NIP Details and Circumstances
What is the name of the Constabulary? -
Date of the offence: - April 2011
Date of the NIP: - 10 days after the offence
Date you received the NIP: - 11 days after the offence
Location of offence (exact location as it appears on the NIP: important): - A1 BARROWBY THORNS (NORTH BOUND CARRAGEWAY)
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? - 0
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 - Driving north on the A1 after going to see the Royal Wedding in London; didn't see the front-facing Truvelo until it was too late

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? - Yes
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, 11 May 2011 07:06:02 +0000

The NIP states that the alleged offence of exceeding the speed limit took place "contrary to article 2©(temporary speed limit) Order & section 89(1) of the RTRA 1984 and Sch 2 RTAO 1988".

By the 2c part I presume they mean 2© of "The 70 miles per hour (Temporary Speed Limit) Order 1977" (text available at http://www.hughesguides.com/demo/706050.html). Does this really count for anything, given that section 5 of the same Order shows that the 1977 regulations expire on 30 November 1978? ("5. The period of this Order is a period beginning immediately after midnight at the end of Tuesday 31st May 1977 and ending at midnight at the end of Tuesday 30th November 1978.")

Is that grounds for rejection of the NIP?

P.S. The NIP states that it is alleged I was travelling at 79mph in a 70mph limit.

No.

What about the fact that 79mph in a 70mph limit is at the very lower limit of the ACPO guidelines? I realise that speeding is an absolute offence; but is there likely to be any value in owning up but pleading leniency (in a letter sent at the same time as the NIP)?

ACPO guidelines are dead and buried. And in any case, they were nothing more than guidelines.

You won't get "let off" by pleading leniency.

You could check out the force's website and see if they offer SACs at that speed.

The 1977 Temporary Speed Limit Order was extended indefinitely by the 1978 Order - otherwise we would not have speed limits on 'derestricted' roads.

The NIP must specify the nature of the alleged offence. If it slightly mis-stated the name of the order that created the NSL 34 years ago, it would take a Jedi mind trick to persuade a court that that misled or confused you as to the nature of the allegation.