Can I be prosecuted when the NIP arrived after 17 days? Options

[seylectric]

I have just been caught speeding by a fixed Gatso camera. I have just received in the post the Notice of Intended Prosecution. It is 17 days since the offence.

Since I did not recieve the NIP within 14 days can I still be prosecuted?

[Advertisement]

[Beggarall]

Thank you OU812.
I am still hoping to win this on the basis of NIP served late - the "full disclosure" is a fall-back position. I am really hoping that if I ignore the FPN the CPS will not want to pursue the matter further and it will "time out" completely. I have written a number of letters which they must (?) keep on file.
In dealing with the FPN am I best to send it back saying I am pleading not guilty and indicating that I would want full disclosure of the video evidence or should I just ignore it and keep my fingers crossed? Help and guidance appreciated. Thank you all again.

[Rosewell]

As I have said before I am finding all this pretty stressful (interestingly others have said much the same on this forum) and a part of me says pay up and end the matter.

If you think the form filling is stressful wait 'till you get into court!

The whole idea of the FP system is it takes the stress out of the equation. You don't actually think that the executive will make it easy to resist the law do you? If you want a stress free life go the FP route.

At the start of the proceedings you have two choices; pay up, no fuss or; fight and maybe no points. This is the fightback forum isn't it? You have decided to fight so do not weaken your resolve, you have plenty of surport here to help you through. Yes it's an uphill push but it's worth it if you are successful.

[OU812]

In dealing with the FPN am I best to send it back saying I am pleading not guilty and indicating that I would want full disclosure of the video evidence or should I just ignore it and keep my fingers crossed? Help and guidance appreciated. Thank you all again.

I actually asked this very same question recently, but no one offered a reply. Simply waiting out the 28 days will do the trick as they will automatically summons you. I had read somewhere (and I now cant find it) that it was viewed against you (probably unofficially) if you just waited out the 28 days rather than immediately reply rejecting the fixed penalty, however my fixed penalties dont have any information on how to go about this.

The other thing worth bearing in mind is that if you just let the 28 days expire, there is more chance of the 6 month limit expiring (especially if you used the full 28 day limit for the s172 return) than if you try to immediately get court proceedings instagated against you

I personally wouldnt bet my game plan on this, but having said that I'm still in my fixed penalty 28 day period and I've never delt with the CPS before so I have no idea how slowly their wheels turn

[volvo4life]

I actually asked this very same question recently, but no one offered a reply. Simply waiting out the 28 days will do the trick as they will automatically summons you. I had read somewhere (and I now cant find it) that it was viewed against you (probably unofficially) if you just waited out the 28 days rather than immediately reply rejecting the fixed penalty, however my fixed penalties dont have any information on how to go about this.

I know that I would personally respond withing 21 days, at least then when you get your day in court and the CPS try pushing to the court that you were delaying and uncooperative then they have nothing to go on to prove that because you always replied in the time required. When writing to them, always at the end of a letter put that you would appreciate a reply in xx days, at least 7 and no more than 21.... The courts do not like timewasters...

[seylectric]

Apologies for the long delay as I have been working away. I posted the original question "Can I be prosecuted if the NIP arrived later than the legally required 14 days".

I actually wrote back stating that I hadn't recieved the NIP, and I was sent a copy. However the "copy" didn't have the original date on it, but had a new date on it - dated some two months after the offence. I wrote back stating that it was impossible to remember who had been driving the car at the time of the alleged offence and as such I was now expected to try and "guess" who was driving at the time, which, I pointed out, was ridiculous. I also pointed out that as the "copy" had a date on it that was later than the date on my first letter to them, it could not actually be considered to be a true copy.

I recieved a further letter stating that if I did not fill in the NIP I would be summonsed for failing to name the driver. I again replied stating that they were asking the impossible, as I could not be sure who the driver was, therefore my "evidence" could not be classed as reliable. I also asked for a copy of the evidence, i.e. the photograph. A photograph duly arrived, approx. 3" x 2", which showed my car but the number plate was not that clear. I also recieved a blown-up photo, but I wrote back pointing out that the original photograph did not prove it was my car beyond any reasonable doubt, and that the blown-up version (which did clearly show my plate) was inadmissable as the evidence (the original photo) had clearly been tampered with (i.e. blown up). I did not recieve any further reply.

Thank you for your help.

[Beggarall]

volvo4life said

I know that I would personally respond withing 21 days, at least then when you get your day in court and the CPS try pushing to the court that you were delaying and uncooperative

Is that really the way the CPS behave? Why would the CPS do anything of the sort...it sounds far too vindictive and personal - not an impassionate application of the law. Do you have any experience or evidence that the CPS act this way?

[Blackbird]

Why would the CPS do anything of the sort...it sounds far too vindictive and personal

Oh yes they would, and worse if you wind them up
I spent 1.25 hours discussing points of law with the back of the head of the CPS - didn't look at me as I came in, during the proceedings, or as I left and this was a PTR.

Be prepared!

Best Regards

[OU812]

I know that I would personally respond withing 21 days, at least then when you get your day in court and the CPS try pushing to the court that you were delaying and uncooperative then they have nothing to go on to prove that because you always replied in the time required. When writing to them, always at the end of a letter put that you would appreciate a reply in xx days, at least 7 and no more than 21.... The courts do not like timewasters...

Yes but what do you actually write to them saying/asking during the 28 day fixed penalty period?

Besides there isnt really and requirment to reply unless you want to take them up on the fixed penalty is there?

[AWretham]

Hi I have just been flashed by a Gatso facing facing towards me I didn't think they could detect the speed of an oncoming car? Also the flash didn't go off until I was almost going past it, I would have thought it would have taken the picture when I was about halfway through the marked zone? but it seemed alot l8r. If they do send me a letter through within the 17 days then how can I deal with this? I have heard I can send the letter back unsigned and they won't beable to prosecute? Any help is very much appreciated thanks.

