Please can someone help.

I was the the registered keeper of my vehicle.
I reported my vehicle stollen on 20th July 2020 - having last used it back in March/April pre covid/lockdown.
The vehicle was retrieved by police and scrapped on 28th July.

On 27th August I received a Notice of Intended Prosecution (NIP). Speeding camera - excess speed.
Date of offence was 7th June. This was most certainly the thieves - as was in an area I've never been - later found in the same area destroyed.
As the NIP was dated 27/8/20 for an offence on 7/06/20 rather than claim it was the thieves I asked to reject on the grounds the NIP was issued >14days since offence. Easy....

The police reply was that the NIP was issued in time - and any subsequent issue has no time restriction.
This puzzled me as i'd received nothing. My father wondered if I hadn't updated my address with the DVLA since moving - but I have no way of checking (that I know of) as I subsequently scrapped the vehicle and so don't have the V5. Either way I have to trust the police are correct that the NIP was issued - even if lost in the post.

On the NIP - there is no means to reply that the bike was stollen - you HAVE to name someone as the driver or keeper.
I have also tried calling the camera unit (suggested on the form) - only to be cut off while on hold every single time.
I basically don't know what to do and this is causing me a lot of stress. I have a clean licence and I'm not willing to accepting points for something I didn't do.

Any Help / advice really appreciated.

Where was it for 3 months that you didn't notice it had gone? This seems highly strange.............

The problem is you can't reject a notice and the request to name the driver is valid (it's not subject to the 14 day requirement).

So, you do have to reply substantively. (Even if the NIP was 'late')

You do not have to use their form - and in some cases doesn't fit the circumstances (as here).

First question though, I presume you only discovered it was stolen on 20th July (or thereabouts). There's a gap from 7th June?

OP, where was the vehicle between March and 20th July?

Did anyone else have access to the keys during this time?

It would do you more good writing what you have written here and posting it to the police.

That will work.

You have 28 days beginning with the date of service to provide the information required under s. 172 RTA 1988 (subject to any applicable statutory defences). The fact that you have tried to reject the notice does not negate the fact that you still have time to comply with the requirement.

If your car was stolen at the time of the speeding offence, arguably you were not the person keeping the vehicle and your obligation is simply to provide any information that is in your power to give and that might lead to the identification of the driver.

The problem you potentially face is one of credibility. Reporting your car stolen some time after the offence is not generally the best starting position - although there may well be some good reasons why you were not aware that it had been stolen. Trying (and failing) to 'be clever' by rejecting the NIP on a technicality, rather than simply explaining that the car had been stolen, etc. would tend to challenge your credibility further.

I have seen several truly awful s. 172 notices which purport to make unlawful requirements of the addressee. and I would generally be the first to play 'silly b*ggers' with them on a point of principle, but in your current position (as told to us), I would be minded to go out of my way to be cooperative.

In fact, Andy, the vehicle was a motor bike. There could be some mileage in this if, say, it was locked up in a remote lock-up or garage which was infrequently visited, so the theft was not readily noticed. However, the OP has been reluctant (both here and where he has posted the problem elsewhere) to explain why it took him so long to realise his bike was missing.

Ok, I may try that thank you.

Firstly thank you to those who have made supportive replies.

I had selected 'email notifications' when posting this, but received none so assumed there were no replies - it is the weekend after all. So apologies for my lack of responses to some points that have been made/questions asked...



For clarity - This vehicle was a 125cc moped.

I last used it going to work in March before lockdown started. I next needed to use it (to go to work) 20th July - the date I found it missing and so reported this to the police, who later found it abandoned and broken beyond repair. I obviously have the crime reference number to substantiate this.

It was still a further month before I received the NIP.

Why did I initially reject the NIP? On the information I had, this was the first and only NIP. It was late under those facts. By law, rather than try and sell my story, it made sense to simply reject as I expected an immediate outcome in my favour.

Failing a successful rejection I would then have to go down the route of making the point it was stollen - likely to be asked all those questions some of you are now asking me - thus this would be a more challenging route.

For those questioning the validity of my 'story, if i suspected I was going to get a ticket from an offence in June, why would I wait until 6weeks later to report my bike stollen as a 'get out'. It makes no sense. It's also not what happened.

Again, I really appreciate the help of those who have offered solutions.

Do you have anything that may help substantiate your whereabouts on the 7th June. Particularly around the time of the offence ? Location data on your phone for example. Use of banking facilities could help. Something from employer if working, any appointments.

Where was it parked for those 3 months ? On the road ? On a pavement somewhere ? On private land ? Your garden, a garage ?

If left unused parked for that length of time it might just have come to the attention of your local highways as a potentially abandoned vehicle.

I guess you mean scooter. A moped would have to be 50cc or less.

In hindsight you should have told them the full information - for which you must now. You obviously cannot provide the name of the rider as it was stolen but you can provide the events and crime reference number.

