Hi Sorry for not using the wizard but it didn't apply to this subject.

Between October and the end of December I did some contract work for a company the required driving all round the country. As part of that my employer would hire a cars for me and an assistant (that they had contracted) to drive round in but the car were hired rather amusingly only only the days we needed from enterprise so we would frequently go through 3 hire cars in a week.


During the contract i sent my assistant 'Frank' off on his own in the car to do work round London and he came back one day fretting about being flashed in the limehouse link tunnel. Nothing was heard and we'd kind of forgotten about it.


Fast forward to yesterday and Frank emailed me saying his mother had opened a letter to a name she didnt know - It was my name and it was a NIP but had been sent to his home address.

The rough details are

Date of sending 04/01/2013
Date of offence 20/11/2012

Offence Excess speed ;47 in 30 Restricted road Limehouse Link Tunnel.

Basically the offence he worried about!


Reading it he thinks he cant fill out the form because the letter was not addressed to him so has said he will pop it in the post for me to fill out and effectively incriminate him!


Now whilst i can do I'm wondering if there might be any way the NIP is invalid and i can avoid having to incriminate him - I am worried about him - he's only had his licence 6 months and I'm grateful that he contacted me about it rather than just putting the letter in the bin leading to possible further legal problems - we don't work together any more he's knows it was him and the NIP seems to be a compleate balls up so in his circumstances i would have been tempted to bin it or return it to the police with 'no person of that name at this address.' But more so than this im astonished that the police sent to NIP to me at his address.

We would both have been insured via work and the enterprise contract and whilst i can believe that when they contacted enterprise I would have been the 'leading' name given, and i can belive that enterprise would bugger it up and give them my name with Franks address..... Im just surprised that the police wouldn't bother to check my name and address.

Anyway can anyone suggest any advice or am i just going to have to try and fill out the back of the form and incriminate him?

If the police are given a name and address, as they seem to have been by Enterprise, there is no reason at all for them to check further. The form has been addressed to you by name and although it will reach you by a circuitous route, you must then complete it honestly. What happens thereafter is not your concern, Frank chose to do 47 in a 30 and must bear the consequences, you did not.

I know this sounds harsh but its not your problem what happens to Frank, when you get the NIP fill it in and return it naming him with maybe a covering letter explaining the circumstances and keep a copy and obtain proof of postage, it would be unwise to put yourself in the firing line and at risk when there is no need to,

If you don't fill in the form effectivly incriminating Frank, you'll finish up with 6 points and massive fine.

Not sure how you think they can check YOUR name and address. If they could do that no one would be able to disappear in this country of ours. How many people do you think have the same name as yourself ?

As has been said, Enterprise gave them A name and An Address and they sent the form to that address. It doesn't give you a get out clause because you now know about and are getting it forwarded to you.

The DVLA data base I would have hoped... The police seem pretty able to track most people 'down' Im hardly someone on the run trying to hide my identity and especially considering if my ex colleague hadn't have decided to make me aware of this it would have then looked like I was failing to respond to them.

Why would they check when your details have already been supplied? On what grounds would a check be carried out?

Well at least in my line of work it would be called due diligence...

And in others it would be called bureaucratic over-kill. If this was a murder inquiry you might have a point, but in the routine processing of huge volumes of speeding offences adding a further stage which is unnecessary in 99.9% of cases would be a great waste of public money.

Hopefully in your line of work it is also diligent to only suggest an action is routine when you know what you are talking about.

It's also known as a breach of the Data Protection Act, as there are no grounds for the enquiry.