Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: [NIP Wizard] nip ten minutes wrong for nipc and was it nipc???
FightBack Forums > Queries > Speeding and other Criminal Offences
SIZZA
NIP Details and Circumstances
What is the name of the Constabulary? -
Date of the offence: - February 2017
Date of the NIP: - 10 days after the offence
Date you received the NIP: - 12 days after the offence
Location of offence (exact location as it appears on the NIP: important): - m11 motorway, mp 52.8 south bound, essex, united kingdom
Was the NIP addressed to you? - No
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? - wife's 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 - After 40 mins stuck in mway traffic i took a photo of tipped over lorry as i passed at crawling speed. Officer saw me take photo, wife has now received nip/driver detail request. Two big issues (i) time of nip is ten minutes different to time photo on phone proves i was there (ii) charge is nipc and at that speed on that road in those conditions, seems hard to say i was nipc.

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? - No

NIP Wizard Recommendation
Based on these responses the Wizard suggested that this course of action should be considered:
  • Do nothing!

    The police are not requesting the information from you, they are requesting it from the person the NIP is addressed to.
    Wait until you receive a NIP addressed to you personally, then come back here.

Generated by the PePiPoo NIP Wizard v3.3.2: Thu, 09 Mar 2017 19:17:39 +0000

So does the NIP mis-stating the time by ten minutes give me a get out or will the magistrate just hit me anyway under a slip rule?

And do i have an chance of arguing i was in proper control? I was only taking a photo as i passed at genuine 5 mph. there are other details but that's the nub of it.

All help much appreciated.
southpaw82
Last time I checked NIPC didn't require an NIP. If no NIP is required it doesn't really matter if the time is ten minutes out.

Even if an NIP was required you'd need to be disadvantaged by the error, which it doesn't seem you are.

In any case the driver still has to be named.
SIZZA
Thank you, Southpaw, also for promptness!

I was looking ahead, assuming i would get a correct nip once my wife has returned the driver details. So my assumption is that the charge will state that i was there ten minutes before i was (and i think i can prove that). On the second point, I think it would be really hard to argue i was not in proper control...but will the magistrate pay even the slightest attention or just throw the book at me anyway?

Sizza.
Logician
Your wife will have to reply naming you as the driver and in due course you will receive a document addressed to you; do not try to shortcut this by replying on the form sent to your wife, no good can come of it. The time difference has no significance, you were there and are aware of the incident. Clearly you were holding the phone and looking out of the side window, so I would say it is a slam dunk nipc. Bear in mind that is the charge used to prosecute mobile phone use before a separate offence was created, but of course it is your right to go to court and argue that you were in a position to have proper control, however if you lose the costs have a guideline figure of £620.
peterguk
QUOTE (SIZZA @ Thu, 9 Mar 2017 - 19:28) *
I think it would be really hard to argue i was not in proper control...


The charge isn't "not in proper control". It's "driver not being in position to have proper control". Difficult to argue the latter if phone in one hand looking out the window. But it is your right to take it to court.
SIZZA
Thank you again, Soutpaw. On the time difference you confirm my instinct which was that the time might have been wrong but so what.

The real issue I am unhappy is the speed. At 5 mph on a motorway that has a single file of traffic under police control where there was a load of road space every which way (2 lane motorway, tipped over lorry from other carriageway blocking half of our fast lane). I just didnt need two hands on the wheel because there were no corners and there was nothing that could possibly have happened that i would not have seen coming from miles away at that speed and i would have been able to brake to halt in a split second. I was holding the phone at arms length looking straight ahead, so no argument about not having eyes on road either. 50 years old, clean licence, took the photo only to show my boy that i really was so late picking him from school becuase of traffic!
peterguk
QUOTE (SIZZA @ Thu, 9 Mar 2017 - 19:39) *
I was holding the phone ... looking straight ahead


QUOTE (SIZZA @ Thu, 9 Mar 2017 - 19:23) *
i took a photo of tipped over lorry as i passed
SIZZA
Peterguk - Thank you.

Yep - holding phone straight ahead of me so it looked through the windscreen and with my old iphone you can very easily hit the shutter button with the thumb of the hand in which you are holding the phone, it's the "natural" way to do it. I take your point entirely but actually it really wasn't dangerous. It's the low speed thing and the circs. On a normal road at 30mph it would have been insane. But at 5 mph in those circs it wasnt. My wife says i was daft and i agree with her - but was it nipc?
Jlc
There's no strict definition - having one hand off the wheel in itself is normal but doing something with it like eating an apple, drinking or holding a phone and taking a photo will be hard to defend. The speed may assist but it will still be difficult.
SIZZA
JLC - thank you to you also.

