Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: [NIP Wizard] First NIP since 2005
FightBack Forums > Queries > Speeding and other Criminal Offences
Big Ben
NIP Details and Circumstances
What is the name of the Constabulary? -
Date of the offence: - November 2016
Date of the NIP: - 16 days after the offence
Date you received the NIP: - 17 days after the offence
Location of offence (exact location as it appears on the NIP: important): - C905 Littlemoor Road.
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? - Hire 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 - Allegedly, 36 in a 30. At the time I saw the camera van, I remember overtaking a car which was slowing down.

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: Sat, 03 Dec 2016 12:31:36 +0000
AntonyMMM
Any particular question ?

Reply naming the driver and you should receive an offer of a speed awareness course (not having had a NIP since 2005 , you should be eligible).
Big Ben
I have countered all previous NIPs (around 5 from 2002 - 2005) with the PACE response naming myself as the driver on the "date of the alledged offence" and pointing out that, as I've not been cautioned for any criminal offence, the information I supplied could not be used in a court as evidence against me.

Is this still an option for me or has there been a change in the law since I last took this route? :-)
666
QUOTE (Big Ben @ Sat, 3 Dec 2016 - 14:36) *
I have countered all previous NIPs (around 5 from 2002 - 2005) with the PACE response naming myself as the driver on the "date of the alledged offence" and pointing out that, as I've not been cautioned for any criminal offence, the information I supplied could not be used in a court as evidence against me.

Is this still an option for me or has there been a change in the law since I last took this route? :-)


It's not been an option since 2007. See the sticky at the top of this forum.
Big Ben
Ah, that's what I feared. So, it's just a case of hands up and pay up then? ohmy.gif
Jlc
Unless you can show the (presumably) approved device was incorrect.
Big Ben
I've two hopes there, I reckon - Bob Hope and no hope... biggrin.gif
Jlc
And bob is dead cool.gif
Big Ben
Has anyone here tried the PACE route since 2007? Having just read up about the ECHR ruling and associated stuff it seems there's a grey area here and could be open to a challenge in court.
southpaw82
QUOTE (Big Ben @ Sat, 3 Dec 2016 - 17:14) *
Has anyone here tried the PACE route since 2007? Having just read up about the ECHR ruling and associated stuff it seems there's a grey area here and could be open to a challenge in court.

Based on what?
Jlc
How deep are your pockets?

What's grey, exactly?
Big Ben
Based on the law saying that the accused has to be cautioned first before appearing in court for a criminal offence. Speeding is or was a criminal offence and I rebutted all my previous NIPs using that defence as I received no caution from the speed camera.
andy_foster
QUOTE (Big Ben @ Sat, 3 Dec 2016 - 19:10) *
Based on the law saying that the accused has to be cautioned first before appearing in court for a criminal offence.


But the law does not say that.
southpaw82
QUOTE (Big Ben @ Sat, 3 Dec 2016 - 19:10) *
Based on the law saying that the accused has to be cautioned first before appearing in court for a criminal offence.

Perhaps you could show us that law?
Big Ben
Google it. I did. I have used the PACE clause successfully in the past both both for my own NIPs and those sent to family and friends. Not one constabulary tried to argue with me except the Met who once claimed they'd clocked me at 60 in the Limehouse Tunnel. They dropped the case following my second reply to their bluff and bluster letters.
southpaw82
QUOTE (Big Ben @ Sat, 3 Dec 2016 - 21:01) *
Google it. I did.

Cop out. You said it now you back it up.
andy_foster
When I was studying for my law degree, there were a number of authoritative sources of law. Google was not one of them.

N.B. "Google it" (in the context of a response to a request for an authority to support an unconventional interpretation of the law) usually translates to "we both know that I'm talking utter sh*te, but if I can't post an actual authority to support my position as none exists, but if I pretend that the other person is merely too stupid or lazy to find the authority, I can continue pretending".

Nobody is disputing that the PACE witness statement has been effective in the past. This was largely due to the police not knowing how to deal with it. That is no longer the case.
peterguk
QUOTE (Big Ben @ Sat, 3 Dec 2016 - 21:01) *
Google it. I did.


So, simple question for you to consider:

All the 000s of drivers successfully prosecuted in court. Why has not one single one appealed on the basis a cop didn't pop round to caution them?
southpaw82
QUOTE (peterguk @ Sat, 3 Dec 2016 - 21:28) *
QUOTE (Big Ben @ Sat, 3 Dec 2016 - 21:01) *
Google it. I did.


So, simple question for you to consider:

All the 000s of drivers successfully prosecuted in court. Why has not one single one appealed on the basis a cop didn't pop round to caution them?

They didn't Google it. Obviously.
andy_foster
QUOTE (peterguk @ Sat, 3 Dec 2016 - 21:28) *
So, simple question for you to consider:

All the 000s of drivers successfully prosecuted in court. Why has not one single one appealed on the basis a cop didn't pop round to caution them?


That is what is known as "begging the question" - you have made a false assumption that no motorist has appealed on the grounds that he was not cautioned, and implied it to be a settled fact.
Prior to the judgment in O'Halloran and Francis v the UK, a number of motorists lodged appeals on broadly this ground (and often others), including a chap called Gerard O'Halloran (who I met in Strasbourg).
squaredeal
QUOTE (AntonyMMM @ Sat, 3 Dec 2016 - 13:39) *
Any particular question ?

Reply naming the driver and you should receive an offer of a speed awareness course (not having had a NIP since 2005 , you should be eligible).

Which would need to be attended in Dorset
NewJudge
QUOTE (Big Ben @ Sat, 3 Dec 2016 - 21:01) *
Google it. I did. I have used the PACE clause successfully in the past both both for my own NIPs and those sent to family and friends. Not one constabulary tried to argue with me except the Met who once claimed they'd clocked me at 60 in the Limehouse Tunnel. They dropped the case following my second reply to their bluff and bluster letters.


Then it would obviously be worth giving it another run on this occasion. Promise you'll come back and let us all know how it went. Don't forget to reply to the request for driver's information (unless your defence strategy will work on that charge as well).
sgtdixie
OP, you clearly have no idea of the actual law. If you had an authority for claiming someone must be cautioned before proceedings began because you had found the information on Google you would post a link.

The world has moved on. The authorities have closed many loopholes in recent years, however cautioning someone before proceedings isn't one. It is true that sometimes they discontinue prosecutions when there is no need to legally, but that is down to incompetence.

So you have advice, if you know better show us why we are wrong.
Ocelot
IIRC there were a number of cases on Pepipoo around 2005 where some people thought they had to be cautioned before providing information about the driver, so this may be where the confusion lies.

From Pace Code C

10. Cautions

(a) When a caution must be given

10.1 A person whom there are grounds to suspect of an offence, see Note 10A,must be
cautioned before any questions about an offence, or further questions if the answers
provide the grounds for suspicion, are put to them if either the suspect’s answers or
silence, (i.e. failure or refusal to answer or answer satisfactorily) may be given in
evidence to a court in a prosecution. A person need not be cautioned if questions are
for other necessary purposes, e.g.:

(a) solely to establish their identity or ownership of any vehicle;

(b) to obtain information in accordance with any relevant statutory requirement

Is it (a) above which also means they don't have to be cautioned if questioned about who was driving the vehicle at the time of an alleged offence?
southpaw82
(B)
glasgow_bhoy
QUOTE (Big Ben @ Sat, 3 Dec 2016 - 21:01) *
Google it. I did. I have used the PACE clause successfully in the past both both for my own NIPs and those sent to family and friends. Not one constabulary tried to argue with me except the Met who once claimed they'd clocked me at 60 in the Limehouse Tunnel. They dropped the case following my second reply to their bluff and bluster letters.

I call bullshit.

You actually titled this topic 'First NIP since 2005' and now your saying you've had them in the past and used PACE.

How can this be your first NIP if you've fought them in the past?
andy_foster
QUOTE (glasgow_bhoy @ Sun, 4 Dec 2016 - 19:25) *
You actually titled this topic 'First NIP since 2005' and now your saying you've had them in the past and used PACE.

How can this be your first NIP if you've fought them in the past?


Read what you wrote. If that doesn't answer your question, read it again.
The Rookie
But it does indicate that the OP's experience is 11 years out of date!
Ocelot
QUOTE (southpaw82 @ Sun, 4 Dec 2016 - 19:21) *
(B)


Cheers.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2019 Invision Power Services, Inc.