Discussion
eybic said:
I was under the impression that if everything is done at the roadside then the 28 days is irrelevant as that bit has already been done. I think the timeframe you work to now is 6 months for them to get in touch although I may be wrong.
It will arrive one day under the 6 month period!TX.
Edit - oops read whole thread before posting next time
JonV8V said:
Hilts said:
CoolCurly said:
best advice I can give you, dont drop the soap in the shower.....
119 months on the site and that's your best advice?Jesus, Mary and Joseph.
Why even bother?
First time I've seen someone say plod asked them to call up and ask where their NIP was. I'm not doubting you OP BTW.
What next, get the NIP and then go and do your own prosecution? Well that would be pretty cool actually. Just give yourself a verbal warning and a spanking from your wife/husband/gf/bf/mistress/hooker.
XMT said:
CoolCurly said:
best advice I can give you, dont drop the soap in the shower.....
What a knob. OP just leave it till you hear something. As long as you werent driving stupid you will be 3 points and fine.
90 is the bloody norm on motorways with space.
BlackST said:
Stopped by an unmarked car 20 days ago.
Caught doing 90 on the motorway.
Have been giving the slip stating what speed I was doing, officers name, time and date.
The NIP hasn't arrived on my doorstep yet. The officer mentioned if I don't receive it in a certain timeframe I need to call up and see where it is?
The date of offence on the slip he gave me in the back of the police car he has put my date of birth instead. I guess that is a minor thing and can be corrected by the officer when he gets back to his base?
He has entered a date of offence which is clearly impossible. Ie prob before the date of the cars first registration. A decent law firm specialising in motoring matters should get you off on this. Caught doing 90 on the motorway.
Have been giving the slip stating what speed I was doing, officers name, time and date.
The NIP hasn't arrived on my doorstep yet. The officer mentioned if I don't receive it in a certain timeframe I need to call up and see where it is?
The date of offence on the slip he gave me in the back of the police car he has put my date of birth instead. I guess that is a minor thing and can be corrected by the officer when he gets back to his base?
Happened to me a long time ago.90 in a 70.
I noticed them on the inside lane to late by then.They followed me for a while and stopped me.The ususal spiel.One of the coppers was ok,the other one a miserable get.
He asked me why I slowed down when I saw them.Maybe I should have gone faster and they wanted a race.;)
I noticed them on the inside lane to late by then.They followed me for a while and stopped me.The ususal spiel.One of the coppers was ok,the other one a miserable get.
He asked me why I slowed down when I saw them.Maybe I should have gone faster and they wanted a race.;)
castroses said:
He has entered a date of offence which is clearly impossible. Ie prob before the date of the cars first registration. A decent law firm specialising in motoring matters should get you off on this.
Ten years ago, I had similar situation where the time of the offence was stated incorrectly as 0730 hours rather 1930 hours. When the paperwork arrived, I simply wrote back and said at time of the alleged offence I was elsewhere therefore rejecting the NIP but providing any further explanation. . I eventually received an response explaining the error, stating they would not take further action but rapping my knuckles re speed. The police officers evidence was based only on a calibrated speedo, no gun and I don,t know if that had a bearing - my argument had it gone to court might of been if tan officer cant record the correct time then perhaps his other uncorroborated evidence was also inaccurate. My understanding was that had I surrendered my driving licence by roadside then I would accepted the NIP and would not of been able to challenge in the way I did. nickydee said:
Ten years ago, I had similar situation where the time of the offence was stated incorrectly as 0730 hours rather 1930 hours. When the paperwork arrived, I simply wrote back and said at time of the alleged offence I was elsewhere therefore rejecting the NIP but providing any further explanation. . I eventually received an response explaining the error, stating they would not take further action but rapping my knuckles re speed. The police officers evidence was based only on a calibrated speedo, no gun and I don,t know if that had a bearing - my argument had it gone to court might of been if tan officer cant record the correct time then perhaps his other uncorroborated evidence was also inaccurate. My understanding was that had I surrendered my driving licence by roadside then I would accepted the NIP and would not of been able to challenge in the way I did.
Might HAVE been, not might OF been.I don't want to sound horrid here, but if you don't understand why might OF is wrong, then you would simply get tied in knots and thrown to the wolves trying to defend yourself in court.
As for the time thing, yes the chances are that's why they dropped it. There are procedures for correcting such errors on tickets etc, but (so I am told) they sometimes don't bother because it's less trouble to drop it. Myself, I would argue that getting the time completely wrong is a fundamental flaw in the case, but of course they have created protocols and procedures to get them out of such holes if they need to.
castroses said:
He has entered a date of offence which is clearly impossible. Ie prob before the date of the cars first registration. A decent law firm specialising in motoring matters should get you off on this.
He was stopped at the time and, as such, the OP might find it difficult to convince a court that he had been confused or disadvantaged by the officer's typo.If he was to take it to court, the slip the officer handed to him at the time of the stop would become little more than a worthless scrap of paper with zero evidential value.
zarjaz1991 said:
Might HAVE been, not might OF been.
I don't want to sound horrid here, but if you don't understand why might OF is wrong, then you would simply get tied in knots and thrown to the wolves trying to defend yourself in court.
As for the time thing, yes the chances are that's why they dropped it. There are procedures for correcting such errors on tickets etc, but (so I am told) they sometimes don't bother because it's less trouble to drop it. Myself, I would argue that getting the time completely wrong is a fundamental flaw in the case, but of course they have created protocols and procedures to get them out of such holes if they need to.
Guilty as charge M'laud of the heinous crime of bad grammar - Take me down! I don't want to sound horrid here, but if you don't understand why might OF is wrong, then you would simply get tied in knots and thrown to the wolves trying to defend yourself in court.
As for the time thing, yes the chances are that's why they dropped it. There are procedures for correcting such errors on tickets etc, but (so I am told) they sometimes don't bother because it's less trouble to drop it. Myself, I would argue that getting the time completely wrong is a fundamental flaw in the case, but of course they have created protocols and procedures to get them out of such holes if they need to.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff