NIP time limits with regards to Cameras
Discussion
Hi
Received an NIP from Dyfed Powys police dated 23.02.2006 (but received at my work on 27.2.06) for a speeding offence (camera device it says) on 22.01.2006.
Can I do anything to write back and say that they are out of time or should I just take it on the chin and submit my details?
Received an NIP from Dyfed Powys police dated 23.02.2006 (but received at my work on 27.2.06) for a speeding offence (camera device it says) on 22.01.2006.
Can I do anything to write back and say that they are out of time or should I just take it on the chin and submit my details?
My understanding is that the clock starts ticking on the day following the alleged offence. Because they waited 31 days before issuing the NIP, you should be in the clear.
Are they really so snowed under with work that they have a four week backlog? Or do you think it was a typo? If they're that busy they could employ some extra staff in their little empire raising invoices.
I know if I'm generating so much business that I can't invoice fast enough I'd have to expand.
SM
Are they really so snowed under with work that they have a four week backlog? Or do you think it was a typo? If they're that busy they could employ some extra staff in their little empire raising invoices.
I know if I'm generating so much business that I can't invoice fast enough I'd have to expand.
SM
oi_oi_savaloy said:
The car is registered to the firm I work for. But the lady who received it in HR (where all these things go) says that these NIP's go straight to her and not to the lease company first.
Does that make a difference?
If she received the NIP within 14 days of the offence (excluding the day of offence) plus acceptable postal lag and she replied in good time, then your NIP is valid.
griffter said:
This is interesting because it begs the question(s):
Where is it stated that a NIP must be received within 14 days (+ a bit)?
What do you do when you get one late? Write back? Ignore it?
Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988.
1.—(1) Subject to section 2 of this Act, where a person is prosecuted for an offence to which this section applies, he is not to be convicted unless—
(a) he was warned at the time the offence was committed that the question of prosecuting him for some one or other of the offences to which this section applies would be taken into consideration, or
(b) within fourteen days of the commission of the offence a summons (or, in Scotland, a complaint) for the offence was served on him, or
(c) within fourteen days of the commission of the offence a notice of the intended prosecution specifying the nature of the alleged offence and the time and place where it is alleged to have been committed, was—
(i) in the case of an offence under section 28 or 29 of the [1988 c. 52.] Road Traffic Act 1988 (cycling offences), served on him,
(ii) in the case of any other offence, served on him or on the person, if any, registered as the keeper of the vehicle at the time of the commission of the offence.
(2) A notice shall be deemed for the purposes of subsection (1)(c) above to have been served on a person if it was sent by registered post or recorded delivery service addressed to him at his last known address, notwithstanding that the notice was returned as undelivered or was for any other reason not received by him.
You still have to reply even if the NIP is out of time or they can do you for failing to supply the info. Your reply should give the driver's details (once you have double and triple checked that it actually was late) and also point out the late service. They should let it drop at that stage.
You're quick with those keys Mrs M 
Unfortunately you'll need proof that it really was delivered late (as opposed to just trying it on). The date stamp on the envelope should be evidence enough, assuming it wasn't subsequently delayed. Failing that I don't think there's any way to prove late reception of NIP via normal post.
MrsMiggins said:
Your reply should give the driver's details (once you have double and triple checked that it actually was late) and also point out the late service. They should let it drop at that stage.
Unfortunately you'll need proof that it really was delivered late (as opposed to just trying it on). The date stamp on the envelope should be evidence enough, assuming it wasn't subsequently delayed. Failing that I don't think there's any way to prove late reception of NIP via normal post.
smeggy said:
One would have thought the revenue generated by the fine would dwarf the cost of special/recorded delivery?
Indeed, special delivery costs £3.85 and recorded is just 66p plus the normal postage cost, I'm surprised they've not added that amount to the fine by now.
Extra expense, straight off the bottom line
But if they won't justify the extra cost then doesn't that show it really is all about the money?.........
>> Edited by catso on Tuesday 28th February 14:10
Dwight VanDriver said:
They cannot add costs to a Conditional Offer...
dvd
However the fixed penalty income is used to cover their 'expenses' so they could easily ensure service by using recorded. Might mean that they only get new cars/computers/office furniture every 2 years instead of 1 though.
I think that explains it.
Oh you are so right Mrs Miggins, the fines money certainly does cover expenses. Which is why I struggle like hell to find office space for my staff while our SCP enjoys luxurious purpose built offices in rural Winchester, with adequate free parking and oodles of space. Oh, and did I mention the feature water fountain as the centrepiece to the office development?
A more self-righteous, self-serving bunch of cretins I have never met. However, there is one bonus. They do employ the most bone idle, useless traffic officers in the force as "Enquiry Officers" which keeps them out the way of the rest of us doing policework.
A more self-righteous, self-serving bunch of cretins I have never met. However, there is one bonus. They do employ the most bone idle, useless traffic officers in the force as "Enquiry Officers" which keeps them out the way of the rest of us doing policework.
xxplod said:
A more self-righteous, self-serving bunch of cretins I have never met. However, there is one bonus. They do employ the most bone idle, useless traffic officers in the force as "Enquiry Officers" which keeps them out the way of the rest of us doing policework.
One side or the other, please, Sir, but off that fence...
xxplod said:
Oh you are so right Mrs Miggins, the fines money certainly does cover expenses. Which is why I struggle like hell to find office space for my staff while our SCP enjoys luxurious purpose built offices in rural Winchester, with adequate free parking and oodles of space. Oh, and did I mention the feature water fountain as the centrepiece to the office development?
A more self-righteous, self-serving bunch of cretins I have never met. However, there is one bonus. They do employ the most bone idle, useless traffic officers in the force as "Enquiry Officers" which keeps them out the way of the rest of us doing policework.
XXplod. Are you Robin Hood?
Dibble said:
A more self-righteous, self-serving bunch of cretins I have never met. However, there is one bonus. They do employ the most bone idle, useless traffic officers in the force as "Enquiry Officers" which keeps them out the way of the rest of us doing policework.
One side or the other, please, Sir, but off that fence...
Nein - surely that belong to Dick's "record of achievement record book "
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff