PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Nasty Letter about not sending a NIP back**Case Dismissed**
rager
post Sat, 12 Mar 2005 - 12:16
Post #1


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 26
Joined: 12 Mar 2005
Member No.: 2,547



Hi there,

I got a letter through the post today, dated the 10-03-2005, saying
QUOTE
I refer to the notice of intended prosecution/section 172 road traffic act, 1988 form sent to you over four weeks ago under the above reference, which related to an alleged road traffic offence.

The form in question legally required you to supply details of the driver of the vehicle, it also carried a warning by not complying you are committing an offence. The offence cannot be dealt with through fixed penalty procedures. A court appearance is therefore probable. The offence carries a maximum fine of £1000, endorsement and possible disqualification.

To date no satisfactory reply has been received from you at this office

You failure to identify the driver of the vehicle has therefore made you liable for the offence which is contrary to section 172 of the road traffic act, 1988.

You are advised to immediately respond to the request by identifying the driver/rider of the vehicle at the time of the incident.

In the event that you do not understand the document or require further information you are advised to contact the office without further delay.


Now, this is all fine and dandy apart from I havent ever had a NIP from the Constabulary about the alleged offence.

What should I do?

I think, the best option would be to ring them up on monday (tried today but they are only open weekdays) and then ask them to send me out a NIP and once that comes I will send back this.
http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=2846

Does that sound right?

Any help would be amazing
Thanks!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
4 Pages V   1 2 3 > »   
Start new topic
Replies (1 - 19)
Advertisement
post Sat, 12 Mar 2005 - 12:16
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
Observer
post Sat, 12 Mar 2005 - 12:41
Post #2


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,266
Joined: 17 Oct 2003
Member No.: 433



rager,

Are you the registered keeper of the vehicle concerned?  And have you moved recently?  Is the reminder letter correctly addressed to you.  If "yes", "no", "yes" to the above, and you are able to swear on oath that you did not receive a NIP, then you should be able to avoid conviction.  If you are the RK, we need to think more carefully.


--------------------
Have you benefited from PePiPoo?
Please make a donation or become a member
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Bourne_Star
post Sat, 12 Mar 2005 - 13:27
Post #3


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 55
Joined: 6 Mar 2005
From: Staffordshire
Member No.: 2,514



rager,

I haven't been a member long but I've been trawling this site for over a week now.

rager wrote:
QUOTE
I think, the best option would be to ring them up on monday
I read this somewhere
QUOTE
DON'T PHONE: Its as good as a statement and quickens the process ... drag it out as long as possible so they get bored of all the paperwork and hopefully drop the charges


Plus IMO having printed copies at hand are more beneficial if/when the case goes to court.  I'd write to them and ask for another NIP.


--------------------
Knowledge is Power
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
rager
post Sat, 12 Mar 2005 - 14:20
Post #4


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 26
Joined: 12 Mar 2005
Member No.: 2,547



Thanks to both of you.

Observer, the answers are like you say "Yes I am the keeper", "No, I haven't moved for many years", "Yes it correctly addressed to me".
Also "Yes I am able to swear under oath that I did not recieve a nip".

Bourne_Star, that makes sense and writing a letter saying i didnt recieve the nip sounds like better.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
rager
post Sun, 13 Mar 2005 - 00:58
Post #5


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 26
Joined: 12 Mar 2005
Member No.: 2,547



QUOTE (rager)
Bourne_Star, that makes sense and writing a letter saying i didnt recieve the nip sounds like better.


Do you guys think this will do the trick?

QUOTE (Letter to Police)
Dear Sir/Madam

I received a letter with the “CTO Reference XXXXX” dated as the “10th March 2005” on the Saturday the 12th of March 2005.

In the letter it reads that I have not replied to a Notice of Intended Prosecution/ Section 172 Road Traffic Act 1988 form which was sent to me over four weeks ago in relation to an alleged road traffic offence. This is of great concern to me as I have not received such letter/form in regards to a alleged road traffic offence.

