Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: NIP
FightBack Forums > Queries > Speeding and other Criminal Offences
scottish
Hi, I need some help with an NIP i recieved for doing 83 in a 70.

I have a company car and been a victim of a clone care quite recently so have had to contest a few NIP's all proved not guilty on review of the video...so I played the other drivers may have access to my car and that I need to review the video... see leter attached.
firefly
QUOTE (scottish)
<...>09 November 2004 at the location named as, A9, Edinburgh to Perth road, Dunblane, District of Stirling at a part near to Allan Water<...>

Gumphh! This is but a stone's throw from my house, almost literally; and to be honest I didn't know they sat there. Must be a new beat.

The position in Scotland is less clear than in England. I can see that you have drafted a letter based on the one in the 'Unsure of Driver' thread. If it's a company car then the requirements are not quite the same.

Who is the car registered to? Is it in the company's name?
scottish
FF .. I am not the registered owner my company is ..im just down as the keeper but I have access to all company cars as others do to mine along with my spouse/girlfirend.
firefly
Hi scottish,

In your position, I would certainly get in touch with gassit. As I understand it, he owns his own company not too far from where your alleged offence took place. In addition to this, he went through a case almost exactly like yours where the company was the RK.

If you PM him, I'm sure he can tell you how to play it.
scottish
FF ....thanks I have sent a PM to gassit

Did I do and say the right thing in the letter
I picked most of the letter from posts on this site... along with a little common sence...

I like this site but it does seem very vauge on the scottish court system.

Also is it common to be called by the constable about the letter I wrote...
I found that to be very strange...

regards..
firefly
Hi scottish,

The reason the Scottish information is so vague is partly because there are no High Court judgments to clarify the legal position as we have had in England.

Whilst it is true that the courts in Scotland may agree with the content of these rulings, they are not bound by them. It is for this reason that going unsigned may still be an option here. The truth is, until we have a test case or two, we can't be sure.

Wait for gassit to get back to you. Once you have spoken to him, post back on the particulars and we can take it from there.
jeffreyarcher
QUOTE (scottish)
FF .. I am not the registered owner my company is ..im just down as the keeper but I have access to all company cars as others do to mine along with my spouse/girlfirend.

What do you mean 'the keeper'? Do you mean that the company has 'allocated' the vehicle to you?
Also, you are unclear about the capacity in which you have received this NIP.
Has it been sent to the company, in their name, and you are dealing with it as an officer of the company, and the fact that you usually drive the car is just coincidence or,
Have you received it in your own name, having been named as driver by the company, on a previous NIP to them?
When you say 'my company', do you mean that you own it, or merely that you are employed by them?
These facts are critical and must not be confused.
QUOTE (scotish)
Also is it common to be called by the constable about the letter I wrote...

In England & Wales, no; extremely rare. However, D&G, Fife & L&B (and now, apparently Central?) seem to be heavily into the 'threats and intimidation' route.
scottish
Jeffreyarcher....
yes the company has allocated this vehical to me
I was sent the NIP after being named as the driver... the original was sent to my employer
and no I dont own the company just an employee...

regards
scottish
Hi ff, I got a reply from gassit who couldn't offer much more advise as he admited his NIP and one of his drivers was named in another so he has not done much in the way of protesting.

So over to you guys ... any advice would be a great benefit..
gassit
Scottish

You missed my point. I as the employer and registerd keeper provided the Scamera partnership with a list of possible drivers in an attempt to assist the usual user of the vehicle. I ignored all the bluff and bluster letters, threats and irate phone calls from numerous police officers but did not capitulate. Under normal circumstances if your company assists you like this and only names you as part of a list, not on the NIP , the case will be dropped.

However D&G just NIP'd one of the people on the list. This individual argued his case for a further 6 weeks, but ultimately made his own decision to accept the promise of 3 pts and £60 if he gave in, rather than sending the matter to court, which they would normally do for the speed he was doing.

So the question is are your company prepared to play ball and see how Central react to a list of possible drivers, or is it too late for that. If you read Firefly's excellent thread on this matter this is normally a pretty good way of killing the matter.

So I hope your boss hates the b******s as much as I do then he might help.

Cheers


Gas

PS I have bought every employee that wanted it (4 so far) an S3 neo GPS camera locator and laser alert and a Blinder "garage door opener" (honest officer) . I honestly am a caring boss. Want the 2 for £199 I'll tell you where.
matt1133
i recently helped a business owner in a similar situation, south of the border. he refused to name any possible drivers as it would breech their human rights as they had already denied driving.

the owner had followed normal para 4 procedure apart from submitting possible drivers, instead sent a letter saying: it would breech rights, he has been upstanding citizen whole life, first offence in 30 years of clean driving, and would rather the court decide than breech the rights of his workers and possibly be sued by them,

the result was the case being dropped by the metropolitan scammers icon_wink.gif
scottish
Hi FF and the others


any suggestions on what I do now please.

regards.
patdavies
I wouldn't mention that the speedo as underreading as it is an offence in itself.

Popular belief is that a speedo must read with +/- 10%. However, this was only at 30 mph. Subsequetn and superceding EU legislation specifically states that a speedo may not underread at any speed.
scottish
Pat thanks  is it my responsibility to ensure the speedo is correct.


regards.
firefly
Hi scottish,

In your shoes, I would forget the whole 'cloned' line of defence. It's a dead duck. Do your job sheets or company logs show that you were in the area at/or about that time? If so, the chances of the same type and registration of car passing are so small that it will hold next to no water in court.

You have been advised to follow the 'unsure of driver' route, and at present I would stick to that if you were unsure. If it progresses to court then you can request (and will have a better chance of receiving) the video evidence. From this you can make subsequent investigation into the discrepancies with the speed reading. Until then, forget it. It's pretty close to pointless trying to second guess what a video shows from seeing the stills.
scottish
Hi, some of you may remember my post from last November about an NIP for doing 83mph in a 70mph near stirling..

Well after a little delay .. a few letters as well getting very hot sweats after the police contacting my employer (without my knowledge) for route details and the police failing to provide satisfactory evidence which was also riddled with discrepencies... pics unclear and enhanced.. no record of recorded delivery letter and no logs kept on my trips....backed up by my employer...

I finaly got my reply in the post today.  my comments are in ( )

"Contrary to Section 89 of the road traffic act 1984
I would advise that under the terms of Section 172 of the Road Traffic Act 1988, it is incumbent upon the keeper or nominated driver of a motor vehical to supply full and valid details of the driver at the time of an alleged offence, and failure to do so in itself an offence, punishable by a fine of up to £1000.

After further review of the circumstances (or was it that the evidence was riddled with errors... teee hee)..   and while it appears that you have failed to keep sufficient record in order to comply with the above-mentioned legislation. (is it legal legislation to keep records)??
On this occasion only I am prepared to take no further action other than to formally advise you or your legal obligation as outlined above.

However, should any vehical registered to you, or in your possession be involved in a road traffic offence in the future were the legal requierments are not met, the circumstances will be reported in full to the Procurator Fiscal."


Well thankyou kind officer for informing me of my legal obligations, despite failing in yours....

RESULT...... and I think this should be moved to success cases.

thanks to everyone in hear for advice.

regards
firefly
Wow!  That wasn't too difficult.   rolleyes.gif

Thanks for posting back to inform us of the outcome.  Glad to be of assistance.  Perhaps a wee donation to the fund is in order?  Follow the link on my signature.......ahhh go on!
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.