Recieved an NIP. Now i'm confused.

[Labbetts]

I had a Notice Of Intended Prosecution arrive on my doormat this morning

It confuses me for two reasons:

Firstly it was sent out on the 12th January 2016, exactly 14 days after the incident took place. So It could never have arrived within the allotted 14 day period.

Secondly it says “SPEEDING-EXCEED 40mph - LOCAL ORDER-MANNED EQUIPMENT. Speed of Vehicle 34mph”

One is very confused. Any advice would be most welcome.

[Labbetts]

Red Devil said:

How do you know it was sent out on 12th? If you can provide sufficient evidence of this (if the NoIP is dated the 12th that would be persuasive) and the 12th is indeed 14 days after the date of the offence then it would be impossible for it to have been served within the statutory time frame

WOW. Thanks for all your swift replies guys.

FYI: The letter is dated the 12/01/2016, so excatly 14 days after the alleged offence took place (29th Dec). So unless they couried it (which they didn't) it could never arrive on time. It didn't arrive until today (2 days outside)

But the offence says says it was for exceeding a 40 MPH limit - at 34MPH.
Even 34MPH in a 30MPH is pretty sh*t to be honest, especially as the road they are reffering to is a dual carridgeway and i'm a slow bd at the best of times. I've been clocked at let off in the past (in my early days) at 42 in a 30.

In any case, i'd rather write than phone up. I probably get through to some numpty that will just 'revise' the error and re-issue the ticket. If anyone has any terminology i can use? (copy / paste) feel free to PM me. Thanks again guys. Muchos Gracias.

[Labbetts]

Red Devil said:

If the OP is not the RK on the V5C, somebody must have reacted quickly for the correct details to be obtained and processed by day 14. Even if he is but the DVLA had an incorrect/out-of-date address, I reckon it would be nigh on impossible for the police/SCP to have discovered this and sorted it in such a short time scale.

Not sure i follow sir.

FYI, i've lived at my current adress for 12 years, so no problem there. Car is a Personal Lease Vehicle, so although i don't own it i am the RK. It's all abiove board and up to date.

I'm guessing NY caused something of a backlog.

[Labbetts]

eybic said:

Is the V5 in your name?

Well unbeknown to me, apparently not. It's VW FS.
You learn something new every day.
Does that mean the 14 day rule doesn't apply?

[Labbetts]

eybic said:

Labbetts said:

eybic said:

Is the V5 in your name?

Well unbeknown to me, apparently not. It's VW FS.
You learn something new every day.
Does that mean the 14 day rule doesn't apply?

It does move the goalposts somewhat yes. The RK must be served within 14 days so it's entirely possible that was the case.

I'll forget that approach then.

Which brings me back to the bigger issue - in that there is no offence according the this correpondance. Unless driving 6MPH under the limit is now illegal.

[Labbetts]

ferrariF50lover said:

Unfortunately for you, yes.

Let's clear up the other issue. You know the road, you've got the name of it on the NIP, is it a 40 or a 30?

I don't actually know the road that well (A414 London Road / Harlow)
The part they are reffering to though is a dual carridgeway in pretty open countryside, so i suspect it will be a 40. That's my recollection anyway. In any case, that's what's stated on the NIP so not sure what else i can go off ?!?

[Labbetts]

Red Devil said:

Labbetts said:

eybic said:

Is the V5 in your name?

Well unbeknown to me, apparently not. It's VW FS.
You learn something new every day.
Does that mean the 14 day rule doesn't apply?

Correct. The original NoIP will have gone to VW FS. Unfortunately the 14 day rule applies only to them, not to you. Not wanting to risk a S.172 conviction they have reacted pdq and dobbed you in.

What you now need to do is scrutinise the NoIP you have received. If, as is likely, you have been served with your own S.172 you must respond to it within the 28 day time scale I mentioned earlier. The police/SCP cannot automatically assume you were indeed the actual driver at the time of the alleged speeding offence.

Yep. More than happy to do that asap.
Just not sure what the offence is? Can't imagine these things get dished out by accident, but it's a pretty ridcilous mistake. I've never heard of it.

[Labbetts]

agtlaw said:

Errors in the notice do not automatically render it invalid.

You may wish to send a cover letter when you return the completed form. Point out the mistake. If you're lucky then no further action will be taken.

But then what do they need to provide to make it viable.
Surely when it comes to an offence of this nature, an inacurracy as big as this (the actual speed of the vehicle) must surely invalidate the prosecution no? I'm guessing they can't manually adjust it.

[Labbetts]

agtlaw said:

A notice referred in error to dangerous driving at “1.15pm”; in fact, the accident from which...

feels somewhat different though. The detail in this is quite incidental in the offence (dangerous driving Vs detail of location it occured). feels like they were trying to worm their way out of it on a technicallity. Magistrates were clearly having none of it.

In my case, the speed is the offence. And the speed they've stated is too low.
It would have to be manually adjusted, or corrected. And then do i have grounds to distrust that?

What do they normally provide by way of evidence at the next stage?

Thanks for all your replies though chaps.

[Labbetts]

agtlaw said:

Labbetts said:

But then what do they need to provide to make it viable.
Surely when it comes to an offence of this nature, an inacurracy as big as this (the actual speed of the vehicle) must surely invalidate the prosecution no? I'm guessing they can't manually adjust it.

See my previous posts. It's now too late to amend. Apparently you're not the RK in any event.

They will either abandon this case or run with it as is.

Complete the driver information form. Send a cover letter. Ensure they get it by using 'Signed For' post.

that's the plan. grateful. thnx

[Labbetts]

rewc said:

I am not too familiar with the area but I thought London Road was a SC road that runs parallel to the A414? The A414 and London road are completely different roads?

Edited by rewc on Thursday 14th January 16:50

I'm guessing they're referring to the junction where they meet. Which would make sense.

[Labbetts]

btcc123 said:

OP I think you are better off ringing the phone number on the NIP to sort it out.I had a positive outcome doing it that way.

Have tried fella. Goes through to numerous answerphone messages. No human beings. About right.

[Labbetts]

ferrariF50lover said:

Labbetts said:

I don't actually know the road that well (A414 London Road / Harlow)
The part they are reffering to though is a dual carridgeway in pretty open countryside, so i suspect it will be a 40. That's my recollection anyway. In any case, that's what's stated on the NIP so not sure what else i can go off ?!?

There's a little known American company which has actually been operating in the UK for a while now. They're called Google and they, inter alia, provide mapping services to the public at large.

Come now, Mr Labbetts, you're on the Internet as we speak, there's no way you couldn't have worked this one out on your own.

clearly please point out where the speed limit button is and i'll gladly check.

ferrariF50lover said:

At 34mph, I suspect you may now qualify for the LoonR1 special service... If you can find him.

...i'm intruiged

[Labbetts]

I take that back. Google street view is your friend It's a 40.

[Labbetts]

speedking31 said:

OP, which road did you drive along?

It was the A414 - dual carridgeway - 40MPH all the way through.

I remember where he was, and it wasn't even directly on that junction, but further down where the BP garage is. I think they've just used that as location marker. I can certainly mention it in my cover letter. The road doesn't drop to a 30 by the way - 40 all the way

[Labbetts]

Red Devil said:

Although a Notice cannot be amended, any error can be corrected by sending a replacement Notice within 14 days of the offence. Likewise, if the matter proceeds to Court, errors in the Notice can be corrected in the Court papers. The Slip Rule allows typographical or minor errors to be corrected in this fashion, it does not however allow the prosecution to bring a completely new case or allegation. if he contests it[/i]

Quite a slip haha. When the mistake IS the offence, or not in my case.
I can imagine small incedental errors (like exact time of offence or mispelling of a name) would fall under a slip rule. Mine would have to be a completely new prosecution - with a different alleged speed.

[Labbetts]

V8LM said:

And how quickly?

clearly not quick enough!

[Labbetts]

If the speed was 44MPH, would that fall within the 10% grace. Or is that 10% thing just a myth?

[Labbetts]

V8LM said:

Labbetts said:

Red Devil said:

Although a Notice cannot be amended, any error can be corrected by sending a replacement Notice within 14 days of the offence. Likewise, if the matter proceeds to Court, errors in the Notice can be corrected in the Court papers. The Slip Rule allows typographical or minor errors to be corrected in this fashion, it does not however allow the prosecution to bring a completely new case or allegation. if he contests it[/i]

Quite a slip haha. When the mistake IS the offence, or not in my case.
I can imagine small incedental errors (like exact time of offence or mispelling of a name) would fall under a slip rule. Mine would have to be a completely new prosecution - with a different alleged speed.

The allegation is speeding.

Not currently. It says I was within the limit.

[Labbetts]

Toltec said:

Red Devil said:

Point taken, but here it does: specifically 34 mph. We don't know what his speed actually was so cannot guess whether he will be offered a SAC or a CoFP. My comment was based on it being the latter (if he was really caning it, it may go straight to summons). If he declines a CoFP and goes NG then AIUI the officer's witness statement will be what matters and the original error (assuming he really was over the posted limit) can be corrected. Hence my query about the Slip Rule applying in this case.

What I am wondering is how he deals with this if he gets a response that still shows 34mph. How do you plead to something that is not an offence? If he pleads guilty to 34mph can they change the speed later?

Well i've written a covering letter pointing out the inaccuracy, carefully worded. Also pointed out the error in locality too - as in two separate roads being listed as one. Will be interesting to see how this plays out... so watch this space. Fingers crossed they decide not to pursue it - I certainly wasn't caning it, simply cruising with the rest of the traffic at what felt like a perfectly safe speed. So let's see. Really appreciate all the wisdom shared on here. Thanks chaps.