Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Recieved NIP and recent comunications with plod...
FightBack Forums > Queries > Speeding and other Criminal Offences
atheophilus
Ref Ruefuls NIP of September 24th (see below)

I too have had an NIP due to an alleged speeding 77mph on exactly the same bit of road on 27.7.04. I too did not see the van or warning, the guy must have been hiding well as its pretty clear along the verge of that section.

I initially went through not signing the form and refereing to dpp v broomfield, this was before I knew the loophole had possibly been closed. I now have a letter refering to dpp v francis and threatening impending procecution.

Any suggestions as to what I can do next?

Regards


[quote="Rueful"]Hi I have just received a nip reminder in the post. Dated 23rd September 2004, Got it on the 24th of September.

Date of offence 05/08/2004.
Speed 76mph on a 50 limit. A308 Staines By-pass. If I am right about the area of the road it was on it is a dual carriage-way, not a built up area. I think the van was there as a couple of months ago there was a fatal accident there. If it was in the location I am thinking of the van was on the other side of a small hill so I couldn't see it until too late.

Postage was first class franked.

I'm the registered keeper, and I'm pretty sure it was me driving as I'm the only one that drives the car!!

I have a UK license but have only had it for one year so if I get 6 points I'll have to retake my test. I have no points at the moment.

The form is from the Surrey Police and here are some of the detials from it.

Details of offence at top.

THIS FORM MUST VBE COMPLETED BY YOU, THE ADDRESSEE; DO NOT HAND IT TO ANYONE ELSE

Note: Police are unable to respond to any comments that you may make unless it is to a point of law.

Information Provided under section 172 road traffic act 1988

Warning: It is aan offence to knowingly or recklessly furnish a false statemen. The offence can incur a fine of up to £2000

Part one: I was rthe driver at the time of the alleged offence

space for my details

NB In certain circumsstances a fixed penalty will be offered rather than a prosecution

Part 2 If I wasn't the driver

Part 3 If I wasn't the keeper.

Under Section 172 of the road traffic act 1988 you were required to provide wirthin 28 days information as to who was the driver on the date of the offence.

On the letter with it it says If no reply is received witrhin fourteen days from the date of this letter, consideration will be given rto prosecuting you for this offence, for which the penalty is a maximum fine of £1000 and penalty points. There is a FAQ with it as well, the only interesting point on it is where it says:
Rueful
They have moved the van to the end by the Fordbridge round-about, I suppose so they can catch people breaking the limit as it changes from 50 to 30. And the van may get stuck in the mud on the verge over winter as well!!

I expect someone will be around soon with some advice.

Good luck!
atheophilus
Rueful,

Thanks, how far have you got so far?
jeffreyarcher
The non-signing loophole is closed (DPP v Francis); whatever else you chose to do, not signing is not an option. You will be prosecuted and convicted.
atheophilus
I only realised the loophole had been closed the other day, after some correspondance with the Police, they brought it to my attention! Having been down this route is it now possible to use my right to remain silent or have I blown that by having the form filled in (not by me). Alternatively I could go down the route of not knowing if it were myself or wife driving and to be honest neither of us can remember as it was back in July!

Any advice will help.
Rueful
QUOTE (atheophilus)
Rueful,

Thanks, how far have you got so far?


I sent the PACE letter and they sent one back saying it is only valid for arrestable offences. I think it will go to court and get complicated. Everyone should do something like this once in their life though..... tongue.gif
atheophilus
Rueful,

I agree, no harm in trying...

Is it true that without the signature/admittance I cant be given more than 3 points? If this is true I would prefer less points and a more severe fine/endorsement as my insurers are only bothered if I have more than 8 points (already have 3)
Glacier2
Why don't you nominate your wife and let her nominate you back. You have both complied with S172 and the two of you cannot be compelled to give evidence against each other in court. Game over!
andy_foster
atheophilus,

Can give us exact details of all paperwork?
(e.g. the wording of the NIP/S172, how you replied, any replies from them, etc.)
atheophilus
Andy,

Sure here goes...

NIP recieved within 14 days pretty standard make reg number date 27.7.04, time 08.30, speed 77 (in a dual carraigeway 50mph limit zone)

The form clearly had stated accross the top 'THIS FORM MUST BE COMPLETED BY YOU, THE ADDRESSEE; DO NOT HAND TO ANYONE ELSE'

Got the wife to complete the form for me and returned it unsigned, she wrote a statement (not sent to the police) to say she had filled the form in (for future ref).

A letter dated 30th Sept from the Police which basically said they sent the form and I returned it with my details but not signed, a photocopy of the form was sent to me for me to complete it with a signature and I should return it within 14 days. The letter also stated that without a signed document as to my admission as to being the driver the matter would revert to a court hearing for the offence under section 172 of the RTA 1988.

A further letter was recieved dated 13th october reminding me of their prvious letter and that the form remains outstanding so court proceedings would now be instigated against me under section 172 of the RTA together with section 12 of the Road Traffic Offenders act 1988.

This letter crossed with mine of the 11th October in which I asked for clarification of the following points..1. Please can you tell me where in law it states that it is obligatory to sign the form and I will of course be happy to obey.
2. Referring to your last paragraph, what is the alternative to… ‘the matter will revert to a court hearing for the offence under section 172 of the road traffic act 1988’

I then got a letter dated 14th October refering to DPP v Broomfield and a paragraph at the end which said hope this is useful please return the completed form by 25th October.

On 19th October I sent this...

Thank you for your letter of 14th October. I wonder if you could clarify a couple of points with reference to your letter.

