How late can you receive a NIP and it still be valid

[andoverben]

Just had a Nip through the Post for an offence on the 10th August (43 in a 30) it is however dated 9th October. I thought they had to be sent within 14 Days to be valid? is this correct?

It was for a Car that I had bought a few months before and sold shortly afterwards so this may account for the delay as it probably went to the other Owner, does this make a difference?

[blaineuk]

Yes, as long a the registered keeper at the time got it with in 14 days it is valid.

[andoverben]

Arse, felt particularly hard done by it. I was about 10ft from a Derestricted sign with the Van in the 60 Zone but evidently catching people accelerating prematurely. I remember seeing him thinking what a Scumbag blatantly there for no purpose but to raise revenue since it is in the middle of nowhere I wonder whether he got me. The answer evidently is yes.

[XDA]

blaineuk said:

Yes, as long a the registered keeper at the time got it with in 14 days it is valid.

I thought that the NIP had to be served within 14 days from the date of the alleged offence?

OP, are you the registered keeper of the car (are your details on the V5)? Have you had the car long?

[Furry Exocet]

XDA said:

I thought that the NIP had to be served within 14 days from the date of the alleged offence?

OP, are you the registered keeper of the car (are your details on the V5)? Have you had the car long?

Did you read the post?

[XDA]

Furry Exocet said:

XDA said:

I thought that the NIP had to be served within 14 days from the date of the alleged offence?

OP, are you the registered keeper of the car (are your details on the V5)? Have you had the car long?

Did you read the post?

No I didn't.... (completely missed the second paragraph!)

[paintman]

Don't see why you think you're being hard done by.
The speed limit is up to the sign. Once you've passed the sign go for it
Same when entering a speed restricted area. The speed limit applies from the sign.

[m8rky]

I could be wrong but I was under the impression that the van had to be in the relevant speed zone and that their is some tolerance on so many feet within the limit.I do stand to be corrected on that if not the case.

[paintman]

Ah, call me cynical, but I somehow doubt that the OP was doing 30 until 11 feet from the sign then jumped from 30 to 43 by the time he'd got to within the claimed 10 feet........

Edited by paintman on Sunday 14th October 10:42

[4rephill]

m8rky said:

I could be wrong but I was under the impression that the van had to be in the relevant speed zone and that their is some tolerance on so many feet within the limit.I do stand to be corrected on that if not the case.

From: http://www.abd.org.uk/speed_limit_signs.htm

Signs to indicate the beginning of a speed limit

Direction 8 of TSRGD sets out the requirements for the placing of signs to indicate the beginning of a restriction, requirement, prohibition or speed limit. The first paragraph of direction 8 lists the diagram numbers of the signs to which the direction applies, including diagrams 670 and 674 (See above). The other paragraphs relevant to speed limits are as follows:

(2) In accordance with the following provisions of this direction and the provisions of direction 9, appropriate signs to which this direction applies shall be placed to indicate the point at which a restriction, requirement, prohibition or speed limit applying to traffic on a road (in this direction and in direction 9 called the "relevant road") begins.

The limit starts at the position of the sign, not "so many feet within the limit". You should have ample time to spot the limit sign and reduce your speed accordingly before entering the speed restriction.

[pitmansboots]

m8rky said:

I could be wrong but I was under the impression that the van had to be in the relevant speed zone and that their is some tolerance on so many feet within the limit.I do stand to be corrected on that if not the case.

You are under the wrong impression. The only vehicle that needs to be in the relevant limit is the car being measured, not the van doing the measuring, what would be the point of that?

[Furry Exocet]

m8rky said:

I could be wrong but I was under the impression that the van had to be in the relevant speed zone and that their is some tolerance on so many. feet within the limit.I do stand to be corrected on that if not the case.

As long as the operator has measured the distance from them to the sign and the person being pinged is outside of that measurement then they are fair game

[clyffepypard]

Furry Exocet said:

As long as the operator has measured the distance from them to the sign and the person being pinged is outside of that measurement then they are fair game

Interesting point. Were is their evidence that the speeding car was still in the 30 zone when pinged. Do they also record the distance to the car and the limit sign?
This would also be a good reason for the camera car to be also in thside the same zone, since it inherently avoids such a possibility of error.
One might also wonder whether this place is a known accident spot, or just a good revenue earner. I'm suspecting the later from the description so far.

[Frix]

clyffepypard said:

Interesting point. Were is their evidence that the speeding car was still in the 30 zone when pinged. Do they also record the distance to the car and the limit sign?
This would also be a good reason for the camera car to be also in thside the same zone, since it inherently avoids such a possibility of error.
One might also wonder whether this place is a known accident spot, or just a good revenue earner. I'm suspecting the later from the description so far.

