Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: [NIP Wizard] Scottish nip going to court
FightBack Forums > Queries > Speeding and other Criminal Offences
Transit187
NIP Details and Circumstances
What is the name of the Constabulary? -
Date of the offence: - August 2016
Date of the NIP: - 2 days after the offence
Date you received the NIP: - 7 days after the offence
Location of offence (exact location as it appears on the NIP: important): - A9 public road between Drumochter and Dalwhinnie (A889), Highland
Was the NIP addressed to you? - Yes
Was the NIP sent by first class post, second class or recorded delivery? - Not known
If your are not the Registered Keeper, what is your relationship to the vehicle? -
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 - Drifted above limit 70 on 60.
Anyway sent back unsigned nip twice then a few letters past back and forth before got visit from the officer said nothing sent onway with no interview under caution now got citation that getting sent back NG.
Now just wondering is it still case that no trials have went ahead in Scotland for unsigned and what's the chance of it happen
Sorry for poor grammar
thanks in advance


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)? - Yes
Did the first NIP arrive within 14 days? - Yes
Although you are the Registered Keeper, were you also 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? - Scotland

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.

    Depending on your circumstances, you may wish to consider completing the form, but returning it unsigned. By doing so there is a risk that you will be convicted under s172, which would attract 6 penalty points and a fine; in most cases this is likely to exceed the penalty for the speeding offence itself.

    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: Mon, 13 Mar 2017 18:38:40 +0000
Jlc
What offence(s) are on the citation?
Transit187
Rtra 1984 sec 88-89
Rta 1988 sec172 (2)(a)and (3)
The Rookie
We have yet to hear of a PF taking an S172 all the way to a trial based purely on the response being unsigned. We have seen it taken to the brink and them try and do a deal to the speeding (and some defendants accept that).

Of course its possible you are really unlucky and have been chosen as a test case.
Transit187
Thanks Rookie
Just what I was looking to find out for time being just couldn't find anything resent on matter will keep PePiPoo updated as still very early stages so time will tell
Another quick question if it was to go and loss at trial what I be looking max ban for taking the piss?
Gan
When does it say that the offence took place ?

The issue here is that he failed to reply to a verbal request
The speeding has timed out
AntonyMMM
QUOTE (Transit187 @ Mon, 13 Mar 2017 - 18:38) *
got visit from the officer said nothing sent onway with no interview under caution


What exactly happened on this visit - what were you asked and what did you say ?
southpaw82
QUOTE (Gan @ Tue, 14 Mar 2017 - 08:32) *
When does it say that the offence took place ?

The issue here is that he failed to reply to a verbal request
The speeding has timed out

The verbal request is not a fresh request, there is only one (the first one). Think it's a Scottish case too.
The Rookie
Scotland doesn't have sentencing guidelines but the sentencing is usually broadly inline with the E&W ones (maybe worse for an Englishman after the weekends thrashi....sorry match).

The penalty for the S172 is 6 points or a ban, while a ban is theoretically possible its vanishingly unlikely even for taking the pi55. Assuming they push it to trial and you lose. You would of course have the option of appealing the verdict or sentence anyway.
Transit187
Cheers for Rookie

As for ploice and things don't want to be saying to must at moments as dealing with things the now
All I will say is no warrant no law to make any one sign and no gun to my head so please leave me alone close door they don't get to ask unless they got one of them
Date of offence august 2016
NewJudge
Well at least the speeding matter has timed out now. That just leaves you with the S172 to worry about.
Transit187
Nope papers were sent out on last unfortunately not that i see it as to mush of problem tho
Gan
What is the date on the citation that they allege you committed the S172 offence ?

This ought to be 28 days after the S172 was served and cannot possibly be in August when the alleged speeding took place

If not, is it the date of the verbal request because, as SP has pointed out, they cannot serve a second request ?
andy_foster
QUOTE (Gan @ Tue, 14 Mar 2017 - 08:32) *
The speeding has timed out


Que? (The OP has received a citation which libels both charges. We do not know when it was issued or served. It would seem a bit of a stretch to assume that the speeding charge was issued out of time).

