NIP information inaccurate or misleading
Discussion
If a NIP alleges an offence at a location that's description is in some way inaccurate or possibly misleading, is that suitable grounds for cancellation, even if some or most of the information is correct? Lets assume that they also have a photo.
How would one respond to the NIP? (Claim you were not at the location stated, or just highlight the contradiction and shed doubt on its validity?)
If you have real knowledge rather than an opinion it would be appreciated, although I know that English Law is always open to interpretation.
How would one respond to the NIP? (Claim you were not at the location stated, or just highlight the contradiction and shed doubt on its validity?)
If you have real knowledge rather than an opinion it would be appreciated, although I know that English Law is always open to interpretation.
thirsty33 said:
If a NIP alleges an offence at a location that's description is in some way inaccurate or possibly misleading, is that suitable grounds for cancellation, even if some or most of the information is correct?
In a word, yes.
In Young v Day (1959) 123 J.P. 317, the Divisional Court refused to set aside a decision by the justices that a notice of intended prosecution under the Road Traffic Act 1930 s. 21 was insufficiently particular where it stated the place of the offence of dangerous driving as "the Hothfield to Bethersden Road," which was a minor road four miles long. (Pope v. Clarke [1953] 1 W.L.R. 1060 followed).
The police are required, under section 1 of the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988 to issue a notice of intended prosecution within fourteen days of the commission of the offence. This notice must specify the nature of the alleged offence and the time and place where it is alleged to have been committed.
What you need to do is to wait until at least day 14 from the date on the NIP (this stops them issuing you a new one with an amended and correct offence locus), and write to them along the lines of this letter that I found on PEPIPPOO some time ago:
PEPIPPOO said:
Dear Sir/Madam
Notice of Intended Prosecution (NIP) Number - ********
With reference to the above notice (copy attached), and after taking legal advice, I am writing to inform you that the NIP I have been served has insufficient detail as to the alleged offence locus and, as such, is invalid.
Section 1(1c)) of the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988 states that in order for a NIP to be valid, the alleged offence locus must be given therein :
(c) <…> 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.
You will see from the NIP that the alleged offence locus is ‘M25’. This is, unfortunately, excessively vague in order to identify the driver, as myself and the other driver on the day of the alleged offence were unaware of the incident in question, and as a consequence, cannot be sure unless more detail is given.
In Young v Day (1959) 123 J.P. 317, the Divisional Court refused to set aside a decision by the justices that a notice of intended prosecution under the Road Traffic Act 1930 s. 21 was insufficiently particular where it stated the place of the offence of dangerous driving as "the Hothfield to Bethersden Road," which was a minor road four miles long. (Pope v. Clarke [1953] 1 W.L.R. 1060 followed).
It would appear therefore, that in order for the keeper of the vehicle (i.e. myself) to identify the driver as per s.172 of the Road Traffic Act 1988, a new NIP requires to be issued, detailing the precise locus of the alleged offence. Once in receipt of this NIP, myself and the other driver on the day will try and establish the identity of the driver at the time of the alleged offence and respond when we have reached a conclusion.
Yours faithfully
>> Edited by DeMolay on Monday 12th September 20:39
Many thanks - I couldn't find anything suitable on Pepipoo myself and you have answered my other query about re-issuing the NIP if I tip them off about the error, so patience is the key then. Although I could scupper myself by already having asked verbally for the photo. However, nothing ventured.
Only thing is mine has excessive detail suggesting somewhere third mile from where it is, but same principle.
I spoke to my Legal Helpline provided by DAS and I think he works for the Police - he shot down all my queries in flames - no good at all.
>> Edited by thirsty33 on Monday 12th September 22:43
Only thing is mine has excessive detail suggesting somewhere third mile from where it is, but same principle.
I spoke to my Legal Helpline provided by DAS and I think he works for the Police - he shot down all my queries in flames - no good at all.
>> Edited by thirsty33 on Monday 12th September 22:43
Now that's what I want to hear first thing in the morning. Thanks Vic!
I am actually going to complain about my legal helpline advisor - I don't think he had any interest in helping at all. He tried to claim that whatever I could prove using the road markings, the calibration certificate of the Radar stood as proof of my speed. So what is the point of the two photos and timings then? Wouldn't you love to have him in your defence in court - Prosecution "We admit the Crowns evidence contradicts itself" Defence "Oh well never mind, as long as part of it incrimnates my client, find him guilty m-lad" GREAT !!
I am actually going to complain about my legal helpline advisor - I don't think he had any interest in helping at all. He tried to claim that whatever I could prove using the road markings, the calibration certificate of the Radar stood as proof of my speed. So what is the point of the two photos and timings then? Wouldn't you love to have him in your defence in court - Prosecution "We admit the Crowns evidence contradicts itself" Defence "Oh well never mind, as long as part of it incrimnates my client, find him guilty m-lad" GREAT !!
thirsty33 said:I agree, he is talking carp. Radar based speed sensors can be affected by internal and external means; the two photos are used to confirm there was no such error. Gatsos would not have gotten their approval without the camera.
He tried to claim that whatever I could prove using the road markings, the calibration certificate of the Radar stood as proof of my speed. So what is the point of the two photos and timings then
>> Edited by smeggy on Tuesday 13th September 18:50
That sounds better. I have videoed said camera set off by an Ambulance - timings check out on that within the error of 1/25th second frames. So I can now rely on the distance calculation when I make it. There are some bushes adjacent to the camera - radar reflection on a windy day? A smallish sign facing the detector (APCO says no signs) and a bus shelter within range but not close (APCO says no bus shelters)
Something else APCO says is that if there are other vehicles in shot, especially large ones, discard it. now here is a beautiful irony - if you are speeding but are surrounded by other vehicles, especially ones that obscure your vision, which might indicate a dangerous behaviour, they won't nick you, but if the road if completely empty which is certainly likely to be much safer, your're done for. (OK, speeding is an absolute offence, I know that, but the prima-face argument for them being there is safety)
Something else APCO says is that if there are other vehicles in shot, especially large ones, discard it. now here is a beautiful irony - if you are speeding but are surrounded by other vehicles, especially ones that obscure your vision, which might indicate a dangerous behaviour, they won't nick you, but if the road if completely empty which is certainly likely to be much safer, your're done for. (OK, speeding is an absolute offence, I know that, but the prima-face argument for them being there is safety)
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff