Received NIP, but photo is of different car?

[ehasler]

I've just received a NIP in the post for doing 100 on the M4, but although I was on that road that weekend, the time on the NIP was about 10 hours prior to when I would have driven past that spot.

I checked the evidence online, and the photos are of a different car! It's another black TVR Tuscan, but is obviously not me as you can identify the driver, and also the Tuscan is not an S, so doesn't have the front splitter. There are also some stickers on the front which mine doesn't have. I can't read the registration number, but assumed they'd blanked it out for some reason.

I've just phoned Wiltshire Police, and the person I spoke to had a look and said they can't read the registration number either so they're going to look into this and get back to me.

Any ideas how this could have happened, and suggestions for what I should do next?

[Rob-C]

So the cheeky f*ckers have just taken a random punt against the owner of any black tuscan they could trawl up from the DVLA?

Evidently not.

Edited by Rob-C on Thursday 21st June 09:52

[ehasler]

Ah, it's all becoming clearer

Wiltshire police have just got back to me, and say that as they couldn't read the registration, they looked at the event website advertised on the front of the car, and saw photos of my car on there, so contacted the organiser of the event, and he helpfully gave them my registration details and claimed that I had his stickers on my car. The only slight problem with this is that it's clearly his car and him in the driver's seat!

[Marki]

ehasler said:

Ah, it's all becoming clearer

Wiltshire police have just got back to me, and say that as they couldn't read the registration, they looked at the event website advertised on the front of the car, and saw photos of my car on there, so contacted the organiser of the event, and he helpfully gave them my registration details and claimed that I had his stickers on my car. The only slight problem with this is that it's clearly his car and him in the driver's seat!

That is fecking outrageous

[Percy Flage]

ehasler said:

Ah, it's all becoming clearer

Wiltshire police have just got back to me, and say that as they couldn't read the registration, they looked at the event website advertised on the front of the car, and saw photos of my car on there, so contacted the organiser of the event, and he helpfully gave them my registration details and claimed that I had his stickers on my car. The only slight problem with this is that it's clearly his car and him in the driver's seat!

I suggest you suggest to the police that they do him for attempting to pervert the course of justice. That'd teach the .

[dougc]

ehasler said:

Ah, it's all becoming clearer

Wiltshire police have just got back to me, and say that as they couldn't read the registration, they looked at the event website advertised on the front of the car, and saw photos of my car on there, so contacted the organiser of the event, and he helpfully gave them my registration details and claimed that I had his stickers on my car. The only slight problem with this is that it's clearly his car and him in the driver's seat!

Wonder if they put that much effort into tracking down the scrote that broke into my shed and nicked £700 worth of gear?

Edited by dougc on Thursday 21st June 09:49

[TRACKDEMON]

ehasler said:

Ah, it's all becoming clearer

Wiltshire police have just got back to me, and say that as they couldn't read the registration, they looked at the event website advertised on the front of the car, and saw photos of my car on there, so contacted the organiser of the event, and he helpfully gave them my registration details and claimed that I had his stickers on my car. The only slight problem with this is that it's clearly his car and him in the driver's seat!

Bl00dy hell Ed! Not sure which is worse:

The police deciding to prosecute (not investigate first) on the basis of some shonky info supplied by an MOP
or
Some scumbag fingering you for something he did - this presumable someone from a motoring event. Name & most definately shame!!

Shouldn't he now be getting a visit for perverting the course of justice as well as speeding?

[TonyHetherington]

Cheeky fecker!

That's perverting the course of justice is that

[jwo]

That is outrageous behaviour - did you record the phonecalls? - obviously they would deny it if it became 'public'.

I think that is a blatant abuse of the law - and don't they have to prove the registration beyond reasonable doubt, ie have a clear un doctored photograph?

[IainT]

ehasler said:

Ah, it's all becoming clearer

Wiltshire police have just got back to me, and say that as they couldn't read the registration, they looked at the event website advertised on the front of the car, and saw photos of my car on there, so contacted the organiser of the event, and he helpfully gave them my registration details and claimed that I had his stickers on my car. The only slight problem with this is that it's clearly his car and him in the driver's seat!

I'm guessing that the 'event organiser' (aka sneaky SoB) is likely to be a PHer (owning a TVR and organising events) and are probably now dreading a knock on the door.

Name and shame should be suspended for this - that behavious is outrageous! (unless this is a double bluff and you've managed to put the plod off onto another poor unsuspecting Trev owner )

[blueyes]

ehasler said:

Ah, it's all becoming clearer

Wiltshire police have just got back to me, and say that as they couldn't read the registration, they looked at the event website advertised on the front of the car, and saw photos of my car on there, so contacted the organiser of the event, and he helpfully gave them my registration details and claimed that I had his stickers on my car. The only slight problem with this is that it's clearly his car and him in the driver's seat!

Although he's a bit naughty naming you, he needn't have bothered...he could have told them to feck off:

From the ACPO code of practice:

Where the zoom facility and/or adjusting the contrast/brightness, or reversing the films polarity cannot identify a vehicle registration mark, the reading will be disregarded. PNC will not be used to establish identity by a search of a range of numbers/letters and clarifying by make/colour.

[Timsta]

blueyes said:

ehasler said:

Ah, it's all becoming clearer

Wiltshire police have just got back to me, and say that as they couldn't read the registration, they looked at the event website advertised on the front of the car, and saw photos of my car on there, so contacted the organiser of the event, and he helpfully gave them my registration details and claimed that I had his stickers on my car. The only slight problem with this is that it's clearly his car and him in the driver's seat!

Although he's a bit naughty naming you, he needn't have bothered...he could have told them to feck off:

From the ACPO code of practice:

Where the zoom facility and/or adjusting the contrast/brightness, or reversing the films polarity cannot identify a vehicle registration mark, the reading will be disregarded. PNC will not be used to establish identity by a search of a range of numbers/letters and clarifying by make/colour.

I bet the OP won't be telling them to feck orf!

[catso]

TRACKDEMON said:

Bl00dy hell Ed! Not sure which is worse:

The police deciding to prosecute (not investigate first) on the basis of some shonky info supplied by an MOP
or
Some scumbag fingering you for something he did - this presumable someone from a motoring event. Name & most definately shame!!

Shouldn't he now be getting a visit for perverting the course of justice as well as speeding?

Surely the Police are more in the wrong here by attempting to prosecute without any evidence - if they don't have the reg plate then they don't know whose car it was end of story, they shouldn't just make things up by matching similar vehicles FFS.

IMHO there must be some kind of attempt of perverting/fitting up involved?

OTOH someone else fingering you is not very nice either.

Yet another reason why Speed Cameras need to be scrapped.

[Parrot of Doom]

lol. Excellent thread, but would be even more excellent if you told us who it was.

[tigger1]

catso said:

OTOH someone else fingering you is not very nice either.

Each to their own.

Sounds like the OP had a close shave...seems quite cheky to try to get "evidence" in this manner though, I'd certainly consider an angry letter to your MP mentioning how this form of [cough]persecution[/cough] prosecution is being carried out.

[Mr Freefall]

TRACKDEMON said:

ehasler said:

Ah, it's all becoming clearer

Wiltshire police have just got back to me, and say that as they couldn't read the registration, they looked at the event website advertised on the front of the car, and saw photos of my car on there, so contacted the organiser of the event, and he helpfully gave them my registration details and claimed that I had his stickers on my car. The only slight problem with this is that it's clearly his car and him in the driver's seat!

Bl00dy hell Ed! Not sure which is worse:

The police deciding to prosecute (not investigate first) on the basis of some shonky info supplied by an MOP
or
Some scumbag fingering you for something he did - this presumable someone from a motoring event. Name & most definately shame!!

Shouldn't he now be getting a visit for perverting the course of justice as well as speeding?

And people wonder why the is no credibility in the scameraship. Looks like the Police are happy just to issue NOIP's without following proceedure.

I dont know who is at fault more, the Police for not following guidline, or at least stepping outside them, or, the prize fecking iddiot who tride to stripe someone up, when it was him, and upping the charges to PTCOJ...

Whatever next???

Mr F

[ehasler]

Parrot of Doom said:

lol. Excellent thread, but would be even more excellent if you told us who it was.

I don't want to name names, just in case the actual events are different to what I've just been told...

However, if you were to look back at my previous posts this month there might be a clue there

[tony_666]

ehasler said:

However, if you were to look back at my previous posts this month there might be a clue there

....ahhh!!!! ...so from looking at your posts, it was either the bloke who runs that Le Mans 24 hour event or the bloke who runs the Candy run???

Edited by tony_666 on Thursday 21st June 11:37

[Puggit]

Not just a letter to the MP - but I think the press must be told about this.

The 'safety' partnership are perverting the course of justice IMHO.

[ehasler]

tony_666 said:

ehasler said:

However, if you were to look back at my previous posts this month there might be a clue there

....ahhh!!!! ...so from looking at your posts, it was either the bloke who runs that Le Mans 24 hour event or the bloke who runs the Candy run???

I don't think the guy who runs Le Mans drives a Tuscan

Edited by ehasler on Thursday 21st June 10:40