To all of you - this is SO helpful and i am very grateful for the no-nonsense, informed advice.

Sizza.
notmeatloaf
QUOTE (SIZZA @ Thu, 9 Mar 2017 - 19:58) *
but actually it really wasn't dangerous.

Police would seem to agree with you, they could pursue dangerous driving which is a minimum one year ban.
The Rookie
It doesn't have to be dangerous for it to be in a case where the driver is not in a position to excercise proper control.

For example if the traffic is accelerating away from the incident and the driver holding the phone and taking the photo can't/doesn't because of that its a slam dunk guilty, if every driver does that then the hold up is bigger and takes longer to clear than was necessary.
Gan
I can't see mention of the offence other than what members have assumed

If it's "using a phone" rather than "not in a position..." you have no defence other than Jimmy Carr's
The guidance notes before the mobile phone legislation was introduced included stationary traffic

There are frequent reports of motorway queues because drivers are taking photos so I can't see the magistrates having any sympathy for your argument

A ten minutes difference on a NIP is irrelevant
Logician
OP states "charge is nipc and at that speed on that road in those conditions, seems hard to say i was nipc." He of course mis-states that, the offence is not being in a position to have proper control, which is a bit different.
Gan
Thanks

Didn't look at the heading
SIZZA

To reply to Gan, it is NIPC and not “using a phone”.

As the person up the sharp end on this one, The Rookie’s point about not accelerating away seems to the one where I lose most. Gan supports this with his observation on losing magistrates’ sympathy through being the cause of a queue. I think you must be right and I am grateful for you having shown me this now rather than learning it in the court.

In my head, the basis of my defence was that in those conditions and circumstances (which I can demonstrate by having photos looking ahead) and at the speed I was travelling and because my eyes were off the road less than anyone gawping through a side window or looking down to adjust the temperature, there was nothing at all that could have happened that I would not have been able to see and react to in plenty of time. Holding the camera in one hand did not compromise to any degree my being in a position to control the car (Logician, this is why the conditions were relevant to the proper meaning of NIPC).

The Rookie and Gan’s retort is that the only reason I was travelling so slowly was because I was taking the photograph. I think this is undeniable. Down I go.

I did not accelerate as I would have done had I not been photographing. It might be understandable after sitting there for 40 mins but it is still wrong. It’s bad luck for me that I time this just when the penalty has doubled.

There is still a technical point whether that behaviour is NIPC (I think not). Driving without due care etc or some other offence is probably more appropriate but that is not a hair for me to start splitting.

Again, thank you to all.
peterguk
QUOTE (SIZZA @ Fri, 10 Mar 2017 - 13:07) *
There is still a technical point whether that behaviour is NIPC


Is there?

As i said in an earlier post, NIPC is not the charge.
SIZZA
NIP Details and Circumstances
What is the name of the Constabulary? -
Date of the offence: - February 2017
Date of the NIP: - 11 days after the offence
Date you received the NIP: - 13 days after the offence
Location of offence (exact location as it appears on the NIP: important): - m11 motorway, mp 52.8 south bound, essex, united kingdom
Was the NIP addressed to you? - No
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? - wife's 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 am goign to be charged with Not In Proper Control. After extremely helpful discussion here on separate topic (see those posts) I will take the COFP if it is offered.

Question- offence on 23/2/17. Legislation introducing new penalties introduced i think 1/3/17. So do I get hit with new (6 points and £200) or old (3 points and £100)?


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? - No

NIP Wizard Recommendation
Based on these responses the Wizard suggested that this course of action should be considered:
  • Do nothing!

    The police are not requesting the information from you, they are requesting it from the person the NIP is addressed to.
    Wait until you receive a NIP addressed to you personally, then come back here.

Generated by the PePiPoo NIP Wizard v3.3.2: Fri, 10 Mar 2017 13:27:48 +0000
southpaw82
No. Also, one case, one thread is a rule here.
The Rookie
To reiterate again, the offence is NOT not being in proper control, it is not being in a position to have proper control.

Take it to an extreme example, you could drive down the motorway at 70mph with your eyes shut, if nothing happened you would be in control, but in the event something did occur you would not be in a position to be in proper control. That occurrence doesn't have to happen for you to not be in the position to have proper control.
notmeatloaf
Just to add as well the offence is

QUOTE
No person shall drive or cause or permit any other person to drive, a motor vehicle on a road if he is in such a position that he cannot have proper control of the vehicle or have a full view of the road and traffic ahead.


So your own admission that you were holding the phone up in front of you would seem to sink you as you would no longer have a full view of the road in front of you.
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.