They may simply drop it or they may investigate further.

No one is suggesting otherwise but it has been known for people to do quite extraordinary things in an attempt to avoid a minor speeding offence.

Yup -seems that way. It's frustrating that on receipt of the NIP there is no 'issue' number or history provided with it - i.e., had I known this was not the first NIP, but a subsequent NIP, then my initial action would have been different.

Issue with hindsight is it's always 20:20

Sure, but as noted above the s172 requirement is not 'invalidated' after 14 days. Anyway, give them all the info you have and see what happens next.

What was the OP doing during the period from 7th June onwards? Furloughed? Holiday? Lock down indoors? He's said the bike was in a remote lock-up garage. Any witnesses to say where he was on the date of the alleged speeding offence?

Wasn't it NewJudge that posited the "remote lockup" scenario? I can't see that the OP has confirmed that.

This is why suggesting facts or engaging in speculation is often unwise. Advice needs to be given on the basis of the facts presented by the OP - by all means get those facts but they need to come from the OP.

It appears new judge is privy to the OPs other sources of enquiry.

Following the short discussion with Jlp I've simply replied stating the info I have. FYI the bike was simply on my drive, not locked up, but also not being used. I guess the phrase out of sight, out of mind applies.

FWIW this is my response - minor details omitted:

Dear Officer in Charge,
I write to acknowledge receipt of your recent communication related to the above referenced NIP, dated dd/mm/yyyy and received on dd/mm/yyyy.

I was the registered keeper of the vehicle at the time of the alleged offence.
I was not the driver at the time of the alleged offence.
I am unable to provide the details of the driver at the time of the alleged offence.
At the time of the alleged offence the vehicle was stolen and not in my possession.
At the time of the alleged offence the vehicle was being driven without my authority.

At some point in time prior to the time of the alleged offence the vehicle was stolen. I had no knowledge of the theft at the time of the alleged offence. At the time of the alleged offence the vehicle was not in use by myself due to COVID related travel and social restrictions. The location of the offence was over 5 miles from my permanent residence and as such was also beyond the travel distance permitted in (country). I am a registered health care professional and I adhered rigidly to (Countries) Government COVID safety advice.

The last time I know I had possession of the vehicle was dd/mm/yyyy. The vehicle was used for commuting to my place of work – (place of work). The first time since dd/mm/yyyy that I had to attend my place of work was dd/mm/yyyy. On this date, dd/mm/yyyy, I found my vehicle had been stolen. I immediately reported the vehicle stolen to the (region) Police. The crime reference number is xxxxxxxxxx.

I draw further attention to the location of the offence at (place) ‘the’ Road (Nr jct with ‘the’ Rd) ‘area’ ‘city’. The vehicle was located by and retrieved by (region) Police less than 2 miles away from that place of alleged offence at (place where found). The vehicle had been abandoned and was no longer road worthy. Subsequently, the vehicle had to be scrapped as it was damaged beyond repair and was scrapped shortly after I received the vehicle from (locality) Police station. The date the vehicle was scrapped was dd/mm/yyyy.

With respect to my location at the time of the alleged offence I have accessed iPhone tracking data recorded and stored on Google Maps, to obtain my location, see appendix 1. Google maps demonstrates I went cycling in the morning, returning home at 12:08. From 12:08 until 18:12 I was at my permanent residential address. Please see the attached screen shot (appendix 1) demonstrating; 1) confirmation of my account details (top right corner), 2) the timeline for 7th June 2020 (left menu), and 3) that my location at 15:41 (the time of the alleged offence) was at my permanent residential address [home (state address)] , which is registered with Google Maps.

On the grounds that the vehicle was stolen and driven without my authorisation at the time of the alleged offence, and that I have demonstrated by whereabouts as being at my home address at the time of the alleged offence, I respectfully request that you drop the case against me.

Thank you for your cooperation.



I'll update the forum once I receive a response.

I would remove the last paragraph, it doesn't add anything.

The second to last paragraph I would trim down, where you were is wholly irrelevant, you're not being asked where you were but who was driving the car where it was. Establish you were elsewhere but I think that's too much details and dilutes the important bit.

Your problem is that your first response isn't really what would be seen as the action of an innocent man and on that basis the Police may decide your reply needs testing in court now.

I would leave the second to last paragraph as it is, and remove the last paragraph. I would say it's unlikely the police would want to go to court, in the first instance if they want to confirm the veracity they're more likely to come round for "a chat", as a remarkable % of people who make up convoluted stories tend to "reconsider" their response once the local booby comes round.

As there will be no "reconsideration" in this instance it is unlikely the threshold for prosecution would be met so I see no real chance of court action. To bring court proceedings, there has to be a realistic prospect of conviction. As there is an explanation to the failure to name the driver that is consistent with innocence and which is the police will have no viable rebuttal to, a prosecution would be pretty close to an abuse of process and there's no way the CPS would take it forward.