It is also of greater concern to me that this letter states that it is a legally required of me to supply you of such details and it is offence not to supply such details which would result in a maximum fine of £1000, endorsement and possible disqualification. The reason of such concern is as stated before, I have not received such form and thus I have been unable to supply the required details.

Further in the letter it reads that I am advised to immediately respond to the request by identifying the driver/rider of the vehicle at the time of the incident, and that if I require further information I am advised to contact this office without further delay. I tried ringing on the day which I received the letter, Saturday the 12th, but I was greeted with an answer machine which told me that you are only open on weekdays.

As such I have written this letter requesting further information, for a copy of the “Notice of Intended Prosecution/Section 172 Road Traffic Act, 1988 form” and also any information that you have that would help me identify the driver/rider.

Yours faithfully,
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Tinytim
post Sun, 13 Mar 2005 - 01:38
Post #6


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 296
Joined: 6 Nov 2003
From: Poole Dorset
Member No.: 499



I honestly don't think stalling is such a good idea, all they need to do is show they posted the thing to you and you'll have to fight off a s172. On oath or not it will be your word against their records

IMO you have been given the perfect oportunity to use the PACE witness statement. You don't have the form but you do have a letter telling you to provide the information.

In your situation I would modify the PACE statement by inserting the 1st 4 paras of your letter and send it back. When you get the NIP in a week or so asking you to fill it in ignore it. (I would be quietly confident if it had a date over 14 days from the offence as this would tend to suggest they didn't actually send you one) Don't speak to them again and wait and see.

Read up on the PACE statement situation on this forum so you know your situation, you may end up in court but more on your terms than theirs.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Observer
post Sun, 13 Mar 2005 - 09:31
Post #7


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,266
Joined: 17 Oct 2003
Member No.: 433



rager,

The ticket office will be able to give evidence that a NIP was issued and sent by first class post.  That will create a "rebuttable presumption" that the NIP was served in the ordinary course of post (two days later).  In your case, the NIP was not actually received so the presumption of service can be rebutted.  That places a burden on the other side to show, beyond reasonable doubt, that the NIP was served (i.e. that you are lying).  The ticket office has the option of assuring service of NIPs by using registered post.  The fact they choose not to do so (no doubt because of cost) means that a proportion of NIPs will not be served and those 'suspects' cannot be prosecuted.

If you are able to and do give evidence (in court or by way of a sworn affidavit) that the NIP was not received, that evidence should be accepted by a court and, since it is now too late for you to be served with a new NIP, the charge will be dismissed.

I suggest the following letter.

QUOTE
Dear Sir/Madam

Re: Notice of Intended Prosecution reference XXXX ("NIP")

I refer to your letter dated 10th March 2005.

I have to inform you that I did not receive the NIP and can only assume that it was lost in the postal system.  If you wish to send a replacement, I will of course comply with the obligations placed on me by law.  However, I should point out that any replacement notice now served on me will fail to satisfy the requirement stated in section 1, Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988

1.—(1) Subject to section 2 of this Act, where a person is prosecuted for an offence to which this section applies, he is not to be convicted unless—
......................
© within fourteen days of the commission of the offence a notice of the intended prosecution specifying the nature of the alleged offence and the time and place where it is alleged to have been committed, was—
..................
(ii) in the case of any other offence, served on him or on the person, if any, registered as the keeper of the vehicle at the time of the commission of the offence.


I am willing to give sworn evidence to that effect, if needed.

In the circumstances, I trust you will agree that your enquiry into this matter should be discontinued.

Yours faithfully,


--------------------
Have you benefited from PePiPoo?
Please make a donation or become a member
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cjm99
post Sun, 13 Mar 2005 - 20:09
Post #8


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 5,109
Joined: 16 Dec 2003
From: Manchester
Member No.: 675



QUOTE (RTOA 1988)
(2) 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.

   (3) The requirement of subsection (1) above shall in every case be deemed to have been complied with unless and until the contrary is proved.


QUOTE (Observer's Draft letter)
I did not receive the NIP and can only assume that it was lost in the postal system.