There evidence will recorded in their notebook/logbook and any subsequent statement. Distance to the car is always recorded. Limit sign is easy to do as well. Some devices allow you to eliminate readings taken from distances over or under a certain distance. Ideal for the situation described.

What is the relevance of the "known accident spot"? Wasn't a GATSO.

[Deva Link]

If other people can drive the car and it was a rear facing Gatrso then you could argue that the length of time makes it difficult to be certain who was driving.

However a picture from a camera van is likely to have a pretty good snap of the driver.

[jaf01uk]

Frix said:

clyffepypard said:

Interesting point. Were is their evidence that the speeding car was still in the 30 zone when pinged. Do they also record the distance to the car and the limit sign?
This would also be a good reason for the camera car to be also in thside the same zone, since it inherently avoids such a possibility of error.
One might also wonder whether this place is a known accident spot, or just a good revenue earner. I'm suspecting the later from the description so far.

There evidence will recorded in their notebook/logbook and any subsequent statement. Distance to the car is always recorded. Limit sign is easy to do as well. Some devices allow you to eliminate readings taken from distances over or under a certain distance. Ideal for the situation described.

What is the relevance of the "known accident spot"? Wasn't a GATSO.

They must want to get you really bad if they are prepared to do all that mullarky, why not just play the game fairly in the 1st place and avoid the introduction of doubt into it, oh I forgot, they don't like playing fair! Either sit in the 30 or ping the 60 but doing one from the other just makes people feel "had" like the OP, scamera operators certainly don't seem to care about their image, or perhaps they just go out of their way to make themselves the most unpopular people on planet earth?
Gary

[Furry Exocet]

jaf01uk said:

They must want to get you really bad if they are prepared to do all that mullarky, why not just play the game fairly in the 1st place and avoid the introduction of doubt into it, oh I forgot, they don't like playing fair! Either sit in the 30 or ping the 60 but doing one from the other just makes people feel "had" like the OP, scamera operators certainly don't seem to care about their image, or perhaps they just go out of their way to make themselves the most unpopular people on planet earth?
Gary

Not difficult at all and not really that time consuming. Stand with laser and aim at the speed limit sign, record the distance in pocket notebook. Sight first car and record the speed and distance.

Everything has to be documented anyway, including all pre checks and checks carried out once finished, no trouble to write down 1 extra measurement.

Nothing to do with playing fair, in fact it should be much clearer to the car driver, as they can see exactly where the speed limit change is. No matter what is done, speed enforcers are always deemed to be "not playing fair" when someone is caught speeding

[andoverben]

Not that it really has any relevance since it has been correctly pointed out the speed limits do apply from the sign not from when you can see the sign Having GoogleMapped it quite clearly was more than 10ft before (and in answer to the question above I didn't jump 13mph from 11ft to 10) this is where it was taken
https://maps.google.co.uk/maps?hl=en&q=wherwel...
You will see the lack of Houses and general middle of nowhereness, it is a Road I know fairly well and would have started accelerating round the corner knowing that I passed the last house some while ago and it was changing to 60 and frankly should have done so 50ft earlier what that 30Mph sign does is give plenty of notice for cars coming the other way because there is a very tight bend that you really do need to slow down for coming down the Hill. The Camera Van was in the Layby on the Left you can just see in the distance.

Not that it is any defence because I was bang to rights but just trying to explain why I feel it has squat to do with Road Safety and is nothing more than a cynical attempt to scam money from the Motorist - not that I didn't think that before anyway.

Not sure how to edit that I thought I was looking at a Street View of the B3420 Winchester Road after the Hairpin heading toward the Deristricted sign whereas what seems to have come up is a Map of Wherwell

Edited by andoverben on Sunday 14th October 23:46

Edited by andoverben on Sunday 14th October 23:50

[y2blade]

andoverben said:

Arse, felt particularly hard done by it. I was about 10ft from a Derestricted sign with the Van in the 60 Zone but evidently catching people accelerating prematurely. I remember seeing him thinking what a Scumbag blatantly there for no purpose but to raise revenue since it is in the middle of nowhere I wonder whether he got me. The answer evidently is yes.

Whereabouts were you caught?
I've seen a Camera van in a few of the villages in the area this year.

[clyffepypard]

Frix said:

There evidence will recorded in their notebook/logbook and any subsequent statement. Distance to the car is always recorded. Limit sign is easy to do as well. Some devices allow you to eliminate readings taken from distances over or under a certain distance. Ideal for the situation described.

What is the relevance of the "known accident spot"? Wasn't a GATSO.

You know damn well the relevance of whether it is a known accident spot, Any more stupid comments?