what the OP has put in here to Dorset police. Then see what the police have to say on the matter.


Given that an s.172 conviction is 6 points while the speeding is three points at worst, I'd suggest that this isn't the hill to die on in a case where the vehicle absolutely wasn't in the location specified. By all means the wife should include a cover letter noting that the vehicle wasn't in the location specified at that time, but she should also name the driver on the form to discharge her s.172 requirements.

I completely disagree, how do we know the location is wrong and not the time, or there was a misread and it wasn’t the OP’s wife’s car at all.

The best course of action is to reply stating that the car was not at the location given at the time specified, but do it after 14 days so they can’t serve a correct NIP.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
NewJudge
post Tue, 15 Sep 2020 - 19:42
Post #7


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 2,717
Joined: 29 Oct 2008
Member No.: 23,623



The OP's wife has been asked to say who was driving at hh:mm on dd/mm/yy at Winterbourne Abbas. The answer is nobody was. It is not for her to guess whether the date is wrong, the time is wrong, the location is wrong or the vehicle has been wrongly identified. If she is prosecuted for failing to supply the driver's details the prosecution will have to prove that her vehicle was at Winterbourne Abbas on the date and time specified. From what we've been told they may have some difficulty doing that.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
The Rookie
post Wed, 16 Sep 2020 - 05:47
Post #8


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 45,798
Joined: 9 Sep 2003
From: Warwickshire
Member No.: 317



We normally suggest in these cases confirming that the keeper had the keys and knew where the car was. In this case the equivalent fact is that hubby had it and says he was elsewhere. As the S172 recipient doesn’t KNOW where the car was I would be in favour of providing the name of the person in control of the car at that time and where they say the car was.


--------------------
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
The Slithy Tove
post Wed, 16 Sep 2020 - 05:58
Post #9


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 2,661
Joined: 5 Jan 2012
Member No.: 52,178



QUOTE (The Rookie @ Wed, 16 Sep 2020 - 06:47) *
We normally suggest in these cases confirming that the keeper had the keys and knew where the car was. In this case the equivalent fact is that hubby had it and says he was elsewhere. As the S172 recipient doesn’t KNOW where the car was I would be in favour of providing the name of the person in control of the car at that time and where they say the car was.

The OP doesn't state who had the keys or who was driving. Simply says "we", which could refer to just him and daughter, or all three of them in the car. No indication as to the driver.

This post has been edited by The Slithy Tove: Wed, 16 Sep 2020 - 05:59
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
TryOut
post Wed, 16 Sep 2020 - 07:22
Post #10


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 246
Joined: 7 May 2019
Member No.: 103,734



QUOTE (The Rookie @ Wed, 16 Sep 2020 - 06:47) *
We normally suggest in these cases confirming that the keeper had the keys and knew where the car was. In this case the equivalent fact is that hubby had it and says he was elsewhere. As the S172 recipient doesn’t KNOW where the car was I would be in favour of providing the name of the person in control of the car at that time and where they say the car was.

Absolutely pointless, it isn’t a game of tactics.
Either there is evidence the car was there or there is not. If the OPs wife sends a note to ask the police to confirm the details they will do so. THEN the OP’s wife can act accordingly. Names need not be exchanged in this simple and reasonable correspondence.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Biscay
post Wed, 16 Sep 2020 - 08:29
Post #11


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 5
Joined: 15 Sep 2020
Member No.: 109,760



Thanks for your input so far. Clearly not straight forward.

For record: I am the hubby who was driving at the time. We (Me, wife, daughter) were all in the car at the time/date of alleged incident so my wife knows exactly where we all were at the time. If we had got home 8 minutes earlier and the car was sat on the drive with no one in it, how would she have legally responded? There seems to be no option on this form for mistaken identity; i.e. the police could have got something wrong. (Which clearly they have)

also... Doc says Winterbourne Abbas (I mispelt it previously - not a NIP error)

I attach 2 x maps about where we + car were and another showing the alleged incident location.

Having viewed this on google maps, I see that the A35 does extend as far as 'Westbourne' to the 'LV' roundabout but even then its not a section I travelled on given my route home.

This post has been edited by Biscay: Wed, 16 Sep 2020 - 09:20
Attached thumbnail(s)
Attached Image
Attached Image
 
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Biscay
post Wed, 16 Sep 2020 - 08:53
Post #12


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 5
Joined: 15 Sep 2020
Member No.: 109,760



smile.gif I don't live at 83 Canford Cliffs Road.. its just the end point of a section of road about 5 mins from home..