1. In The Director of Public Prosecution v Broomfield, Judge Wilkie concluded that a Police Authority could include reasonable instructions as to the manner in which information was to be provided. In relation to Section 172 and that this could include written information. Judge Wilkie did not state that written information should be signed.
2. On the 13th December 2002 at Bristol Crown Court in the case of The Director of Public Prosecution v Pickford, Judge Ticehurst stated that a lacuna in the law does exist.
3. As neither Judge Wilkie or Judge Ticehurst have highlighted the law that makes it obligatory to sign the form, please can you tell me specifically where in law it states that it is obligatory to sign the form and I would of course be happy to do so.

I look forward to hearing from you as soon as possible.

A letter dated 21st October stated..

In response to my letter 19th Oct I was refered to Judge Wilkies decision and DPP v Broomfield again 'that the information should be given in written form and signed by the accused is not merely a whim of those who produce the form, but is specifically directed at enabling the document to be accepted as evidence that the accused was the driver' He also stated that in his judgement the Crown Court at Bristol wrer wrong in their decision.

Also DPP v Francis 16th March 2004 'the cheif officer can require that the response be in writing and is signed.

I regret I am unable toassist further.

As a delay tactict I sent the following on 25th october....

Thank you for your letter of 21st October 2004, only received today!

Could you please send me a copy of the form you refer to in your letter of the 14th.

I look forward to hearing from you as soon as possible.


I have not yet recieved a reply, I suspect one is waiting for me when I get home!

Regards

Andre
atheophilus
Just got a letter extending my reply to the 4th November - Any ideas?
Glacier2
see my earlier post
atheophilus
That seems to be my only (sensible) option...

Thanks
firefly
Have brought this post from other (newly created) 'orphan' thread.

atheophilus, when asking questions about your case, try sticking to the thread you have already opened; that way everyone has the full case history.

Ta. biggrin.gif
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

NIP recieved within 14 days pretty standard make reg number date 27.7.04, time 08.30, speed 77 (in a dual carraigeway 50mph limit zone)

The form clearly had stated accross the top 'THIS FORM MUST BE COMPLETED BY YOU, THE ADDRESSEE; DO NOT HAND TO ANYONE ELSE'

Got the wife to complete the form for me and returned it unsigned, she wrote a statement (not sent to the police) to say she had filled the form in (for future ref).

A letter dated 30th Sept from the Police which basically said they sent the form and I returned it with my details but not signed, a photocopy of the form was sent to me for me to complete it with a signature and I should return it within 14 days. The letter also stated that without a signed document as to my admission as to being the driver the matter would revert to a court hearing for the offence under section 172 of the RTA 1988.

A further letter was recieved dated 13th october reminding me of their prvious letter and that the form remains outstanding so court proceedings would now be instigated against me under section 172 of the RTA together with section 12 of the Road Traffic Offenders act 1988.

This letter crossed with mine of the 11th October in which I asked for clarification of the following points..1. Please can you tell me where in law it states that it is obligatory to sign the form and I will of course be happy to obey.
2. Referring to your last paragraph, what is the alternative to… ‘the matter will revert to a court hearing for the offence under section 172 of the road traffic act 1988’

I then got a letter dated 14th October refering to DPP v Broomfield and a paragraph at the end which said hope this is useful please return the completed form by 25th October.

On 19th October I sent this...

Thank you for your letter of 14th October. I wonder if you could clarify a couple of points with reference to your letter.

1. In The Director of Public Prosecution v Broomfield, Judge Wilkie concluded that a Police Authority could include reasonable instructions as to the manner in which information was to be provided. In relation to Section 172 and that this could include written information. Judge Wilkie did not state that written information should be signed.
2. On the 13th December 2002 at Bristol Crown Court in the case of The Director of Public Prosecution v Pickford, Judge Ticehurst stated that a lacuna in the law does exist.
3. As neither Judge Wilkie or Judge Ticehurst have highlighted the law that makes it obligatory to sign the form, please can you tell me specifically where in law it states that it is obligatory to sign the form and I would of course be happy to do so.

I look forward to hearing from you as soon as possible.

A letter dated 21st October stated..

In response to my letter 19th Oct I was refered to Judge Wilkies decision and DPP v Broomfield again 'that the information should be given in written form and signed by the accused is not merely a whim of those who produce the form, but is specifically directed at enabling the document to be accepted as evidence that the accused was the driver' He also stated that in his judgement the Crown Court at Bristol wrer wrong in their decision.

Also DPP v Francis 16th March 2004 'the cheif officer can require that the response be in writing and is signed.

I regret I am unable toassist further.

As a delay tactic I sent the following on 25th october....

Thank you for your letter of 21st October 2004, only received today!
Could you please send me a copy of the form you refer to in your letter of the 14th.
I look forward to hearing from you as soon as possible.


26th October a reply with a new copy of the form asking for its return by 4.11

1st Nov I sent a letter stating I was unsure of the driver, could have been me or my wife, could they provide a copy of the evidence to help me identify the driver.

5th Nov, got a compliment slip... the photographic evidence is to prove the offence not identify the driver. In my opinion the driver is male.

There are three photos of the front of my car, in the first the speed figure is distorted, in the second the speed figure is slightly distorted, but it looks like 77mph and the third clearly has 71mph. The driver is not identifyable in any of the photos.


Could anyone advise what I should do next? I am happy not to complete the form and get 3 points and a fine, what I dont want is more than 3 points. Can I dispute the 77mph based on an unclear photo and plead 71mph?
fatcockney
Interested to know the progress on this one. Any update??

Scammers seem keen to keep pushing for their £60!
atheophilus
Have sent PACE letter with witness statement etc, not heard anything for a few days now. I keep seeing police cars and think they are after me now...

Will post, when I get a reply or not!
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.