Mum got an NIP, 40 in a 30 but the letter is LATE

Mum got an NIP, 40 in a 30 but the letter is LATE

Author
Discussion

Alex

9,975 posts

283 months

Wednesday 16th May 2012
quotequote all
One point: Late service of the NIP is a valid defence against the charge of speeding, but NOT against the charge of failing to name the driver, so it must still be completed.

Moogle

Original Poster:

257 posts

169 months

Wednesday 16th May 2012
quotequote all
Everything I have stated in this thread is factual and all information has been taken from the letter sent to Mummy Dearest, there is no interpretation of the events, it was an automatic camera that caught her and at no point has she or I ever disputed the possibility that she was actually speeding but that's not what I am asking here.

And I'm glad I'm not the only one that thought that WhereamI was talking utter tosh. Again thank you all for your help.

daz3210

5,000 posts

239 months

Wednesday 16th May 2012
quotequote all
ferrariF50lover said:
It's all very simple.
.......
Thus, upon the sending of the NIP, it is for the defendant to show on the balance of probabilities that he did not receive it, and so it was not served, within the fourteen whole days after the date of offence.
This is achieved by the serving of a signed s9 Witness Statement to that effect.
That does sound very simple.

Is there any layout for such a statement, and anything that should/should not be included?

Or should you trot down to your local station to make the statement?

And should the S9 Statement then be sent with the completed NIP?

Zeeky

2,779 posts

211 months

Wednesday 16th May 2012
quotequote all
daz3210 said:
ferrariF50lover said:
It's all very simple.
.......
Thus, upon the sending of the NIP, it is for the defendant to show on the balance of probabilities that he did not receive it, and so it was not served, within the fourteen whole days after the date of offence.
This is achieved by the serving of a signed s9 Witness Statement to that effect.
That does sound very simple....
Simple and incorrect. It is based on the premise that if the defendant raises a defence then the prosecution have to disprove it. The legislation and indeed the case law creates this particular defence as one that the defendant must prove.

The Interpretation Act 1978 uses the words "unless the contrary is proved"

In cases where the defendant has to prove his defence he need do so only on the balance of probabilities and not to the criminal standard.


I must say I have no desire to assist an expat who slags off his country's criminal justice system having chosen to live in one with a relatively corrupt system. He may learn that in time.



Moogle

Original Poster:

257 posts

169 months

Wednesday 16th May 2012
quotequote all
Zeeky said:
Simple and incorrect. It is based on the premise that if the defendant raises a defence then the prosecution have to disprove it. The legislation and indeed the case law creates this particular defence as one that the defendant must prove.

The Interpretation Act 1978 uses the words "unless the contrary is proved"

In cases where the defendant has to prove his defence he need do so only on the balance of probabilities and not to the criminal standard.


I must say I have no desire to assist an expat who slags off his country's criminal justice system having chosen to live in one with a relatively corrupt system. He may learn that in time.
I do appreciate your help, just for balance I never said the US doesn't have it's own issues, this much is glaringly obvious to me in the month and a half I've been here however, perhaps I should clarify, in the specifics of traffic/road law I have significantly more rights here to defend myself than I do in the UK, also the entire system here (in regards to traffic/road laws) isn't quite obviously engineered to generate profit with little regard for ACTUAL road safety.

Yet.

I can already see the signs it's going that way here, but I'm not sorry I'm not deeply patriotic about something that is broke and continues to get worse, I'm not going to make excuses for 'my country' when its government continues to royally fk it up. As a genuine question, what is your experience of being/living in the US and what area?

'He' knows the corruption already, do you believe this is unique to the US and not the UK? When (not if) you get so utterly fed up with the way things are headed there in the UK, go and do what all the other people who have the option do and leave the country (note: everyone has the option).

Richard C

1,685 posts

256 months

Wednesday 16th May 2012
quotequote all
Moogle said:
WhereamI said:
Of course she could just accept her guilt, pay the fine and move on without trying to wriggle out on a technicality. A guess that since you rant about the British justice system you've yet to get the wrong side of the US one, good luck to you if you do.
Bless you, you're one of those.... Good luck with the world you and your people want to create and choose to live in, also I didn't ask for your moral advice, I asked for LEGAL advice which as it currently seems, she has a LEGAL RIGHT to contend the ticket since a LAW has been broken by the constabulary and she would not be 'wriggling out on a technicality', this is LAW set by them, not us.

You people scare me the most as you've already been brain washed into just bending over and accepting what is dished out to you with no questions asked. You've already given up the fight, please don't try and suddenly try and find it again here in this thread.
Ever so nicely put - far better than I could have phrased such a response to the endless stream of apologists, apparatchik's and worse that our corrupted system encourages

WhereamI

6,887 posts

216 months

Wednesday 16th May 2012
quotequote all
Moogle said:
WhereamI said:
Of course she could just accept her guilt, pay the fine and move on without trying to wriggle out on a technicality. A guess that since you rant about the British justice system you've yet to get the wrong side of the US one, good luck to you if you do.
Bless you, you're one of those.... Good luck with the world you and your people want to create and choose to live in, also I didn't ask for your moral advice, I asked for LEGAL advice which as it currently seems, she has a LEGAL RIGHT to contend the ticket since a LAW has been broken by the constabulary and she would not be 'wriggling out on a technicality', this is LAW set by them, not us.

You people scare me the most as you've already been brain washed into just bending over and accepting what is dished out to you with no questions asked. You've already given up the fight, please don't try and suddenly try and find it again here in this thread.
Every day they issue, what, hundreds or is it thousands of these things? And you really think that by saying that you didn't get it in time they are going to say 'OK, we'll let you off then'?

