Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: [NIP Wizard] NIP has incorrect/non existing location for offence.
FightBack Forums > Queries > Speeding and other Criminal Offences
ukukukuk
NIP Details and Circumstances
What is the name of the Constabulary? -
Date of the offence: - November 2017
Date of the NIP: - 8 days after the offence
Date you received the NIP: - 9 days after the offence
Location of offence (exact location as it appears on the NIP: important): - DOVERCOURT ROAD, HIGH HEATON
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? -
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 - Received a request for information to identify the driver of vehicle. However the offence location doesn't exist.

It states 'Dovercourt Road, High Heaton' and there is no Dovercourt Road in High Heaton. There is a Dovercourt Road in Walker, a few miles away but I've never been there in my life.

On the 15th I did see a manned handheld mobile speed trap near where I live in High Heaton, it was on 'Dovedale Gardens'. I presume this is just a clerical error when they've entered info on to a computer, mixing up Dovedale Gardens for Dovercourt Road... not sure how you can do that and as I say there's technically no Dovercourt road in this area.

Dovedale Gdns has a 20 mph limit on it, when I saw the van I might have been slightly over 20.

Is the fact the NIP's location of offence incorrect grounds to get it dismissed in someway?

Should I just send the NIP back with my details on it and wait to see what NP's next step is?

The NIP states "where it is alleged that the Endorsable offence of Speeding - exceed 20mph - Local Order - manned equipment was committed." There's no indication what the actual speed was.

Any advice appreciated.


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? - 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: Tue, 05 Dec 2017 17:55:49 +0000
andy_foster
Whilst the requirement to serve a NIP within the 14 days (subject to any statutory exceptions, which do not appear to apply in this case) is mandatory, the required details are 'merely directory' - which means that as you are aware of the incident in question, an error does not invalidate the NIP.

AFAIK there is no case law regarding such errors in an s. 172 requirement, but I would be very wary of trying to be too clever with the s. 172 response in a case with such a minor error. There is a slim chance that they may drop it out of embarrassment if you query the requirement.
ukukukuk
QUOTE (andy_foster @ Tue, 5 Dec 2017 - 18:22) *
Whilst the requirement to serve a NIP within the 14 days (subject to any statutory exceptions, which do not appear to apply in this case) is mandatory, the required details are 'merely directory' - which means that as you are aware of the incident in question, an error does not invalidate the NIP.

AFAIK there is no case law regarding such errors in an s. 172 requirement, but I would be very wary of trying to be too clever with the s. 172 response in a case with such a minor error. There is a slim chance that they may drop it out of embarrassment if you query the requirement.


Thanks for swift reply Andy. Is the location of the incident really considered a minor error?

I guess if they have a photo of my car and proof I was speeding, arguing that plod doesn't know what road he's stood on won't make a bit of difference. unsure.gif
Jlc
QUOTE (ukukukuk @ Tue, 5 Dec 2017 - 18:37) *
Is the location of the incident really considered a minor error?

Andy covered that in his reply. You do not appear to have been disadvantaged by the 'error'.
Churchmouse
QUOTE (Jlc @ Tue, 5 Dec 2017 - 18:49) *
QUOTE (ukukukuk @ Tue, 5 Dec 2017 - 18:37) *
Is the location of the incident really considered a minor error?

Andy covered that in his reply. You do not appear to have been disadvantaged by the 'error'.

So, if he had been the dozy or unobservant type, blindly hurtling around High Heaton at a white-knuckle speed slightly in excess of 20mph, he would have had no clue what location they had "meant" to specify in the NIP, and thus would have been disadvantaged? Interesting. Don't query before 14 days...

--Churchmouse
Jlc
QUOTE (Churchmouse @ Tue, 5 Dec 2017 - 19:18) *
Don't query before 14 days...

Indeed - they may consider cancelling out of 'embarrassment'. Unless it was 80 in a 20... laugh.gif

I favour a 'bemused' phonecall.
Logician
I favour replying to the notice and stating that the car was not in Dovercourt Road, Walker, on the day in question, the car was in High Heaton, but there is no Dovercourt Road in High Heaton to your knowledge. Reply after 14 days to avoid a corrected NIP being issued.
peterguk
QUOTE (Logician @ Tue, 5 Dec 2017 - 19:51) *
I favour replying to the notice and stating that the car was not in Dovercourt Road, Walker, on the day in question, the car was in High Heaton, but there is no Dovercourt Road in High Heaton to your knowledge. Reply after 14 days to avoid a corrected NIP being issued.


+1
ukukukuk
Quick update. Sent back section 172 with my details. Offer of speed awareness course sent 14th Dec. Opened the weblink to look at it, 1 day before 28 day period. System said I had to have taken course by 30th Dec. Obviously another error on their end as you have 28 days to accept then 4 months to take. Called the fixed penalty unit and explained the 2 glaring errors. Incorrect address and the inability to book the course.

Charges dropped! YAY biggrin.gif

Btw found out it was an alleged 29 in 20.
Jlc
Ok, the 'embarrassment' as I mentioned earlier. Result.
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.