PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

14-Day Question, Split from hijacked thread
shawn
post Thu, 5 Apr 2007 - 15:37
Post #1


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 8
Joined: 5 Apr 2007
Member No.: 11,474



I have a similar senario.

I was caught speeding (allegedly) on the 12/10/2006, however, I did not receive a NIP until the 1/12/2006 that was sent on the 30/11/2006 and it was a "final reminder", obviously I sent a letter back stating I had not received the original and it was 41 days after the offence before I received any notification from. (I used the advice on this thread and sent the RAC advice letter from this site).

They sent back saying they acknowledged a reply and babbled on about the equipment used to catch me (I don't care, I ever questioned that) and that "the paperwoek was send in compiance with the legislation i.e. within 14 days of the offence date, to yourself as the registered keeper".

To kepe them happy I sent back another letter stating "I cna confirm that the driver of the ehicle at the time of the alleged offence was:...." and stated my name, address, phone number, DOB and driver number and also pointed out rhat the RTA Act 1988 sections 1(1)©(ii) and 1(2) means that em not receiveing the NIP in the 14 day period means they have no case and that I was "[re[ared to swear to this under aoth in a court of law if necessary". That was on thr 20th December.

A week after Xmas I receive a reply confirming receipt and "noting the content" (LOL!!!!), as I still remian in dispute it would go to court and until this morning I had heard nothing else from them and was feeling quite pleased with myself.

This morning I received a court summons for the following,
"Between 25/10/2006 and 24/11/2006 at droitwich in the county of worcestershire beiung the keeper of a vehicle, namely XXXX XXX XXXX, the driver of which was alleged to have been guilty of an offence, failed to give such information as to the idnetity of the driver as you were required to give by on or behalf of the chheif officor by or on behalf of the cheif officor of police for west mercia constabulary contrary ti sectuion 172(3) of the road traffic act 1988 and schedule 2 to the road traffic offencders act 1988".
They also enclosed two statements, one form the officor who was using the gun saying he was trained, he did it properly etc etc and one form a girl in central ticket office saying I have NOT provided evidance as to who was driving (dated 2/2/06( (clearly silly moo had not seen my letter on the 20th Decemeber). It also says a letter was sent first class on 20/10/2006 by first class post. They have also included a picture of my vehicle.

Now I have not ONCE admitted my car was speeding (not have I denied it), honestly, I really don't know. It's a road I used once every 2 weeks driving form from uni on the weekends and I know the road changes from 70 to 50 at that point so doubt I'd have been speeding but cannot swear to it)

A few things I think/believe and have found out.
- The Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988 (c. 53) section 1(2) states, "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.". The central office has admitted they only sent it by "first class delivery". A valid arguement? Or not?

- My summons is for not providing a named driver. Quite simply, I have! I have the delivry stub of the recorded delivery note for Royal Mail, I have a leter off them staying they received it and I still have a copy of the letter. So Do I just point that out and thats the end of the case? What about the other evicence showing my car was speeding (I assume I does, I don't understand the pictures) and saying how the camera was used? How is that relevant to not saying who was driving? Can this case also turn into a case of was I/wasn't I speeding and I get 'done' for that instead? Basically, what should I prepare for or be able to argue is not relevant.

- Where do I stand with having my rights read to me? Still not happened, if I've broke to law and go to court I thought I had to have my rights read to me?

- The 6 months thing, how does that work? 180ish days? 26 weeks? My offence was 21st of Oct so does it mena 21st April? (please, I'm in cout on the 26th! 4 days short of the 26 weeks!!)

Basically, what should I do? ANY advice will be apreciated and YES, I am willing to go to court and fight this, I have said so all along, even fi it cost me more, the more of us who fight these croocked <beeps> the sooners the system melts down! They wnat my cash for speeding and not hurting anyone, does anyone care a drunk unisured driver crashe dinto me before xmas and tried ot run me over? No, the police released her and have lost her and don't give a damn!

Thanks in advance, this forums been great so far for advice smile.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
 
Start new topic
Replies (1 - 6)
Advertisement
post Thu, 5 Apr 2007 - 15:37
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
firefly
post Fri, 6 Apr 2007 - 09:15
Post #2


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 4,714
Joined: 3 Sep 2003
From: ex-Scotland
Member No.: 298



QUOTE (shawn @ Thu, 5 Apr 2007 - 16:37) *
A few things I think/believe and have found out.
- The Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988 (c. 53) section 1(2) states, "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.". The central office has admitted they only sent it by "first class delivery". A valid arguement? Or not?

In a word, no. The RTOA 1988 was amended in 1994 by the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act to permit first class delivery of NIPs.

Read this thread.


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
jeffreyarcher
post Fri, 6 Apr 2007 - 21:20
Post #3


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 8,639
Joined: 5 Jul 2003
Member No.: 134



I don't undertand this, you are not being charged with speeding, you are being charges with S172 (failure to supply).
BTW, the class of postage is irrelevent to S172.
Whatever you do, don't communicate with them before 14/4/07, because they can still lay an information for speeding, if they twig that they've made a mistake.
I suspect that either;
1) They have lost your response in which you named the driver, or
2) They are prosecuting because you didn't use the form.

I presume that you kept a copy of your letter, proof of postage, and their letter acknowledging receipt?

The PTR should be interesting, anyway. laugh.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
shawn
post Thu, 26 Apr 2007 - 22:01
Post #4


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 8
Joined: 5 Apr 2007
Member No.: 11,474



Quick update.

Made my way to court today, to be told he trial was being adjourned until June 8th. This will apparently be some sort of pre-trial hearing to go through the evidence and I will then have to go back to court again.

Does anyone know if I cna claim back expenses? As 2 trips to court will end up costing me more than the fine so a 3rd one is going to cost even more!

Also, does anyone know why they had to get me to court to tell me it was ajourned? Surely a letter of phone call would have been just as good for them and a lot better for me!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
jeffreyarcher
post Fri, 27 Apr 2007 - 00:22
Post #5


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 8,639
Joined: 5 Jul 2003
Member No.: 134



QUOTE (shawn @ Thu, 26 Apr 2007 - 23:01) *
Does anyone know if I cna claim back expenses? As 2 trips to court will end up costing me more than the fine so a 3rd one is going to cost even more!

If you are ultimately found not guilty, you get 'costs'.
Those 'costs' inlcude your expenses, including those of today's hearing.
In some situations, you can make a 'wasted costs' claim. AFAIK, 'wasted' costs are paid even if you ultimately lose.
Also, AFAIK, you have to make a wasted costs claim immediately.
Also, the fault would have to be with the prosecution for a wasted costs claim to be granted.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
shawn
post Fri, 27 Apr 2007 - 00:34
Post #6


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 8
Joined: 5 Apr 2007
Member No.: 11,474



Thanks smile.gif Once again, some great info.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
The Rookie
post Sat, 28 Apr 2007 - 09:59
Post #7


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 45,408
Joined: 9 Sep 2003
From: Warwickshire
Member No.: 317



So to be clear you told them all the details they wanted in a signed letter, and your being done for failure to furnish?

In that case the late delivery of the NIP is not relevant as you are not being charged for speeding, however I can't understand WHY, is it because you replied late, not info requested, not on the form, or because they can't read and don't think you have replied. Jones V DPP is the authority that says you don't need to use the form provided. Are both your replies in the summons pack?

You need to plead not guilty (by writing I suggest) and not pointing out the error of their ways until after the 6 months for speeding timeout are passed (26th April) at your real trial date.

Simon

This post has been edited by The Rookie: Sat, 28 Apr 2007 - 10:02


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

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: Saturday, 8th August 2020 - 20:47
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.