I would not be certain that this assurtion would be accepted. I have seen sec142 cases where the defendant has sworn non receipt and the conviction has been quoshed, and the case not re tried. But, they almost always are people who live in flats or estates with similar road names ie. Blogg way, Blogg close, Blogg Street.
I think a sworn statement plus something else would be required. Remember of course that if he receives another NIP/S172, He must complete the S172 requirement, they have no effective time limit.


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
peteturbo
post Mon, 14 Mar 2005 - 08:01
Post #9


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 876
Joined: 19 May 2004
From: London
Member No.: 1,219



Why tell them at this point that the NIP would be out of time - this is simply rubbing their nose in it and will lose you sympathy?  

It is irrelevant now, so leave it out.


--------------------
Have you benefited from Pepipoo?   Please make a reasonable donation  or become a member.  

Peteturbo
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Observer
post Mon, 14 Mar 2005 - 09:41
Post #10


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,266
Joined: 17 Oct 2003
Member No.: 433



QUOTE (cjm99)
I would not be certain that this assurtion would be accepted. I have seen sec142 cases where the defendant has sworn non receipt and the conviction has been quoshed, and the case not re tried. But, they almost always are people who live in flats or estates with similar road names ie. Blogg way, Blogg close, Blogg Street.
I think a sworn statement plus something else would be required. Remember of course that if he receives another NIP/S172, He must complete the S172 requirement, they have no effective time limit.


As you said yourself Chris, nothing is certain in a  magistrates court.  However, the court would need a very good reason not to accept sworn evidence that a NIP was not served where the testimony is uncontested (which it would be in this case).


--------------------
Have you benefited from PePiPoo?
Please make a donation or become a member
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Observer
post Mon, 14 Mar 2005 - 09:49
Post #11


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,266
Joined: 17 Oct 2003
Member No.: 433



QUOTE (peteturbo)
Why tell them at this point that the NIP would be out of time - this is simply rubbing their nose in it and will lose you sympathy?  

It is irrelevant now, so leave it out.


The out of time aspect does not have to be raised now but there's nothing to be gained by delaying it.  Do you really think emotion plays a part in ticket office procedures? rolleyes.gif


--------------------
Have you benefited from PePiPoo?
Please make a donation or become a member
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
rager
post Mon, 14 Mar 2005 - 09:56
Post #12


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 26
Joined: 12 Mar 2005
Member No.: 2,547



Thanks again for your help everyone, I have sent of a letter based on the example Observer gave.

I'll post back when I next get/hear anything else.

Once again thanks for all your help so far.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
thamesvalley
post Mon, 14 Mar 2005 - 10:01
Post #13


Member
Group Icon

Group: Bad Boyz & Girlz
Posts: 794
Joined: 15 Mar 2004
Member No.: 995



What we could all do is, If we 'think' we have been speeding, Knock up a PACE statement and send it to the relevant scamera dept saying I was the driver at the time ... A few thousand people doing this ... say a few a week ... Should bring the scamera office to a complete halt !?!?

Maybe we should target one office !?!?!?

Clerk (am) : The post has arrived but the driver has no-where to park this artic !?!?

laugh.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
kanefrisby
post Thu, 17 Mar 2005 - 13:48
Post #14


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 23
Joined: 17 Mar 2005
From: hampshire
Member No.: 2,587



Hi Rager,

Did you get any replies to your letter yet?

I was sent a similar letted to you also dated the 10th March, where i also never received an NIP either.  My alleged offenc was near the tolls of the severn bridge, s.wales.

what letter did you end up sending?

regards

Kane Frisby
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
rager
post Fri, 18 Mar 2005 - 08:10
Post #15


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 26
Joined: 12 Mar 2005
Member No.: 2,547



QUOTE (kanefrisby)
Hi Rager,

Did you get any replies to your letter yet?

I was sent a similar letted to you also dated the 10th March, where i also never received an NIP either.  My alleged offenc was near the tolls of the severn bridge, s.wales.

what letter did you end up sending?

regards

Kane Frisby


Hi Kane,

I sent a letter out on monday using Observers drafted out letter. It was sent recorded, though I wish I had used special after reading on here about the two!

I have not recieved anything yet from them, but only time will tell.

