Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Date of offence on NIP is different to that in photo.
FightBack Forums > Queries > Speeding and other Criminal Offences
Smellypants
Hi,

Hope you can help....

My girlfriend drives a company vehicle. The company she works for has received a NIP which states an offence was committed at a certain date and time. As my girlfriend knows for certain she was not driving the vehicle at the time, she has requested evidence which has been supplied in the form of a photo. However, the date and time in the PHOTO is different to that on the NIP. SUBSTANTIALLY DIFFERENT (out by more than a week!).

Whilst my girlfriend fully accepts she committed an offence, the NIP clearly shows the wrong date that the offence occurred on and therefore I think that it should simply be dismissed on these grounds. However, my girlfriend is reluctant to go to court to defend herself and more to the point is likely to get a lot of grief from her work if she decides to contest it etc. She'd rather pay the fine and get three points than get the grief from work. I was wondering if there is a process which doesn't allow them to correct the NIP - if she writes to them pointing out their error, surely they'll just re-issue with a correction?

Is there any way she can get this dismissed without going to court? If so, what is the process/procedure for doing so?

Thanks in advance,

Smellypants.
mob
The best advice I can give at the moment would be to complete the NIP wizard that is cunningly hidden in the section marked "Read this first" Right here: http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?autocom=nipwizard

Paste the output from the wizard so that all the regulars have the details that are needed to give the best advice.
nemo
At this moment in time, has your girlfriend received a NIP in her name ? If not, it is the company's responsibility to respond to the company's NIP.

But in answer to your question:
QUOTE (Smellypants @ Thu, 27 Sep 2007 - 15:27) *
I was wondering if there is a process which doesn't allow them to correct the NIP - if she writes to them pointing out their error, surely they'll just re-issue with a correction?

A NIP cannot be amended - a new NIP is required to be sent in lieu of the defective one no later than 14 days from the date of the alleged offence.

I suggest someone from the company (or your girlfriend) writes to the scammers, points out the fundamental error in the NIP and see how they respond. Make sure that at least 14 days from the date of the alleged offence have lapsed before writing such that a fresh NIP cannot be issued.

Bear in mind also that a defective NIP does not necessarily absolve the recipient (in this case the company) of providing driver details within the 28 days required by statute. If the scammers have not responded within 25 or so days from their receipt of the NIP (and your GF wants to avoid any hassle to the company), then the company should complete & return a copy of the s.172 form (keep the original) with your GF's details.

Your GF may then receive her own NIP in due course, she (or the company) may receive a No Further Action letter or you may hear nothing more.
Smellypants
Well, we waited 14 days as suggested and then we sent them a letter pointing out the error and they've simply sent a new NIP with a cover letter saying "I can confirm that a clerical error was made when the notice was issued".

The annoying thing is though, that despite her sending back the completed S.172, they have sent the new NIP to her company again!

The NEW NIP is clearly now out of time but they're obviously trying it on.

So, what now? My girlfriend is really reluctant to go to court and is even - at this point - saying "I'll just pay it and get the points".

Anyone got any advice/sample letters that would make them drop this as clearly they're not playing by the rules (when did they ever?)

Thanks in advance.

Smellypants.
andy_foster
You can lead a horse to water...

As you may have already suspected, the scammers are bullies, and rarely listen to reason (or the law of the land).
Assuming that the photo was received more than 14 days after the alleged offence, it would seem that she has a 'lead pipe solid' defence. However, if she's not up for a fight (not that much of a fight will be required), then you may well be facing a rather cold Christmas if you try to coerce her.
progbloke
QUOTE
My girlfriend drives a company vehicle.

snip...

As my girlfriend knows for certain she was not driving the vehicle at the time

snip...

Whilst my girlfriend fully accepts she committed an offence


rolleyes.gif
nemo
QUOTE (progbloke @ Sat, 20 Oct 2007 - 18:42) *
QUOTE
My girlfriend drives a company vehicle.

snip...

As my girlfriend knows for certain she was not driving the vehicle at the time

snip...

Whilst my girlfriend fully accepts she committed an offence


rolleyes.gif

Yes, his girlfriend fully admits to driving the vehicle at the date and time shown on the photograph.

