can a NIP/COFP be sent at the same time for a speed offence of 44mph in a 30MPH area?

the driver was driving that particlualr day when snapped by a GATSO ( behind, maybe?) on a stertch of road turning into a Junction. the NIP/S172 and GOFP were sent within the 14day period to the RK address by 1st class. All details seem to be OK. However he claims that he though the road was dual carriage way and that a 40mph applies and also was unfamiliar with the area.

I toold that as far to my knowledge, a NIP is first sent and then a COFP once the offence has been admitted. Any advise

If the recipient is alleged to have committed the offence, then he can consider himself charged, and distinguish himself from Weh (Weh v Austria) - and cannot be required to incriminate himself.

Don't expect a magistrates' court to pay any attention to the above though.

So in layman terrms, the scammers have positive proof ( photos identifying the RK and the car or both) under which they are charging the driver? Is that correct?

No. They are simply trying to shorten the administrative process by combining 2 steps which really shouldn't be combined.

Which force is it from?

Hertforshire.

What is the next step forward?

Sometimes combined NIP/s.172/COFP notices have subtle flaws.

If you can scan the notices, edit out any personally identifiable details and post them (instructions in the FAQ), we can have a look.

Andy, many thanks. Will do that asap. Perfect excuse for getting a scanner.

You mentioned subtle flaws, can you elaborate?

PS. Can the purcahse of the scanner count towards costs if the case if won in court?

Not until we've seen the scans. We won't know if there are any issues until then, and if they're subtle, the explanations are likely to be substantial.



Good question. What can be claimed seems to vary from court to court.
I got my scanner from PC Woe for £30 - not the best, but it does the job.

<eeeewwww> <spit, cough>....

try Aria or Ebuyer - Cheapest is £22 at least you won't have to wash your hands after paying  

http://www.aoxj16.dsl.pipex.com/NIPCOFP.html

Additonal info:
Wondering if this is any hep: The RK has 2 cars in the household. 1 car ( the above) mainly driven by him, but can be used by 2 other members of the family. Belive the insurance policy of other car allows members to drive this car.
2nd car also registerd under above drivers name, but has 2 named drivers, who mostly drive the 2nd car. RK occasionaly drives the 2nd car.
All members in the family have same surname, but differnt 1st names.
When the NIP/COFP came in the enevelope was not opened by the RK himself, it was opened by one of his family member. Reason being that the name on the envelope was just made out to MR. SURNAME. there was no initial(s). However upon seeing that the CAR REGISTARTION belonged to the RK who is the one who drives the most, the paperwork was given to the RK.
Car was bought from a dealer who posted the relevant documents to DVLA and he did not bother to put the full name and suranme of the RK on the car paperwork. Hence DVLA have on their database the RK details as MR. SURNAME

As the NIP/s.172 was addressed to Mr SURNAME, and was opened by a Mr SURNAME, that Mr SURNAME should complete the relevant section of the response form naming the driver - if he knows who was driving, as he is clearly instructed not to pass the form to the driver.
That should buy an extra month.

If he doesn't know who was driving, he is required under s.172(2)(b) RTA 1988 to provide, when so required, any information in his power to give that might lead to the identification of the driver.
That information would presumably be that the RK and owner is [name of RK].
The only appropriate section for someone in that situation would be Part 5., but it could well be argued that it does not satisfy the requirement to provide any information in his power... - although if he is required to provide the information by completing the appropriate part of the form, it could be argued that he has not been required to do any more than that.

Other than providing a concrete link between the request for information, and the certainty of prosecution if the COFP isn't accepted, the COFP does not seem to interfere with the s.172 request in the way that some combined notices do.

Asuming that the RK MR. Surname1
the other member of the family is Mr Surname2

So Mr Surname2 has to fill in Part 2 of the NIP naming Mr Surname1 as the driver. Correct. The details needed to fill in will include all details of RK including his first name(s) , etc? This can be sent on the 27th day to reach the Constabulary on the 28th Day. Sent by Special Delivery

That will mean that a NEW NIP will be sent to MR Surname1, with all his correct details. Then the RK will open the new NIP, and then what happens?

Will a NIP or any "alleged charges" be bought against MR Surname2.


Forgive me, but what is the relevance of this?

Mr Surname1 either names himself on the form provided, names himself in the form of a signed letter (e.g. modified PACE statement), accepts the COFP, or exercises his right to silence.
He has an extra month to consider his options, and for the collective wisdom to chip in with bright ideas.



No.

Andy, I have sent you an PM

Oops, missed that.
To be prosecuted, an information for a summons must be laid with the court within 6 months of the alleged offence.
Whilst that is currently a fair way off, taking a month out of the equation never hurts.
Also, as mentioned above, it gives the driver more time to consider his options.

So when does MR.Surname2 send off the form to the Constabulary? Lat minute, like 26 or 27 day by special delivery? Does it need to be adrressed to the ticket office or to the Police Constable? Just the NIP has to be sent, not the COFP.

Shall advice Mr Surname2 to retain all receipts of special delivery and make photocopies of all documents sent.

Can Mr Surname2 talk to Mr Surname1 about what he, Mr Surname2, has done?

I'd suggest day 26 (from date delivered) by 1st class post (alough others would suggest SD), to the CTO.
Just the s.172 response form (on the back of the NIP).



I'd expect Mr Surname1 to have to instruct Mr Surname2 that he shouldn't have passed the notice to him, and to complete part 2 on day 26.
If Mr Surname2 didn't already know whether Mr Surname1 was the driver, it might be argued that it's better that he didn't know. Other than that, I see no reason not to communicate.

So if the NIP / S172 is dated 21/10/05 it should be sent out on the 17th Novemeber by SD to reach the Scammers Partmnership Safety Unit on the 18th November ( which is 28th Day). Not to be sent to the Chief Constable at this time

Probably doesnt really matter if you send to the CC or the scameraship - the thinking is that sending to the CC will ensure that your letter was read by someone who understands PACE (which technically should result in your case being dropped but in reality wont) and may waste another day of 2 while your letter does the internal rounds (and since the S172 was on behalf of the CC it seems only fitting the reply goes to the CC!)

Correct - although it's 28 days from the date the notice was delivered, not sent.
As Mr Surname2 is not naming himself, the privilege against self incrimination does not apply, and there is no need to have it received by someone who might understand PACE. It is not advisable to flag the case up at this time.

andy_foster: can you pease clarify: and

. are you saying to not send anything yet?

boyinlondon,

My response was as much for the benefit of OU812 as for you - Mr Surname2 should name Mr Surname1 in the form supplied, returned to scammer central (CTO) as per the instructions on the notice.

Sending a PACE statement (whether to the CC or scammer central) would be inappropriate as the sender will not be naming himself, and could flag up the case for special attention, for no good reason.

andy_foster

Yes, i thought so as well, as sending the PACE Statement will not apply at the moment. so Mr Surname2 will send the s172 response naming mr Surname1 on the 18th November.

I have also sent you an PM

No PM???

Depending on when the notice was delivered, it might be better to send s.172 on 17th - 19th is a Saturday - so next working day is Monday 21st.

right.. the s172 will be sent out on the 17th. also a photocopy of the filled notice will be takens and keeping all SD reciepts. GAME ON!!!

PM SENT just a little while ago

Yes my bad, I didnt really read the thread and therefore wrongly assumed that the sender would be naming themself - sorry

The fuist NIP was sent by SD on the 17Th November. On the 19th November a second NIP was sent addressed to the person who was nameed on the first NIP. Along with it came the usual COFP ststing 28days to pay/get points , etc

How should one proceed now?

Hi All, I have to send the NIP by next week and would appreciate any help in what to do next

PACE ws to the CC to arrive on the 28th day from the date of reciept would be my advice!

Simon