irzero
Thu, 30 Apr 2009 - 12:33
x
jobo
Thu, 30 Apr 2009 - 12:44
dont send them the envelope, they will just loose it
learn to open post from the police without ripping the envelope to bits
wait and see if a reminder turns up#
at the moment you dont have an nip
your chances of getting off this depends on your credibility, do nothing which effects this
irzero
Thu, 30 Apr 2009 - 12:49
well yeh the envelope is in 4 peices but i have all of them, the contents are in perfect condition though so its physically impossible to open an envelope in this manner without ripping whats in side into 4 pieces too.
Im hoping that this is a fluke of luck and gives me a basis for decent defence without having to actually defend the speeding
jobo
Thu, 30 Apr 2009 - 12:57
had second thought
i think writing to them saying youve had an empty envelope is agood move, and explains why youve kept it
see what others think
irzero
Thu, 30 Apr 2009 - 13:34
i think ill wait till im well passed the 14 days to respond to this
andy_foster
Thu, 30 Apr 2009 - 13:39
The earlier you raise an issue, the greater your credibility.
Playing a little dumb helps too - if you don't point out that you know that the failure to serve a NIP (if proven) is fatal to the prosecution case, there is likely to be less suspicion that you fabricated the story to avoid liability, and a greater chance of the scammers being less guarded in their response.
That said, don't say anything that isn't true.
Glacier2
Thu, 30 Apr 2009 - 14:22
There is no requirement in law to issue a reminder at all. So the next letter could be a summons for S172.
I would query the scammers now.
irzero
Thu, 30 Apr 2009 - 14:40
xx
jobo
Thu, 30 Apr 2009 - 15:24
your a bit optimistic with you time frames
its more like
4 weeks for original to expire, 1-2 weks for reminder, 7 days to respond 2=3 weeks for cofp 4 weeks to respond
i make that 14 weeks at the very most
and as has been said they may not send a remminder and go to summons
which will leave you with a badly ripped up envelope which you say was empty buit which for some reason youve kept for many months as your only evidence
youve ot to convince a court it was empty, so what will do that ?
A prompt letter expressing concern at an nip going missing seems reasonable responsive to me
then when they issue a replacement, you can get arssy over the late service
irzero
Thu, 30 Apr 2009 - 15:33
x
jobo
Thu, 30 Apr 2009 - 15:46
your playing a dangerous game and may find your self throwing away a pretty good defence
i think youl live to regret your strategy but il leave you to it
Glacier2
Thu, 30 Apr 2009 - 16:05
I agree Jobo, it is a very dangerous game which could end in tears with 6 points on the OP's licence.
irzero
Thu, 30 Apr 2009 - 16:12
6 points from where? speeding is 3 and S172 wont happen if i fill the form in,
MartinHP71
Thu, 30 Apr 2009 - 16:20
QUOTE (irzero @ Thu, 30 Apr 2009 - 17:12)
6 points from where? speeding is 3 and S172 wont happen if i fill the form in,
Going back to your creditability and playing devils advocate.
Does the NIP leaflet have addresses on ?
How as an innocent person (which you are) do you know to ask for pictures and other stuff when nothing turned up but the leaflet therefore someone could read into it that the NIP did turn up and you just trying to confuse the situation.
You have received an envelope with just a leaflet in, perhaps the approach (if the information is on the leaflet) is to ring and ask why you sent this leaflet.
douglasb
Thu, 30 Apr 2009 - 16:43
QUOTE (irzero @ Thu, 30 Apr 2009 - 13:33)
Yesterday i recieved an envelope in the post which contained only a leaflet titled "Upon Recieving a notice of intended prosecution" it was sent via first class pre paid envelope and was actually not sealed!!!!
A couple of questions, the first to irzero.
If the leaflet was the only thing in the envelope, how did the postman know who to deliver it to? (I'm assuming that it was a window envelope rather than an envelope with your address on a label?)
(I took some time creating this post. Martin has come up with the same question
)
The second to the knowledgeable members.
I thought that the argument of "I didn't receive the NIP therefore it wasn't served" doesn't work as the SCP only need to say "We printed it. We posted it. Therefore it was served". Whatever the Royal Mail do with it in the meantime, or whatever mistake the SCP may have made makes no difference
jobo
Thu, 30 Apr 2009 - 17:03
no its presumed served if posted first class etc
but this is a rebuttable presumption
ie if the court believes you didnt get it then you away clear
redloner
Thu, 30 Apr 2009 - 22:32
QUOTE (irzero @ Thu, 30 Apr 2009 - 15:40)
so so far im +10 days for original, + 35 (five weeks) for reminder + 12 days for response + 14 days for their response + further 12 days for my response requesting photo, + 14 days for their response of deny or accept + 10 days for my response + further 28 days for replacement NIP, plus 14 days for filled in NIP + 14 days for offer of fixed penalty, this should take me to exactly 6 months, and because i have filled in the NIP i have no problems with S172 and then because i do not accept the Fixed penalty its also to late to lay papers.
Unless my arithmetic is flawed, or there's something missing, that adds up to 163 days, more than two weeks short of six months. How long ago are we talking about?
irzero
Fri, 1 May 2009 - 09:22
x
Glacier2
Fri, 1 May 2009 - 10:52
Why are you so certain they will send a replacement/reminder?
irzero
Fri, 1 May 2009 - 12:15
x
Glacier2
Fri, 1 May 2009 - 12:23
You are still playing with fire and you could get burned.
jobo
Fri, 1 May 2009 - 12:29
your wrong on so many levels of law and case law
but if this works the most stupid thing you could do is detail it on a public forum, thus alerting the scammers to it, thats aside from the fact that some of you tactics come awfully close to perverting the course of justice.
such as denning receipt of the nip, which if they could prove, would get you jail time. not a clever thing to do my friend
irzero
Fri, 1 May 2009 - 12:40
i think they call it abuse of process.
my case law?
only rule i know of are the 14 day rule and the 6 months time out for speeding and 7.5 month time out of the S172
point taken on the forum part.
ill get back to you guys in 7 months or so
Glacier2
Fri, 1 May 2009 - 12:45
I hope you don't mind eating lumpy porridge.
The fact you have edited your opening post speaks volumes.
Bluedart
Fri, 1 May 2009 - 13:18
QUOTE
lumpy porridge
I wouldn't want to go there and eat it either, although there have been times when it has been imminent. Not because I have done anything wrong, but because those in uniform and their backup teams will take you right to the wire. They live in a permanent state of denial and will never say, "Sorry, we got it wrong".
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please
click here.