However, she denies driving at the date and time specified on the original NIP (which is more than a week different to that shown on the photograph).

smile.gif
Barking Mad
If the girlfriend knows she was not driving the car on the date and at the time ON THE NIP then she should reply as close to the 28 day limit and say in a covering letter "I was not driving the car on that day at that time and to my knowledge no-one else was"

Then wait to see what the Gestapo do and deal with whatever that is then.

Why people should be afraid of courts is beyond me. They are run by people and it's like going to see the headmaster at school. They are not going to lock your GF / wife up. Where is her bacckbone for protecting hersef when she is certain to win!?!?!?!?!
jeffreyarcher
This is just so confusing, please give us some facts.

QUOTE (Smellypants @ Sat, 20 Oct 2007 - 13:17) *
Well, we waited 14 days as suggested and then we sent them a letter pointing out the error

Who is 'we'? As previously pointed out by Nemo, the obligation is on the notice addresse, i.e. the company.

QUOTE (Smellypants @ Sat, 20 Oct 2007 - 13:17) *
and they've simply sent a new NIP with a cover letter saying "I can confirm that a clerical error was made when the notice was issued".

But have they changed the dates?

QUOTE (Smellypants @ Sat, 20 Oct 2007 - 13:17) *
The annoying thing is though, that despite her sending back the completed S.172, they have sent the new NIP to her company again!

They're just going round the loop again; as has been previously pointed out, your GF is not the notice addresse.

QUOTE (Smellypants @ Sat, 20 Oct 2007 - 13:17) *
The NEW NIP is clearly now out of time but they're obviously trying it on.

That's as may be, but the addresse still has an obligation to name the driver.

QUOTE (Smellypants @ Sat, 20 Oct 2007 - 13:17) *
So, what now?

Give us some facts. Is this notice addressed to the company? If so, and the dates are now correct, the company names your GF.

QUOTE (Smellypants @ Sat, 20 Oct 2007 - 13:17) *
My girlfriend is really reluctant to go to court and is even - at this point - saying "I'll just pay it and get the points".

More fool her. Perhaps youi should ask her if she's got money to burn.

QUOTE (Smellypants @ Sat, 20 Oct 2007 - 13:17) *
Anyone got any advice/sample letters that would make them drop this as clearly they're not playing by the rules (when did they ever?)

Answer the above first.
Smellypants
I don't know why this is so confusing, but in answer to your questions:


QUOTE (Smellypants @ Sat, 20 Oct 2007 - 13:17)
Well, we waited 14 days as suggested and then we sent them a letter pointing out the error

Who is 'we'? As previously pointed out by Nemo, the obligation is on the notice addresse, i.e. the company.

We is Me and My Girlfriend. The company have completed the NIP once and sent it back already with a covering letter from my girlfriend detailing that the NIP and the PHOTO were different in date and time.QUOTE (Smellypants @ Sat, 20 Oct 2007 - 13:17)
and they've simply sent a new NIP with a cover letter saying "I can confirm that a clerical error was made when the notice was issued".

But have they changed the dates?

Yes, they have changed the dates.

QUOTE (Smellypants @ Sat, 20 Oct 2007 - 13:17)
The annoying thing is though, that despite her sending back the completed S.172, they have sent the new NIP to her company again!

They're just going round the loop again; as has been previously pointed out, your GF is not the notice addresse.


QUOTE (Smellypants @ Sat, 20 Oct 2007 - 13:17)
The NEW NIP is clearly now out of time but they're obviously trying it on.

That's as may be, but the addresse still has an obligation to name the driver.


QUOTE (Smellypants @ Sat, 20 Oct 2007 - 13:17)
So, what now?

Give us some facts. Is this notice addressed to the company? If so, and the dates are now correct, the company names your GF.

Yes. Both notices have been addressed to the company.

QUOTE (Smellypants @ Sat, 20 Oct 2007 - 13:17)
My girlfriend is really reluctant to go to court and is even - at this point - saying "I'll just pay it and get the points".

More fool her. Perhaps youi should ask her if she's got money to burn.

There's no swaying her on this I'm afraid. She "just doesn't want/need the hassle". Her words, not mine.