1. When was the citation served?
2. When was the citation issued?
3. What date does the citation allege that the s. 89(1) RTRA 1984 offence was committed?
4. What date does the citation allege that the s. 172(3) RTA 1988 offence was committed?
Transit187
There is no date for 172 it's all part of same charge and yes it from end of august
as said the dates have all been check and there bang on by a day 1st thing I looked at
didn't bring my junk mail to work with me so can't give more details
It's not first beating the con it's only the first time they wanted to take things futher that's all
andy_foster
QUOTE (Transit187 @ Tue, 14 Mar 2017 - 21:35) *
There is no date for 172 it's all part of same charge


If that is correct (and I very much doubt that it is), it would seem likely that the s. 172 charge was fatally flawed.
southpaw82
QUOTE (andy_foster @ Tue, 14 Mar 2017 - 22:00) *
QUOTE (Transit187 @ Tue, 14 Mar 2017 - 21:35) *
There is no date for 172 it's all part of same charge


If that is correct (and I very much doubt that it is), it would seem likely that the s. 172 charge was fatally flawed.

It's likely both charges would be bad for duplicity.
andy_foster
Quite how a speeding charge and an s. 172 charge could be made out from the same set of facts is beyond me. AIUI in E & W, duplicity is only a problem if the prosecutor somehow manages to proceed with both charges - if he chooses which to proceed with before the trial starts, then everything in the garden is rosey (unless you are playing ball games where prohibited).
southpaw82
QUOTE (andy_foster @ Tue, 14 Mar 2017 - 23:38) *
Quite how a speeding charge and an s. 172 charge could be made out from the same set of facts is beyond me. AIUI in E & W, duplicity is only a problem if the prosecutor somehow manages to proceed with both charges - if he chooses which to proceed with before the trial starts, then everything in the garden is rosey (unless you are playing ball games where prohibited).

No single count can charge a defendant with more than one offence (at least in England). As you say, the prosecutor would (in England) have to apply to amend the indictment/summons/written charge and proceed with one or other of the offences.
Transit187
Andy I've no reson to lie about what I am saying yes am keeping facts close to me for my own safety as I won't have it being used agents me

Southpaw I've heard of that before what exactly dose mean?
Thanks see the answers

So there still playing game's then cause they shouldn't be able to get one without the other in Scotland
southpaw82
I doubt there's much harm in telling us what offence(s) appears on your citation, leaving out dates etc.
Transit187
QUOTE (Transit187 @ Mon, 13 Mar 2017 - 19:47) *
Rtra 1984 sec 88-89
Rta 1988 sec172 (2)(a)and (3)

As says that's the charge it's on it all part of one charge
andy_foster
QUOTE (Transit187 @ Wed, 15 Mar 2017 - 00:07) *
Andy I've no reson to lie about what I am saying yes am keeping facts close to me for my own safety as I won't have it being used agents me


I never suggested that you were lying. I am however suggesting that the information that you have provided is almost certainly flawed.

QUOTE (Transit187 @ Wed, 15 Mar 2017 - 00:38) *
QUOTE (Transit187 @ Mon, 13 Mar 2017 - 19:47) *
Rtra 1984 sec 88-89
Rta 1988 sec172 (2)(a)and (3)

As says that's the charge it's on it all part of one charge


Those are not charges, they are merely references to the relevant legislation.

An example of a charge (albeit from an English case, and drafted somewhat incompetently) is as follows

"Between 26.08.2004 and 24.09.2004 at Banbury being the keeper of a vehicle, namely motor vehicle (Car) the driver of which was alleged to have been guilty of an offence under Sections 82(1) and 89(1) of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 and Schedule 2 to the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988, failed to give such information as to the identity of the driver as you were required to give by or on behalf of the Chief Officer of Police for Thames Valley. Contrary to Section 172(3) of the Road Traffic Act 1988 and Schedule 2 to the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988."

Basically, "On <date>" or "Between <date 1> and <date 2>", "you did <bad thing, in some detail>, contrary to <legislation>"

If you have actually received a citation which only details the charge(s) as you have described, I would strongly suggest that you get somebody who understands Scottish criminal law, and speaks fluent English, to have a look at it.
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.