Late NIP - Finally, VICTORY IN THE HIGH COURT
Discussion
Some of you may remember i asked for advice following late arrival of an NIP back in October 2007. Not been able to say much here with what's been going on....
Well today was my day in Court - the High Court
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/south_yorkshire...
http://www.thestar.co.uk/york/Speeding-conviction-...
My thanks to those here who helped with advice, and my solicitor John Josephs of Turner, Coulston and my Counsel, Archie Madden.
Well today was my day in Court - the High Court
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/south_yorkshire...
http://www.thestar.co.uk/york/Speeding-conviction-...
My thanks to those here who helped with advice, and my solicitor John Josephs of Turner, Coulston and my Counsel, Archie Madden.
Well done for fighting it.
I hope this sets a useful precedent for others too:
"He rejected arguments supported by lower courts that so long as prosecution warning notices were posted within 14 days - so that in ordinary circumstances they would arrive in time - they were deemed to have been properly served."
I hope this sets a useful precedent for others too:
"He rejected arguments supported by lower courts that so long as prosecution warning notices were posted within 14 days - so that in ordinary circumstances they would arrive in time - they were deemed to have been properly served."
^ Exactly.
If I posted a vat bill within 14 days and it fails to arrive would they believe me, would they b
ks.
It's about time this issue was sorted out as the scammers have made far to much money from this. Next we want to see full disclosure before court hearings and with the fixed penalty offers so you can see if an offence was really committed. Instead of being made to cough up just in case you did it.
If I posted a vat bill within 14 days and it fails to arrive would they believe me, would they b
ks. It's about time this issue was sorted out as the scammers have made far to much money from this. Next we want to see full disclosure before court hearings and with the fixed penalty offers so you can see if an offence was really committed. Instead of being made to cough up just in case you did it.
sleep envy said:
well done
may I ask how you proved you received it in the 16th day?
My postman was witness to me opening it. The CPS at my CC Appeal accepted it was received late, and took me on on the point of law. The CC Judge mis-directed himself on a point of law, so we took it to the High Court.may I ask how you proved you received it in the 16th day?
To those who see me as "getting away with it". -
I fought this as a matter of principal - with my own funds. The law enforcers have to abide by the law, and if no one questions them, the people are treated unjustly, unfairly and in some cases, illegally.
My case was perfect to take to the High Court, and was the first time this matter had been taken to the High Court since the 1994 amendment to the RTOA allowing 1st class post.
The facts had been agreed between both sides, so it was simply a case of having the law clarified.
It always has been ridiculous and a mark of how authoritative the British are, that NIP's have never been sent by registered post.
Too many have rolled over (and will continue to do so) on the basis 'we are the authorities, pay up or it gets worse'.
As the OP has said, he could not know he would win and we are all brainwashed into believing we have little chance (and the fact it IS cheaper to pay up).
Well done, OP.
Too many have rolled over (and will continue to do so) on the basis 'we are the authorities, pay up or it gets worse'.
As the OP has said, he could not know he would win and we are all brainwashed into believing we have little chance (and the fact it IS cheaper to pay up).
Well done, OP.
peterguk M500 said:
sleep envy said:
well done
may I ask how you proved you received it in the 16th day?
My postman was witness to me opening it. The CPS at my CC Appeal accepted it was received late, and took me on on the point of law. The CC Judge mis-directed himself on a point of law, so we took it to the High Court.may I ask how you proved you received it in the 16th day?
To those who see me as "getting away with it". -
I fought this as a matter of principal - with my own funds. The law enforcers have to abide by the law, and if no one questions them, the people are treated unjustly, unfairly and in some cases, illegally.
My case was perfect to take to the High Court, and was the first time this matter had been taken to the High Court since the 1994 amendment to the RTOA allowing 1st class post.
The facts had been agreed between both sides, so it was simply a case of having the law clarified.
There is no excuse for posting the NIP late. It is a simple enough procedure. The person in charge of the ticket office in my force was a quality chap and established systems to ensure they went out well within the time limit. If a PC dragged his feet in sending details, the NIP was served back on him.
A sensible decision. As said before: well done that man.
What is irritating is that it has cost the CPS a lot of money to pursue this matter to the high court. I wonder how many much more worthy appeals they will refuse to run because of cost implications. They've wasted time and effort challenging a chap who was, at least according to the police officers I worked with, dealt with badly.
It will be interesting though, for the last thing the authorities want is an innocent until proven guilty system.
For example, canny drivers, fearing an NIP, may just refuse to sign the recorded delivery, pretend not to be home......in effect, reversing the system as it is now and putting the onus on the police to prove the guilty man or woman has been served their NIP.
They have been used to sending letters by snail mail and from that moment having the whole system to back them up - the defendent was presumed served the NIP. And the courts, naturally, would side with the police.
Now that has (maybe) been turned on its head.
Of course, this could just mean many more speed traps with real police so they can serve the NIP at the roadside.
Doubt it, somehow. The sleeping policeman policy, fines by post and no arguing, has been part of road 'safety' mentality for years now.
For example, canny drivers, fearing an NIP, may just refuse to sign the recorded delivery, pretend not to be home......in effect, reversing the system as it is now and putting the onus on the police to prove the guilty man or woman has been served their NIP.
They have been used to sending letters by snail mail and from that moment having the whole system to back them up - the defendent was presumed served the NIP. And the courts, naturally, would side with the police.
Now that has (maybe) been turned on its head.
Of course, this could just mean many more speed traps with real police so they can serve the NIP at the roadside.
Doubt it, somehow. The sleeping policeman policy, fines by post and no arguing, has been part of road 'safety' mentality for years now.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff