Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: [NIP Wizard] False accusation made by police
FightBack Forums > Queries > Speeding and other Criminal Offences
royzor
NIP Details and Circumstances
What is the name of the Constabulary? -
Date of the offence: - December 2009
Date of the NIP: - 35 days after the offence
Date you received the NIP: - 37 days after the offence
Location of offence (exact location as it appears on the NIP: important): - Manchester Road, Clifton, Manchester
Was the NIP addressed to you? - Yes
Was the NIP sent by first class post, second class or recorded delivery? - Not known
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 - Stopped by police who were doing random checks. Accused me of using mobile phone & also failing to wear a seatbelt. I denied using mobile & proved I couldn't have been using it as it was in my boot. I did not admit or deny seatbelt. As I have only been driving 1yr the mobile accusation could have cost me my licence. He told me he wasn't giving me the slip as the fine amounts had changed from £30 to £60 and they still had the old slips. Can I ask for video evidence in regards to the seatbelt? Were exactly do I stand?

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, 03 Feb 2010 09:15:11 +0000
Pete D
I doubt there will be any video evidence. What is it you have received, is it a NIP an S172 or what. I assume you were not wearing your seat belt ? Pete D
peterguk
So he didn't FPN you for the mobile phone? If so, he was mistaken in his accussation, you proved you could not have been using it, move on.

You neither confirmed or denied the seat belt? Were you wesring it or not?
royzor
Hi Guys,

I would like to clarify I actually started this thread for my 18 yr old son.

The letter He got through the post was a Conditional offer/Fixed penalty Notice. Offence details is under "Section 75 of the road traffic act 1998 (as ammended)". You may be able to settle the matter by accepting a fixed penalty fine.

My son said he had the seatbelt over his shoulder but it was not clipped in.

Roz

captain swoop
So he wasn't wearing a seatbelt.
ford poplar
... and why we prefer the 'victim' to post and provide all relevent details.

Obvious solution for your son - accept the CoFP (if only for not wearing seatbelt)
southpaw82
QUOTE (royzor @ Thu, 4 Feb 2010 - 14:47) *
Offence details is under "Section 75 of the road traffic act 1998 (as ammended)".


Selling a vehicle in an unroadworthy condition? huh.gif

Do you perhaps mean that the CoFP was issued under s. 75 of the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988? Does it list the seat belt offence?
Lynnzer
QUOTE (southpaw82 @ Thu, 4 Feb 2010 - 15:46) *
QUOTE (royzor @ Thu, 4 Feb 2010 - 14:47) *
Offence details is under "Section 75 of the road traffic act 1998 (as ammended)".


Selling a vehicle in an unroadworthy condition? huh.gif

Do you perhaps mean that the CoFP was issued under s. 75 of the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988? Does it list the seat belt offence?

The OP could have some real fun with this one in court
royzor
Hi again.

The sentence I quoted is as follows (I apologies for putting 1998 instead of 1988)

If you were responsible for the alleged offence being committed and want to accept liability, under section 75 of the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988 (as amended), you may be able to settle the matter by accepting a fixed penalty fine

Sorry I can't scan the letter as my main computer is not working at the minute.

Roz
peterguk
QUOTE (royzor @ Fri, 5 Feb 2010 - 17:32) *
Hi again.

The sentence I quoted is as follows (I apologies for putting 1998 instead of 1988)

If you were responsible for the alleged offence being committed and want to accept liability, under section 75 of the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988 (as amended), you may be able to settle the matter by accepting a fixed penalty fine

Sorry I can't scan the letter as my main computer is not working at the minute.

Roz


Since he wasn't wearing his belt, then maybe he should accept the COFP...
Lynnzer
Something wrong with this. S75 of the RTOA 1988 refers to Scotland only for an offer of a fixed penalty by the P.F.
This clearly doesn't sit right with something clocked in Manchester.

If the police have actually made a mistake in this then I wonder what the potential is for taking advantage of it.
Maybe Southpaw can illuminate on this.
Hotel Oscar 87
Sec 75 RTOA 1988 (read here) relates to the issue of a conditional offer where one wasn't issued at the roadside. Such a notice must, amongst other things, set out the circumstances of the offence, the amount that should be paid and the fact that no proceedings will be taken for 28 days.

Can the OP confirm that the notice contains the relevant details?
nemo
QUOTE (Lynnzer @ Sat, 6 Feb 2010 - 12:19) *
S75 of the RTOA 1988 refers to Scotland only..

It also applies to England and Wales..

QUOTE (Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988)
75. Issue of Conditional Offer

(1) Where in England and Wales

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.