Good luck to you with your caes
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
rager
post Sat, 19 Mar 2005 - 10:56
Post #16


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 26
Joined: 12 Mar 2005
Member No.: 2,547



NIP came through today

1. Offence was in England
2. Hampshire Constabulary
3. Date of offence - 01/02/2005
4. Date of the NIP - 18/03/2005
5. Date you received the NIP - 19/03/2005
6. NIP sent by first class (0028 postage paid)
7. I'm the registered keeper of the vehicle concerned
8. UK - Held for over 3 years
9. 0 points as yet.
10. Description of events..

Driving home at lunch (13:36) was driving along the M27 (which was quite empty) and had roadworks on which was at 50mph limit and had the far outside lane closed, the two real lanes were reduced size however the hardshoulder was opened as a lane.

Saw a police van parked in the closed outside lane, braked while changing from the middle lane to inside (hardshoulder) lane.

NIP says I was doing a recorded speed of 79mph (pictures attached but are large pictures)

http://www.uprim.nildram.co.uk/nip1_big.jpg
http://www.uprim.nildram.co.uk/nip2_big.jpg
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
rager
post Mon, 21 Mar 2005 - 13:00
Post #17


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 26
Joined: 12 Mar 2005
Member No.: 2,547



Now, I'm guessing my next step should be to send the PACE letter through?

Or is there another route I should follow as this is the first NIP I have received and it has come after the 14day period.

Any help would be great!!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Bluedart
post Mon, 21 Mar 2005 - 13:14
Post #18


Member
Group Icon

Group: Life Member
Posts: 5,243
Joined: 9 Jul 2004
From: Devon
Member No.: 1,388



It seems to me they have dropped a bollock, 14 days is the limit 17 with so called mitigating circustances to do with the post/ing.
They have clearly dated it 18/03/2005 with the offence on the 01/03/2005, I make that 17 days to typing the letter. Did you keep the envelope? that it came in.


--------------------
Peter
What I'd like to see police/local authorities do is deal with important issues and not these sorts of victimless crimes when society is riddled with problems.

If it's true that we are here to help others, then what exactly are the others here for?

'The world is a dangerous place, not because of those who do evil, but because of those who look on and do nothing.' - Albert Einstein
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
rager
post Mon, 21 Mar 2005 - 13:22
Post #19


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 26
Joined: 12 Mar 2005
Member No.: 2,547



QUOTE (Bluedart)
It seems to me they have dropped a bollock, 14 days is the limit 17 with so called mitigating circustances to do with the post/ing.
They have clearly dated it 18/03/2005 with the offence on the 01/03/2005, I make that 17 days to typing the letter. Did you keep the envelope? that it came in.


Yes I have, I'll have a look what it is dated as when I get back from work.

Though the offence is actually the 01-02-2005. Just over a month!

I take it "mitigating circumstances" is meant to cover lost in the post nips etc?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Observer
post Mon, 21 Mar 2005 - 15:28
Post #20


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,266
Joined: 17 Oct 2003
Member No.: 433



rager,

The date on the envelope is of no relevance now.  As stated in my previous posts, your defence is that a NIP was not served on you within 14 days.  The ticket office will argue that a NIP was sent within 14 days and, if it was lost in the post, that's not their fault but your hard luck.  Not so.  They have the option to assure service by using registered post.  They did not do so.  There is a presumption in law that the NIP was served but that can be rebutted.  You do that by giving sworn testimony that a NIP was not received.  It is then up to the prosecution to show, beyond reasonable doubt, that you did receive the NIP.  They cannot do that so the charge of speeding must fail.  The only way you can lose this case is if a court decides that your evidence is unreliable.

You MUST now complete, sign and return the NIP.  If you wish, you can send a further letter stating that the NIP was not received within 14 days, so is invalid.  However, it will probably be ignored.

You will receive a CoFP which you should ignore.  In due course, you will (probably) receive a summons.  You should plead not guilty and then give your sworn testimony.

I hope this is clear.


--------------------
Have you benefited from PePiPoo?
Please make a donation or become a member
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

4 Pages V   1 2 3 > » 
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, 20th January 2020 - 06:09
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.