QUOTE (Smellypants @ Sat, 20 Oct 2007 - 13:17)
Anyone got any advice/sample letters that would make them drop this as clearly they're not playing by the rules (when did they ever?)

Answer the above first.

Done.
Arragonis
Sorry to butt in, I have a question :

QUOTE (andy_foster @ Sat, 20 Oct 2007 - 13:27) *
...Assuming that the photo was received more than 14 days after the alleged offence, it would seem that she has a 'lead pipe solid' defence. ...


He said the new NIP was received after 14 days, they had the photo before I think, does that make a difference ?
The Rookie
At the moment there is a NIP (well 2) and S172 requests, the NIP is merely to notify the RK of intent to prosecute, the first was wrong, the second out of time.

There is still the S172 responce needed, the compnay should name your GF on their form, she will then get an S172 request (written as a NIP, although legally its not of course) in her neame, she should then reply IMHO using the RAC letter and by filling in the form, they will probably send a CoFP she can ignore, I can't see even the scammers being dumb enough to issue a summons in this case as the evidence against them is overwhelming!

Simon
Smellypants
Can someone give me a sample of the type of letter I can use in this instance. All the RAC Letter examples I have seen on this site all pertain to someone not having a company car which in this instance is not the case and the RAC letter examples I've got would all have to be radically changed to reflect the true circumstance.

Basically, they've now sent my girlfriend a new NIP which is out of time to the original, despite the fact the company sent back the S.172 with her details on - and a letter pointing out their error - which they duly corrected and resent the NIP with ANOTHER S.172 which was completed again and now she's received a new S.172 and NIP which seems to be an issue now because she either completes it and goes to court (something she doesn't want to do), or completes it inaccurately which renders her liable to prosecution for not completing the form correctly.

Also, I don't know how I can find out the name of the Office In Charge instead of sending it back to the Chief Constable.

Help!

Thanks in advance,

Smellypants.
Smellypants
Bumping....
The Rookie
Use the RAC letter and some common sense editing, so just emphasising that the NIP to the RK was later than the 14 days required by law, it doesn't have to be precise, as they are the ones who made the misatke, just be sure to satisfy the S172 request.

Simon
jeffreyarcher
QUOTE (Smellypants @ Mon, 5 Nov 2007 - 13:39) *
Also, I don't know how I can find out the name of the Office In Charge instead of sending it back to the Chief Constable.

Just send it the "The Officer in Charge", exactly as between the quotes. It's a generic term.
Smellypants
Okay... have not received a response from the Officer in Charge and time is upon us to return the S.172.

However, do I tick box 1a or 1b?

1a. I wish to be considered for the fixed penalty procedure OR

1b. I would like the matter to be dealt with by way of a court hearing.

Thanks in advance.

Smellypants.
nemo
QUOTE (Smellypants @ Mon, 26 Nov 2007 - 14:09) *
However, do I tick box 1a or 1b?

1a. I wish to be considered for the fixed penalty procedure OR

1b. I would like the matter to be dealt with by way of a court hearing.

You are under no statutory obligation to 'tick' either of the boxes..
The Rookie
With nemo, tick neither, there is no legal basis for them to ask this of you, they are just trying to save on their costs so they can make more profit.

Simon
Smellypants
Well, on the 2nd attempt they have replied thus:

I can confirm that the first NIP was issued within the legal timescales and the clerical errors found subsequently did not invalidate the notice.

You are required to respond to the NIP within its stated timescales.

Interestingly, this came from the Fixed Penalty Supervisor and NOT the Office in Charge, so sending it to a specific person seems to make no difference.

Looks like it's going to be a fine and three points then. :-(

Smellypants.
The Rookie
No its not, this is typical bully boy bluff and bluster, do not give in.

The first NIP may have been issued in the required timescales but its invalid, the revised NIP was outside timescales and is invalid, don't let these people bully you!

Simon
Chas820
QUOTE
Looks like it's going to be a fine and three points then.



