Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: NIP: does the time have to be accurate?
FightBack Forums > Queries > Speeding and other Criminal Offences
Hairlocks
Does the time of the offence in a NIP need to be acurate Have evidence That I was entering the access gate at work 3 miles away at the same time quoted on the NIP.

Another point is that NIP was only delivered today(19/04/04) by the postman, but it is dated with 05/04/04 for an alleged offence on the 31/03/04. Is 14 days in the post system a resonable amount of time? or 19 days to get to me?
DW190
Hairlocks,

Took a long time from the 5/4/04 to 19/04/04.

Look on the envelope both front and back for a date it was put into the postal system.

Usually with franked mail it is on the sealing flap on the back.
Hairlocks
I can't read the date on the back it has a line that reads
A23704699
but the next line down is unreadable.
DW190
QUOTE (Hairlocks)
I can't read the date on the back it has a line that reads
A23704699
but the next line down is unreadable.

Try a magnifying glass.

If the date is 13/04/04 or after its been sent to late. Was it sent first class?
Hairlocks
It is not the size that is the problem it is the lack of Ink. (So far I think I have found out that this if put on by the franking system before it is given to the royal mail, and if it is not stamped correctly it should be restamped so it is clear in another location.)


If I caught the postman tomorrow morning and he remembered posting through my door yesterday would that help at all?
jeffreyarcher
QUOTE (Hairlocks)
Does the time of the offence in a NIP need to be acurate Have evidence That I was entering the access gate at work 3 miles away at the same time quoted on the NIP.

No, see Pope v Clark in this post. You would have to show that you were 'misled' by the erroneous time. It may open up other avenues; e.g. cloned car etc.

QUOTE (Hairlocks)
If I caught the postman tomorrow morning and he remembered posting through my door yesterday would that help at all?

It's the time of posting that counts, however, do ask him, it will lend credibilty if you do subsequently challenge it. Five months down the line, he will have forgotten about it.
Hairlocks
As far as I can see

(2) A notice shall be deemed for the purposes of subsection (1)© above to have been served on a person if it was sent by registered post or recorded delivery service addressed to him at his last known address, notwithstanding that the notice was returned as undelivered or was for any other reason not received by him.

When and how was first class post allowed, and who is the owner of the risk of a NIP being lost in the post or delayed? Does that notwithstanding bit mean hard luck to me if it is late or I never get the NIP?
Rosewell
The postal rule is harsh. As long as there is a S9 saying that the item was posted, by one of the accepted methods, to the last known address, then that's enough.
jeffreyarcher
QUOTE (Hairlocks)
When and how was first class post allowed,

[forum link]
QUOTE (Hairlocks)
and who is the owner of the risk of a NIP being lost in the post or delayed?

You.
QUOTE (Hairlocks)
Does that notwithstanding bit mean hard luck to me if it is late or I never get the NIP?

It really only applies to that sub-section, i.e. where recorded or registered is used. The problem is sub-section (3),
(3) The requirement of subsection (1) above shall in every case be deemed to have been complied with unless and until the contrary is proved., which while reasonable when it was written, because recorded or registered had to be used, also applies to the new sub-section (1A).
It is up to you to prove that it was not served in time.
Also, it has to be posted; i.e. entered into the postal system. Lying in the scammers' mail room is not posted.
Quite how an operator knows that, escapes me, particularly as all they have probably done is hit the return key on their pc.
There is an example of a case here (about 1/2 way up), where the dispatch of the NIP was disputed.
In that case, the accused managed to obtain the computer's audit trail.
Hairlocks
Thanks for all the help, spoke to the postman this morning, he can't really remember my 1 letter out of thousands he posted yesterday (quite understandable) but did say that Oxford postmen have been on strike for 3 weeks, so 14 days in the post system is possible. looks like I am going to have to admit to driving the car at the time.

Thanks

Hairlocks


Note to self: drive everywhere with eyes fix to speedo!
cjm99
QUOTE
Oxford postmen have been on strike for 3 weeks,
Not so quick to roll over. Read JA's post. sec3

QUOTE
above shall in every case be deemed to have been complied with unless and until the contrary is proved


On the balance of probabilities, a 3 week postal strike would have caused the service of the NIP to be out of time. A perfectly acceptable defence.

Go to the sorting office ask if the manager will write a 'witness statement' to the effect that postal services have been around these dates severely interupted.

Then write to CPS. Even If you can't get a witness statement, write to the CPS tell them you intend to request the court to summons a postal representitive to appear as a witness, in order to aduce that deliveries were interupted and unreliable.
My money is on the case being dropped. biggrin.gif


Chris
Hairlocks
So posting it on time is only for proof that it got to me on time, but if I can prove it was late (19 days), it is invaild because they were trusting the post system, a special delivery is needed to guarentee delivery date! Is that correct

Umm, currently seeking private legal advice, so may yet fight.

I know I have to sign the NIP, but if I claim time expired do I have to say who was probably driving. (part1)

Hairlocks
jeffreyarcher
QUOTE (Hairlocks)
I know I have to sign the NIP, but if I claim time expired do I have to say who was probably driving. (part1)

Yes. There is no time limit on a S172 notice.
cjm99
QUOTE
So posting it on time is only for proof that it got to me on time



If the CPS post by the correct method (first class) such that it should in the normal course of post arrive within 14 days, then the NIP is deemed to have been served correctly.
Unless, and the burden of proof now shifts to you, you can show, that the NIP was not served within 14 days.

In your case, an unusual event took place viz. a postal strike, Which should on the balance of probability be accepted as proof of non service of the NIP.

You still need to return it naming a driver within 28 days.


Chris
Hairlocks
right next set of questions, the return address is a PO.BOX number but the
http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=87


suggests sending the time expired letter to Officer in Charge of the Safety Camera Unit, and not the CC. Do I just put Officer in Charge of the safety camera unit on the first line?

Also if I use the rac template (removing the reference to phoning the helpline) should I mention the postal strike and wiitness now, and does the legal wording matter.

Haven't got any free legal advice yet so I may save my money for appeal like Mika suggest.

thanks yet again
jeffreyarcher
QUOTE (Hairlocks)
right next set of questions, the return address is a PO.BOX number but the
http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=87

suggests sending the time expired letter to Officer in Charge of the Safety Camera Unit, and not the CC. Do I just put Officer in Charge of the safety camera unit on the first line?

Also if I use the rac template (removing the reference to phoning the helpline) should I mention the postal strike and wiitness now, and does the legal wording matter.

Would you edit your post to knock the session id off of the link, it's making the thread almost unreadable..

Just make it,
The Officer in Charge,
XXXshire Safety Camera Unit,
P.O. Box No. XXX,
Etc.

Yes, mention the postal strike and the witness, otherwise they will just say (and they may still just say), "According to our records, it was served within the 14 days and that is sufficient."

What legal wording do you mean? If you mean all the stuff to do with Nicholson v Tapp, no, don't bother with all that. It's not directly relevent in your case.
Hairlocks
Thankyou everyone for your advice, I got a letter this morning basically saying saying I was lucky because of the postal strike and there decide to take no further action.

(This goes against the legel advice I got from lawers)

laugh.gif
nigeldunne64
Congratulations on a fine result.
On Mikas behalf could I suggest a donation of the £60 saved to the fighting fund? That doesn't even take account of the savings in insurance.
Cheers laugh.gif
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.