This post has been edited by Biscay: Wed, 16 Sep 2020 - 08:54
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Biscay
post Wed, 16 Sep 2020 - 10:02
Post #13


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 5
Joined: 15 Sep 2020
Member No.: 109,760



Ok. Everyone can stand down....

"Dear Sir/Madam

Notice Number: ............

I can confirm that a clerical eror was made in relation to the above offence and the matter has now been closed. No further action will be taken against you.

Please accept our apologies for any inconvenience caused...."

But my question would remain on how should you respond if the car is stationary at the time with no driver? The form does not permit a challenge to the alleged 'facts' or fiction in this case.

Thanks for your responsiveness.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
disgrunt
post Wed, 16 Sep 2020 - 10:07
Post #14


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 302
Joined: 8 Dec 2012
Member No.: 58,778



In the case that the registered keeper knows the car is not in the location stated (ie are in the car or have the keys) they write back after 14 days and says that.

If the registered keeper wasn’t in the car and it is only the driver saying I wasn’t there, they write back after 14 days giving the drivers details.

The reason for this is (and I’m not suggesting for 1 minute this is the case here) if the registered keeper wasn’t to name the driver and it turned out the driver had lied to them they would be likely to get 6 points or even worse.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Biscay
post Wed, 16 Sep 2020 - 11:02
Post #15


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 5
Joined: 15 Sep 2020
Member No.: 109,760



ok. thanks.

It does seem that the way the form is written that there is absolutely no consideration that there is any possiblity the allegations could be challenged.

Yep. This is just wrong on so many counts its difficult to work out quite where they could put our number plate and that location together for one and on that date even more incredible.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
zerocoke26
post Wed, 16 Sep 2020 - 12:00
Post #16


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 5
Joined: 27 Mar 2019
Member No.: 103,138



How did you sort it out. Did you email them or send the form back saying vehicle was not at that location and the time.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
NewJudge
post Wed, 16 Sep 2020 - 12:18
Post #17


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 2,717
Joined: 29 Oct 2008
Member No.: 23,623



In this instance although the RK was not driving at the relevant time she was in the vehicle and has first hand knowledge of its whereabouts. She had been asked to say who was driving it at Winterbourne Abbas at hh:mm on dd/mm/yy. She is perfectly entitled to reply by saying that nobody was and she can testify to that if required.

It's less straightforward if the RK was not driving and was not in the vehicle at the relevant time. She could only then say whom she believed was driving (whilst being unable to confirm the location or otherwise) and would be obliged to do so.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
andy_foster
post Wed, 16 Sep 2020 - 17:49
Post #18


Member
Group Icon

Group: Life Member
Posts: 21,014
Joined: 9 Sep 2004
From: Reading
Member No.: 1,624



To answer the OP's question about how to provide answers that the form does not allow for...

Despite what the force in question might or might not state on their form, there is no requirement in law to use the form provided. The law (case law) basically says that you have to substantially satisfy any reasonable requirement for information regarding the driver's identity and the manner in which that information should be provided (e.g. in writing and signed).

There could conceivably be cases where the requirement is so badly phrased that there is arguably no lawful requirement to provide any information whatsoever, but unless you are utterly determined to win a pyrrhic victory (the best kind IMHO) it is far simpler to apply a bit more common sense than appears to have gone into the design of the forms and provide the relevant information in the form of a signed letter.

N.B. The law assumes that any person would have some relevant information to give - even if it was simply that they and their car were not at the incident in question,


--------------------
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
TryOut
post Thu, 17 Sep 2020 - 07:19
Post #19


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 246
Joined: 7 May 2019
Member No.: 103,734



QUOTE (Biscay @ Wed, 16 Sep 2020 - 12:02) *
ok. thanks.

It does seem that the way the form is written that there is absolutely no consideration that there is any possiblity the allegations could be challenged.

Yep. This is just wrong on so many counts its difficult to work out quite where they could put our number plate and that location together for one and on that date even more incredible.

The form assumes there are no mistakes unfortunately

In your wife’s case Dorset police made a mistake

All your wife needed to do was write what you did here but address it to the police

Did the police spot the mistake and correct it or did she write and point it out

It doesn’t take too much intellect to simply write separately if the form doesn’t fit, why become offended by it?
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: Monday, 28th September 2020 - 20:53
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.