Thats up to you,you have an excellent chance of getting off with this but if you want to fold thats your choice but i wonder to myself why did you bother posting here.This is a FIGHT BACK FORUM.
g_attrill
I don't think this is one that a letter will magically fix, it is possible they made the error on more than just her notice so they won't want to write it off in case you go to the papers, they will want to bluff her into accepting an FPN and going quietly. You don't have much to lose by letting them summons, even if she plead guilty by post the points are unlikely to be increased, however the court costs (£35?) will be additional, and there is a chance the fine might be a bit higher.
Smellypants
This is the quandary we're now in - we don't want to give up the fight but we don't want to run the risk of the fine/costs being substantially higher than £60 and three points (some costs could be in the hundreds of pounds).

I suppose we could just write back stating in VERY BIG LETTERS "The first NIP may have been issued in the required timescales but it's invalid, the revised NIP was outside timescales and is invalid" and let them KNOW that we intend to fight it (us bluffing now).

What do you think? Can it do any harm?

Smellypants.
The Rookie
You've already told them the law, and implied you will fight it, at the alleged speed the owrse your likley to get is 3pts/£100fine and £35 costs, the best is nothing and costs, assuming the CPS even take it to court after seeing the file...these people are parasites with no care for the law, your one best chance of success IMHO is a 'letter of concern' to the relevant chief constable about what they are trying to do, he may well then have a word in their shell like...

Simon
jdfi
QUOTE (Smellypants @ Fri, 30 Nov 2007 - 13:54) *
This is the quandary we're now in - we don't want to give up the fight but we don't want to run the risk of the fine/costs being substantially higher than £60 and three points (some costs could be in the hundreds of pounds).

I suppose we could just write back stating in VERY BIG LETTERS "The first NIP may have been issued in the required timescales but it's invalid, the revised NIP was outside timescales and is invalid" and let them KNOW that we intend to fight it (us bluffing now).

What do you think? Can it do any harm?

Smellypants.


No harm whatsoever...

Heres a suggested letter.... the first NIP was indeed issued in time, and we responded advising who was the driver of this vehicle on the 32nd September. However on 32nd September neither myself nor this vehicle were at the location given.

Your 2nd NIP asking for details of the driver on 34th September is invalid, as this was sent and received over 14 days since the alleged offence.

I would ask that you check this point of fact with your superiors, and revert confirming that we have complied with our s.172 obligations (in respect of the NIP pertaining to an alleged incident on 32nd September) and that the second NIP was out of time, and hence we have no obligation to complete it, and that there will be no further action in respect of either of these alleged incidents.

As I said, remember its not just £60 at stake, its a likely couple of hundred over the course of the next four years' insurance.
Smellypants
The thing is, our letters have already been addressed to the Chief Constable and the Office in Charge yet they've just been passed directly to the parasites, so a further letter of concern would simply have no effect - given our others haven't.

Whilst it may not be much more, it's still a considerable risk it could be. Yes, it's likely we'll get 3 points and a £100 fine and Costs (total around £200 = three times that which we stand to walk away with now). As it stands at the moment, we can ill-afford the £60 let alone the risk of three times that. Hence the worry.

I think I'll try one more letter, but I really don't hold out much hope unless I'm rather forceful with it (hence the suggestion of doing it in big letters).

Thanks again for all your help.

S.
nemo
QUOTE (Smellypants @ Fri, 30 Nov 2007 - 13:20) *
I think I'll try one more letter,

How about (and apologies if its a bit wordy - I'm sure you could trim it if necessary):

QUOTE
Dear Sirs,

Notice of Intended Prosecution No. XXXXXXXX

I acknowledge receipt of your letter dated xx.xx.2007 and comment as follows:

Section 1 Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988 requires that, for certain offences, a Notice of Intended Prosecution is served upon the Registered Keeper of a vehicle within 14 days of an alleged offence. It is a fundamental requirement of s.1 RTOA 1988 that the notice specifies clearly the nature, the location and the date of the alleged offence. If these requirements are not met, then s.1 of the 1988 Act is not satisfied and, as such, the offence to which the notice refers cannot be prosecuted.

You will note that the original NoIP, served upon [company] on [date] refers to an alleged traffic light offence on [date] at [time]. At this date and time, the vehicle concerned was elsewhere.

A photograph was requested from yourselves to assist with identification of the vehicle. This photograph showed a date and time of [date & time]. This was entirely different to that specified on the original notice.

The error was advised to yourselves by letter and you responded with both an acknowledgement of your 'clerical error' and a replacement NoIP which showed an amended date and time of the alleged offence. This notice was dated [date] and received on [date].

The purpose of a NoIP is to give an idea of the offence of which the defendant will be accused and to guard against the possibility of his being taken unawares. Indeed, Milner vs Allen [1933] provides that 'the test of validity of a notice is whether the defendant is in any way prejudiced in his defence by the defect'. It is evident that an error as fundamental as an incorrect date would be extremely prejudicial to a defendant.

Despite your assertions to the contrary, statute provides that a defective NoIP cannot be altered or amended. A fresh NoIP is required to be served in lieu of the defective notice, but only if time permits (ie within the 14 days required by statute). Clearly, the amended notice was dated and received by myself outwith these 14 days.

On the basis of the above, it is clear that the notice does not satisfy the requirements of s.1 RTOA 1988 and, for these reasons, cannot be acted upon.

I trust this will be the last I shall hear of this matter.

Yours faithfully,

Smellypants..
Smellypants
That's a great letter. Thanks.

S.
jeffreyarcher
QUOTE (Scammer)
You are required to respond to the NIP within its stated timescales.

Just to confirm, your GF has named herself on a notice addressed to her? You haven't actually said anywhere that she has.
Her being named on the company's notice is irrelevent for this purpose.
Smellypants
In answer to the previous query, yes, my girlfriend has responded to a notice with her name on it.

We've now received the CoFP.

What now? Seems if we don't adhere to their commands that we "must" pay, within 28 days of the letter, then court proceedings will be started.

Thanks in advance,

Smellypants.
Chas820
In my opinion you should ignore the CoFP,they want their money,if it goes to court someone with hopefully more sense will see this and drop it,i would wait to see if you get a summons,if you do than you can write to the cps and ask them to review the case.I`m sure other better minds than mine will come up with further comments.
Smellypants
We decided to wait for the CoFP to expire. The day BEFORE it expired, on day 27, we received a letter from Dorset Police Force Headquarters.

The Head of the Safety, Education and Enforcement Services Department (SEES) for Dorset Police (a Mr. P. Garrett) wrote to us, saying the Chief Constable had asked him to respond directly.

In short, the letter says "As a result of your letter I have fully reviewed the above referenced offence, including the photographic evidence and all correspondence between yourself and Dorset Police. I have concluded that I am satisfied an offence did occur, however clerical errors surrounding the issue of the Notice of Intended Prosecution have been identified. Due to these errors I believe it is not in the public interest to pursue this matter further. I therefore confirm that offence xxxxxxxxx has been cancelled and no further action will be taken."

This is, of course, excellent news and finally the right thing has been done. What is interesting, and may help add weight and give confidence to others who are in the same predicament, is they admit that due to the clerical errors this is not worth pursuing.

My girlfriend, and I, would like to thank everyone at Pepipoo for their support and advice on this matter. Without you, my girlfriend's licence would be tarnished (been clean the whole time she's had it) and we'd be worse off to the tune of £60.

A very big big thank you once again.

Kind regards,

Smellypants.
Chas820
Well done for sticking with it,as i said before all they want is your money,road safety,fair play etc doesn`t come into it,if they can bluff/bluster you out of £60(or more)than they will try it on.Another one for the success stories.
afraid
hello i wonder if this sort of thing will go in our favour, for our sons case, we kept getting notices saying the offense was moter vehicle 76mph in 60 limit then after being offered fixed penalty day later had letter to say there clerical error had not realized it was a goods vehicle with 50mph limit, they still kept getting paperwork wrong and although it is now right the last letter my son had to say it was going to court was not signed by prpoper signiture just typed name, unfortunately i kept phoning them with their mistakes not writng but i think its recoreded, same police force
The Rookie
Well done smellypants, sticking at it when you have a strong case and folding on a weak one is always best, and their own paperwork told you you had a very strong case...

Afraid, please keep to your own thread....its the validity of the NIP thats crucial....

Simon
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.