Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: NIP 14 day Can anyone point me to the actual law?
FightBack Forums > Queries > Speeding and other Criminal Offences
junks
That is where is written down?

My offence date was 24.09.07 & the NIP was dated 04.10.07 the start day or the strike & I received it 24.10 07.

I would just like to see where it is written down as "has to be served" & the defintion of that

Since the letter wasn't dated until 04.10.07 & the strike didn't finish until 10.10.07 the earliest I could possible have received the NIP would have been 16 days.

I have obviously already tried returning it as out of time but just got a letter bacj stating that it's in time as it was posted within 14 days

Cheers ;-)
nemo
QUOTE (junks @ Mon, 12 Nov 2007 - 12:50) *
That is where is written down?

Section 1 Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988.

QUOTE (junks @ Mon, 12 Nov 2007 - 12:50) *
I would just like to see where it is written down as "has to be served" & the defintion of that

QUOTE (Interpretation Act 1978)
7. Where an Act authorises or requires any document to be served by post (whether the expression "serve" or the expression "give" or "send" or any other expression is used) then, unless the contrary intention appears, the service is deemed to be effected by properly addressing, pre-paying and posting a letter containing the document and unless the contrary is proved, to have been effected at the time at which the letter would be delivered in the ordinary course of post.
davepoth
You will need to get something from the Royal Mail stating the delays. You should be able to find out from them whether a delivery to your address took place in the days between the issuance of the NIP and the timeout date, and also if collections were taken from wherever the SCP have their post. If they are a bit reticent, a Freedom of Information request will make things happen. Remember to not be specific about the delivery (Something like "please tell me whether deliveries/collections were made on the route which serves X street on dates...")
junks
Thanx guys I'm a bit annoyed at all this as not only was the NIP late but I remember seeing the van on the bridge & I'm damn sure I wasn't doing the 83 mph that it claims - only one photo of the car with a speed reading on it & that was at 639M away!!

And a section of dual carriageway that has had no accidents on it & you barely get three cars together - in fact there are no other cars in the shot of me!! Buggers! dry.gif
junks
NIP Details and Circumstances
What is the name of the Constabulary? -
Date of the offence: - September 2007
Date of the NIP: - 10 days after the offence
Date you received the NIP: - 30 days after the offence
Location of offence (exact location as it appears on the NIP: important): - A140, SCOLE, towards Eye
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? - 3
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 - I was driving along the dual carriageway section of the A140 I spotted the van parked on the left hand side of a bridge ahead (on my side) & immediately checked my speed which was 75mph (69 on the GPS) so just carried on.

Having received the NIP I wrote back stating it was out of time but received a letter stating that as it was sent on 04/10/07 (the date of the letter) that they have fulfilled their requirements.

I have now got the photograph of the alleged offence which show one frame of my car just coming into view on a bend at 638.8m & 83 mph & another with just the reg & no speed or distance.

A quick calculation assuming the secong frame was taken at about 80m (would have to be something like that from the angle at the bridge) shows the average speed to be about 69mph coincidently the speed my GPS showed


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? - No
Was there a valid reason for the NIP's late arrival? - Unsure
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: Wed, 14 Nov 2007 08:26:41 +0000
The Rookie
The NIP is invalid, whatever thye say, they knew that in the strike the 'normal course of the post' was a lot longer than 2 days....they could have hand delivered, but expect some bluff and bluster...

A late NIP does not absolve you of the need to nominate the driver, have you done so, if not do so, either on the form with another 'late NIP' letter attached, (stapled) to it, or on the bottom of the letter (include the case ref number!)

Simon
fuzzybunny
is there a date on the back of the envelope
see below

that would help to identify when it went through the mail centre.
As the rookie says they should have known better than to post during a strike.
junks
Thanks guys I'm thinking I'll return the form with this covering letter - what do you think??
The Rookie
NO....
repeat the NIP wizard with 'no' in place of unsure for there being a valid reason the NIP was late, this will then supply a link to the RAC letter which is better.

As the NIP is late, there is no need to discuss the alleged offence at all, so don't.

Either fill in the form and staple to the RAC letter, or inlcude all the info asked for within the letter

'I can confirm that I was driving at the time of the alleged offence
Mr J Blogs
1 road to nowhere
somewhere
anyshire

DOB 12/3/45
Licence number
smithj7XXXXXXXX

Yours
and signed....
7159keith
IMHO do not even mention your opinions on your speed at the time etc, they will ignore it anyway and you can always use it later. Focus on the out of time issue for now and reply in time but not too early. Remember that it is neither the police or the CPS who are handling this, it is the civilians in the scammers office. But be careful what you write it may be used against you later.

junks
Cheers for that guys - I have already written saying the NIP was time expired though & they just wrote back saying they only have to send within 14 days, also how do I find out who is the Officer in Charge - simply phone & ask??

Should I just return the completed form this time (still within time as the deadline has been extended due to requesting the photograph I have until th 19th Nov) & attach the adusted letter??

BTW Fuzzybunny no date mark on the envelope
The Rookie
Send the RAC letter stapled to the S172 nomination form, they will bluff and bluster, and you may well get a summons, they want your money!

Simon
7159keith
Do not expect them to drop this, they will just ignore your correspondence and carry on. Follow Simon's advice and you should end up in a good place (eventually)
The Rookie
As an aside there is another thread where the scammers have just dropped it once its clear the accused was well versed in the law and digging his heels in!

http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showto...40&start=40

Simon
junks
Thanks guys - didn't work though sad.gif
nemo
QUOTE (junks @ Mon, 26 Nov 2007 - 19:28) *
Thanks guys - didn't work though

As has already been pointed out, it was unlikely to have been dropped quite so easily - the scammers will lie, bully and coerce in an attempt to get you to fold. Anyway, you need to decide your next move.

You can ignore the CoFP (plus any reminders) and see what happens - you may receive a summons, you may hear nothing more.

You can accept the CoFP (3 points and £60) and the matter would be considered closed.

One thing is certain, you are under no obligation to write to them and 'request a court hearing'..


junks
Thanks Nemo - well I'm certainly not paying the £60 as I wasn't speeding!! It's not about the money or the points as they make no difference to my insurance but no way am I admitting to something I didn't do so I'll ignore it & see what happens ;-)
junks
Is there any guidance as to how many frames should be taken with the LTI 2020?? I only ask as 1 frames with the speed & distance on doesn't seem right - the only other is a frame showing my number plate but no speed & no distance.

Also is there a specific part of the car they should target? I've always though it was the number plate but at 639m you can see the cross hairs are above that - just trying to get some form of defence together before I receive a summons

The points I intend to use are:

1. The NIP was dated 4th October (the date of the strike) & didn't reach me until 24th October
2. The speed reading was taken on a bend
3. The van was to one side of the dual carriageway
4. Only one frame with the speed/distance of my car was taken
5. The car was targeted above the number plate so essentially on the grille
6. They had 18 secs before the sencond photo so why wasn't another reading taken to confirm
7. From the angle of the second photo I have calculated that it was taken at approximately 100m so taking off the 89m that means the car completed 550m in 18secs which is 69mph - coincidentally the same speed as my GPS said I was doing.

I don't know if any of these points are valid so I would appreciate some input

Thanks
Junks ;-)
The Rookie
They don't need any phot's at all, the PC's statement is enough to convict, if you contest it you need the video for it to make any sense.

At that range the inpact cone of the laser is over 70cm across, aiming point becomes a little acedemic!

If they have one reading over the limit, why do they need a second?

The details on the location are only relevant if you can use the video to understand all the implications, so I won't speculate.

Simon
7159keith
Do not go too complicated too soon, camera fights are long ,drawn out and costly.

Things on your side.

1. The notice was not served in the correct time and you have a good case to say they knew it would not be when they sent it.
2. If you fight and request the video they will not give it, always a good scrap from that one.
Maybe more good things that others can throw in.

Things against.
1. If you fight they will almost certainly dual charge you and if I were the CPS I would push on with S172 as you have not responded with the requested info i.e. the driver's identity, within 28 days (remember you are the keeper so there is more power in their request).
2. If they cannot get you on S172 then you need a very speciifc point to fight the speeding if there are any they will only come to light further down the line.

Keith
junks
Rookie it wasn't PC but Civil Servants in the van & Keith I did respond within the time constrants ;-)
The Rookie
To clarify, how do you know that, and how do we know that if you haven't told us, as far as I am aware, unlike some areas, Norfolk still uses PC's for the enforcement, its only civvies in the 'office'.

Simon
Hotel Oscar 87
junks

I appreciate that being accused of something that you feel is incorrect is daunting but keep focussed on the late service issue here. As suggested earlier have you sent a copy of the RAC letter (personalised for yourself)? This is the way to tackle this issue. Don't feel that because you have been batted away by the scameraship once it means that you won't eventually be able to get by the numpties and find someone with an ounce of commonsense and an appreciation of what the law actually says and not what the others think its says.
junks
Yeah I'm kinda coming round to that way of thinking now - I'm just so incensed at the moment, I know I wasn't bloody well speeding but they don't seem to care whether you are actually guilty or not!!

Rookie they told me about the Civil Servants when I rang but that was after I'd filled in the wizard - maybe it's not true then, I should have recorded the call & maybe had them on that too, I must admit they didn't seem to sure about anything when I asked!!

Is it worth sending a reply to the last letter citing the interpretation act & the defintion of served, also finding out whether there was any mail collected from that area on 4th October etc?? Or is that giving them too much information??

I'm just trying to avoid going to court as I have had trouble with stomach ulcers in the past & I'm sure it won't do me any good :-(
fuzzybunny
As the experts say you need to concentrate on the late NIP. Keep it simple. Mine was posted on the 12th day and they backed down. Yours was posted on the 10th day right at the start of the strike so clearly can not be expected to arrive in 14 days. (see link)

http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?s=&...st&p=220309

Trouble is if you suffer from stomach ulcers you need to weigh up whether to go to court or take the fine. I would have thought it was worth another letter really pushing the case for the late NIP to try and make them feel embarrassed for being incompetent.
In the end its health first so you can push it some more before giving in and saying ‘sod it’ I’ll pay the fine (unless that is really going to niggle you worse that going to court).

David


junks
That's the problem David it will get to me either way I know :-(

I'll draught another letter then, cheers mate ;-)
7159keith
Hi Junks

Just to clarify, you are required to give the information requested i.e. name the driver within 28 days, unless you have sent another letter not posted here you have not done this, so technically you have not complied with S172 Section 2 paragraph a.

Focus on the serving of the NIP for now but do not expect it not to go to court. Most times they press on regardless....they want your cash!!!!

Regards

Keith
junks
Sorry Keith I'm not thinking straight - I sent the letter that Rookie suggested on an earlier post (RAC one) together with the S172 & was within the time constraints of their letters although past the 28 day deadline of the original form
7159keith
The RAC letter is about the late service and does not give them what they ask for, the drivers identity if you have it within 28 days of the original NIP. The only reason I mention it is that if you get to court and they have dual charged you it makes a S172 harder to defend.

At present it is not relevant as you have a good case on the late service so stay focussed on that for now.
Fredd
QUOTE (junks @ Thu, 29 Nov 2007 - 10:26) *
I sent the letter that Rookie suggested on an earlier post (RAC one) together with the S172

junks
So to be clear should I bother writing to them again now pointing them to the interpretation act re the 14 days, or is that a waste of time? Thanks
7159keith
Did you fill in and sign the S172 when you sent it back? From your post it seemed you had just returned it, sorry if I was mistaken.

Cannot see any harm in writing and pointing them again to fact that they have to serve it within 14 days not send. If they knew it would not be served in time (widely publicised strike) then they should have made other arrangements to serve so they have not fulfilled their requirement.

Don't be surprised if they carry on though.

Keith
junks
Yes Keith sorry, I did send it back completed ;-)
The Rookie
You can always point them to this page http://www.askthe.police.uk/content/Q557.htm

Simon
junks
Blimey!!! Thanks Simon :-)
junks
Well it took a while but finally had a reply to say they are not taking it any further, I basically ended up telling them "take me to court then".

It's completely wrong that they should be able to get away with lying about the law, you should be able to trust these people & my respect for them has been completely eroded now!

Many thanks for your help ;-)
nemo
Well done for standing your ground. A good result..thumbsup.gif
youngsyr
Well done to all involved. smile.gif

The Rookie
One for success stories...

Simon
oystermouth1
They like playing chicken with motorists. I have successfully fought and won 12 tickets so far, none of them mine by the way. Quite often they carry on about taking you to court, I just write back and say that I look forward to it. Then usually about a week before the court date they back down.
junks
Thanks guys - I have to say without the back up on here I probably would have caved so thanks again thumbsup.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.