PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

[NIP Wizard] jass
jass
post Fri, 17 Jan 2014 - 13:54
Post #1


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 3
Joined: 15 Jan 2014
Member No.: 67,989



NIP Details and Circumstances
What is the name of the Constabulary? -
Date of the offence: - December 2013
Date of the NIP: - 33 days after the offence
Date you received the NIP: - 35 days after the offence
Location of offence (exact location as it appears on the NIP: important): - M1 Northbound
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? - Company Car
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 - I dont really have a description. I received the NIP and it was a bit of a nasty surprise!

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)? - No
Is the NIP addressed to you personally? - Yes
Although you are not the Registered Keeper, were you the keeper of the vehicle concerned (the person normally responsible for it) at the time of the alleged offence? - Yes
Were you driving? - Yes
Which country did the alleged offence take place in? - England

NIP Wizard Recommendation
Based on these responses the Wizard suggested that this course of action should be considered:
  • The law requires you to provide the information requested in the Section 172 notice within the 28 day period, naming yourself as the driver. If you are considering obtaining formal legal advice, do so before returning the notice.

    You should note that there is nothing to be gained by responding any earlier than you have to at any stage of the process. You are likely to receive a Conditional Offer of a Fixed Penalty (COFP) and further reminder(s). If you want to continue the fight, you should ignore all correspondence from the police until you receive a summons. You need to understand from the outset that while you will receive much help and support from members on the forums, you will need to put time and effort into fighting your case and ultimately be prepared to stand up in court to defend yourself.

Generated by the PePiPoo NIP Wizard v3.3.2: Fri, 17 Jan 2014 13:50:22 +0000

Related to my other post http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=86989
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
 
Start new topic
Replies (1 - 5)
Advertisement
post Fri, 17 Jan 2014 - 13:54
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
bhara
post Fri, 17 Jan 2014 - 14:00
Post #2


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 40
Joined: 27 Oct 2013
Member No.: 66,269



It is very vague and non specific location. Is it the same location on both of your NIPs?
Guess, you have a valid case for Vague Location defence
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
sgtdixie
post Fri, 17 Jan 2014 - 14:13
Post #3


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 9,529
Joined: 5 May 2011
From: UK
Member No.: 46,399



A vague locus challenge only applies to an NIP which is mandated by RTOA 1988. This went to the company. What the OP has received is not an NIP which is legally required so can the OP be disadvantaged by a document which is optional? A point for legal discussion I suspect.

In any event the OP must reply within 28 days of receiving the notice naming the driver. He can of course state the NIP is too vague but at this time we don't know if it is or even if it is whether it disadvantages him.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
The Rookie
post Mon, 20 Jan 2014 - 05:03
Post #4


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 45,438
Joined: 9 Sep 2003
From: Warwickshire
Member No.: 317



I agree, but it is very unlikely that the NIP to the registered keeper used anything but the same description of the location.

I also suspect that is not the location given and that this is yet another from the HADECameraSystem in the VariableSpeedLimit section.


--------------------
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 Mon, 20 Jan 2014 - 18:29
Post #5


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 2,635
Joined: 5 Jan 2012
Member No.: 52,178



QUOTE (sgtdixie @ Fri, 17 Jan 2014 - 14:13) *
A vague locus challenge only applies to an NIP which is mandated by RTOA 1988. This went to the company. What the OP has received is not an NIP which is legally required so can the OP be disadvantaged by a document which is optional?

In this case, I would say "yes, possibly". The M1 is a very long road. Even if restricted to the counties named, Beds & Herts (M1 doesn't go through Cambridgeshire), then there is plenty of scope to switch drivers somewhere along the way. The NIP may give the time, which could help in such a scenario, but it would be easy to change drivers quickly somewhere without noticing the time, especially as it's now over a month later.

However, this is all a bit theoretical. For all we know, the OP was the only driver on the day, or the NIP does, in fact, say more than the OP has stated.

Need more detail from the OP to make any sensible response.

This post has been edited by The Slithy Tove: Mon, 20 Jan 2014 - 18:29
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
sgtdixie
post Mon, 20 Jan 2014 - 22:03
Post #6


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 9,529
Joined: 5 May 2011
From: UK
Member No.: 46,399



QUOTE (The Slithy Tove @ Mon, 20 Jan 2014 - 18:29) *
QUOTE (sgtdixie @ Fri, 17 Jan 2014 - 14:13) *
A vague locus challenge only applies to an NIP which is mandated by RTOA 1988. This went to the company. What the OP has received is not an NIP which is legally required so can the OP be disadvantaged by a document which is optional?

In this case, I would say "yes, possibly". The M1 is a very long road. Even if restricted to the counties named, Beds & Herts (M1 doesn't go through Cambridgeshire), then there is plenty of scope to switch drivers somewhere along the way. The NIP may give the time, which could help in such a scenario, but it would be easy to change drivers quickly somewhere without noticing the time, especially as it's now over a month later.

However, this is all a bit theoretical. For all we know, the OP was the only driver on the day, or the NIP does, in fact, say more than the OP has stated.

Need more detail from the OP to make any sensible response.

You have to distinguish from a vague s172 and a vague NIP. The OP has not in law received a statutory NIP so what he has is merely a notice telling him of the allegation. If he has swapped drivers he may have a defence to a vague s172 requirement if he can show the court he could not supply the required detail because of a defect in the s172 requirement.
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: Wednesday, 12th August 2020 - 01:17
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.