I spend my energy on the battles I can win, contesting a speeding ticket when you are guilty isn't one you are going to win.

chriscpritchard

284 posts

164 months

Wednesday 16th May 2012
quotequote all
WhereamI said:
Every day they issue, what, hundreds or is it thousands of these things? And you really think that by saying that you didn't get it in time they are going to say 'OK, we'll let you off then'?

I spend my energy on the battles I can win, contesting a speeding ticket when you are guilty isn't one you are going to win.
The ticket is invalid though, why should the public follow the law if the authorities don't. That's why everyone is (should be?) treated equally in the eyes of the law. As the law states the NIP must be served within 14 days (barring certain exceptions), the OP's mother has a statutory defence to the speeding charge and therefore is NOT GUILTY.

Deva Link

26,934 posts

244 months

Wednesday 16th May 2012
quotequote all
sinizter said:
Why should she just fold over ?

If they cannot follow even the simplest of procedures properly, what hope do they have of handling a more serious charge properly ?
A simple fix would be to employ an army of people to hand-serve these notices, and then up the fine to £500 to cover the cost.

Moogle said:
How does she prove that she received the letter on the 15th? How do they prove she DIDN'T? It wasn't sent recorded delivery.
It's all very well the wailing gnashing your teeth, but what's Mum going to do? Chances are she'll opt for a quiet life and just settle it.

Having said that, it might be worth a note to the sender saying it was received late and they may just drop it - they want the easy route to raising money and hassle gets in the way of that.

Edited by Deva Link on Wednesday 16th May 11:38

blueg33

35,578 posts

223 months

Wednesday 16th May 2012
quotequote all
WhereamI said:
Every day they issue, what, hundreds or is it thousands of these things? And you really think that by saying that you didn't get it in time they are going to say 'OK, we'll let you off then'?

I spend my energy on the battles I can win, contesting a speeding ticket when you are guilty isn't one you are going to win.
Gidden won the same argument. So it can be won. What you seem to be saying is that even though the NIP is illegal you would roll over. Then people wonder why the SCAMMAS get away with repeatedly breaking the law themselves

Deva Link

26,934 posts

244 months

Wednesday 16th May 2012
quotequote all
blueg33 said:
...even though the NIP is illegal
..the NIP isn't illegal.

Deva Link

26,934 posts

244 months

Wednesday 16th May 2012
quotequote all
Apache said:
work colleague has a bin full and no repurcussions
I've heard tales of companies that just bin them and nothing seems to happen. No idea how they get away with it though.

sinizter

3,348 posts

185 months

Wednesday 16th May 2012
quotequote all
Deva Link said:
sinizter said:
Why should she just fold over ?

If they cannot follow even the simplest of procedures properly, what hope do they have of handling a more serious charge properly ?
A simple fix would be to employ an army of people to hand-serve these notices, and then up the fine to £500 to cover the cost.
That may even have the effect of actually changing drivers' behaviour. Which the current system does not until they get to 9 points.

The current system of assuming these notices are delivered the day after posting is fundamentally flawed - when RM themselves say they lose upto 10% of mail - and only being forced on the public as acceptable by the courts.

blueg33

35,578 posts

223 months

Wednesday 16th May 2012
quotequote all
Deva Link said:
..the NIP isn't illegal.
Splitting hairs, it was served outside of the legal time requirement

Deva Link

26,934 posts

244 months

Wednesday 16th May 2012
quotequote all
blueg33 said:
Splitting hairs, it was served outside of the legal time requirement
Says who? The OPs mum? Good luck with that if there's no other proof of late arrival.

In the Gidden case there was no dispute as there was a postal strike on.

blueg33

35,578 posts

223 months

Wednesday 16th May 2012
quotequote all
Deva Link said:
Says who? The OPs mum? Good luck with that if there's no other proof of late arrival.
I have already pointed that out re Gidden.

Blueg33 said:
IIRC Gidden had a witness statement from the postman. That is important as it introduces evidence from a 3rd party rather than just the defendant.
But we have no knoweledge of whether the OP's mum is telling the truth or not. So surely the assumption should be that she is telling the truth and that the advice is that she needs evidence to support this assertion.

On the basis she is telling the truth, then the NIP has not been served correctly and hence is invalid.

Edited by blueg33 on Wednesday 16th May 12:15

daz3210

5,000 posts

239 months

Wednesday 16th May 2012
quotequote all
OK, so how would I go on in this case.....

I get snapped on say a Saturday.

I fly to Australia for three weeks the next day.

When I return there is a NIP behind the door.

I have actually only received it 21/22 days after the offence, although I cannot say when it dropped through the door. I can prove my whereabouts in the interim because my passport is stamped.

Have I got a valid defence in that I was not served in time?

sinizter

3,348 posts

185 months

Wednesday 16th May 2012
quotequote all
daz3210 said:
OK, so how would I go on in this case.....

I get snapped on say a Saturday.

I fly to Australia for three weeks the next day.

When I return there is a NIP behind the door.

I have actually only received it 21/22 days after the offence, although I cannot say when it dropped through the door. I can prove my whereabouts in the interim because my passport is stamped.

Have I got a valid defence in that I was not served in time?
Doesn't sound like it. The way I understood it, which may be wrong, is that it needs to be served to your address within the time period. Not to you personally.

SS2.

14,455 posts

237 months

Wednesday 16th May 2012
quotequote all
daz3210 said:
Have I got a valid defence in that I was not served in time?
No, because you don't know when it was served.

Corpulent Tosser

5,459 posts

244 months

Wednesday 16th May 2012
quotequote all
chriscpritchard said:
the OP's mother has a statutory defence to the speeding charge and therefore is NOT GUILTY.
The way I see it is she committed the crime therefor IS GUILTY, she may have a valid arguement for the prosecution to be dropped, but remains guilty.