[Divbad]

Front-facing Gatsos are unusual: the flash could cause a crash. Was it a Truvelo (3 or 4 very narrow lines in the road, inches apart)?

Try posting a new thread...

[AWretham]

It was a normal Gatso painted in the yellow relective paint.. And yea the flash did almost blind me, and I will post a new thread to get as much help as poss cheers

[digi-ghost]

Hi all

I came to this site via BMW Land, and I've been reading this thread with interest. I'd like to set out a scenario for you, and my conclusion, and see if you guys agree:

On the 6th September 2003, we bought a new car. Drove it home from Cardiff to Swansea, no problem. Mid October, we received a NIP for speeding on 5th October, hands up fair cop etc, took the points.

Changed the plate on the 28th November 2003 to a private plate.

Beginning of May, we receive another NIP, dated 6th May 2004, for an offence on 6th September 2003 i.e. 8 months previously.

Question 1 is can they realistically explain away 8 months by saying they didn't know who we are (haven't moved house, had tax reminder through in March). My guess is that they probably can't, but also that it probably doesn't matter, they'll say it was posted to the reg'd keeper within 14 days etc

Question 2, and this is where it all falls apart, is this - we moved house last week, asked my wife this week where the NIP was so that I could sort it out, and she's pretty sure she chucked it. No use crying over spilt milk I guess.

My conclusion is this - my evidence for them sending it late is now landfill (even if it had mattered), I've got no NIP to return so I'm (or rather she's) in the proverbial, and I'm simply going to have to take it like a man (whimper).

Only one way out - if I write a letter asking them for a copy of the NIP dated 6th May 2004 for registration blah blah blah which has been misplaced due to a house move, will that buy me some time. If they then respond to this, does it effectively confirm that the original was sent on the 6th May?

Secondly, if I get a copy of the photo and it's not obvious who's driving (unfortunately, my wife has long blonde hair and I don't, so might be wishful thinking), shall I then return the new NIP with the details that due to the NIP being received 8 months after offence (and we did swap over part way back to try out the car) we can't remember who was driving?

I need to get this sorted ASAP for obvious reason, so any help would be gratefully received.

TIA

Stuart

[peteturbo]

Stuart,

some questions;

who is rk, you or your wife?

I note the alleged offence was the day you brought the car, but what was the time? ie address issues aside, you may have had nothing to do with the car at that time.

sounds interesting, but others know far more than me - why dont you try a new thread?

Peteturbo

[digi-ghost]

My wife's the RK, and it was defo us, since we picked it up first thing in the morning, and time was about 10:30 ish I think.

I'll post a new thread, thanks for the suggestion

[DW190]

If the date of the offence was the date you bought the car you would be the registered keeper on that date. If the time of the alleged offence on the NIP was before you took delivery then you should name supplier as the keeper at the time of the alleged offence.

I dont see how they could have sent a NIP to the supplier unless your new car was registered by the supplier prior to you purchasing it.

First I would check your registration doc to see if it shows a previous owner and the date showing as when you aquired the vehicle.

Check these first then post again.

[Philwalker_wba]

Dont know if you've already seen this but, Lord Justice Brooke thinks you need PROOF OF POSTING on occasions when the law allows the use of first class post to be deemed as served. Whist this case relates to the accused returning documents by post, Lord Justice Brooke must certainly on balance see the matter as the same for the Camera Partnerships sending NIP. The fact that the letter was dated in time is no proof that it was despatched in time.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE CO/2468/98
QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION
(CROWN OFFICE LIST )

Royal Courts of Justice
Strand
London WC2

Friday, 9th October 1998

B e f o r e:

LORD JUSTICE BROOKE

and

MR JUSTICE SEDLEY

- - - - - - -

KENNET DISTRICT COUNCIL

-v-

YOUNG AND OTHERS

- - - - - - -

(Computer-aided Transcript of the Stenograph Notes of
Smith Bernal Reporting Limited,
180 Fleet Street,
London EC4A 2HD
Telephone No: 0171-421 4040
Fax No: 0171-831 8838
Official Shorthand Writers to the Court)

- - - - - - -

MR BARKER (instructed by Wansboroughs Solicitors, Wiltshire
SN10 1JX) appeared on behalf of the Appellant.

The Respondent did not appear and was not represented.


J U D G M E N T
(As approved by the Court)

Crown copyright
Friday 9th October 1998

22. The one exception is the exception created by section 7 of the Interpretation Act 1978, which is as follows:
"Where an Act authorises or requires any document to be served by post (whether the expression 'serve' or the expression 'give' or 'send' or any other expression is used) then, unless the contrary intention appears, the service is deemed to be effected by properly addressing, pre-paying and posting a letter containing the document and, unless the contrary is proved, to have been effected at the time at which the letter would be delivered in the ordinary course of post."
23. Particulars of the kind with which this case is concerned are authorised by statute to be served through the mechanism which I have described. If, therefore, Mr Young could show the Justices that he had posted the letter, then there would have been a deemed delivery and the gap would have been closed. This too seems to me to demonstrate that it is upon the receiving end that the law focuses and that it is the non-receipt of a response, subject only to proof of posting, that constitutes or completes the offence.

[Louise]

hi there. i really need some help

i was caught on march 13th for 50 in a 30 by a safty camera van.

i didnt get my NIP until july 16th and it was dated july 10th is it still valid?

[fairygothmother]

Hi Louise,
Are you the registered keeper of the car? Have you only recently bought it or moved address recently?

If I were you start a new thread on the main board as more people will read it and be able to help you.

Rach