Alleged dangerous

[Puzzled]

I got a letter from XXXXXXXXX Police force suggesting someone has alleged that at X date Y time, I did something dangerous. I rang the number spoke to plod, and he would NOT tell me what I was supposed to have done.

Now I sincerely and genuinely do not know what I have allegedly done cant remember being at the place stated, wouldn't know the time as my car has no clock, and don't know if it would have been me or my missus driving.

Pointed out to Plod that I was NOT signing the NIP until I was told the full details, and got some incredibly mad story about additional witnesses coming forward.

I think i am being set up. please help, I have decided to not sign anything until they tel me what I have done. Plod does not like this. What is the worst that they can do if I cant tell them?

how can they do this based on some civilian complaint? i cant remember anything at all dodgy, so nothing stand out in my mind. what can i get for dangerous compared to not fessing up?

[Puzzled]

ps if i did do somethign bad, i am sorry, but i cant remember nor can other half. i feel I am not learning a good lesson here

thx

[gopher]

Just reading your post - can you confirm:-

Someone (i.e not BiB) have alleged you did something dangerous whilst driving and you have been sent a nip to sign to say "I did something dangerous" and then await the whatever punishment they seem fit for the alleged "dangerous" act?

if so that sounds like a wind up more than anything legit - or did I read your post wrong?

[jeffreyarcher]

Puzzled said:

Pointed out to Plod that I was NOT signing the NIP until I was told the full details, and got some incredibly mad story about additional witnesses coming forward.

For an S172 demand, they have to specify the "nature" of the alleged offence. How much they have to tell you to satisfy that would ultimately be up to the courts, however, a general allegation that you did something bad clearly doesn't.

[puzzled]

they told me dangerous or careless but it may not come to that when they check statements. bt im scared to fill out form incase they have lots of witnesses. funny tho, he said no photos or vids, only verbal from civvy. so no cops, no accident no nothing, i dont gettit. What are they trying to do.

Cop said i had to name the driver - how can this be right, i dont know who was driving. i cant complete the form legit.

i need to know what dangerous means if it comes to points will it be better to refuse to name?

i dont see a good way out of thisw. obv copper has decided to do me for somethign so what wouldyou do?
All I can think is to reduce damge to min.

V annoyed that this has happened after half million miles driven.

[puzzled]

i really meant it, i have no memory of doing something stupid. so unfair. people do crap stuff to me all the time nad i dont complain.

[hertsbiker]

So what you are really saying, is that you have been accused by another car driver, and the police are taking it very seriously? bad luck. Anyone here know how to deal with this situation???? I could find the advice useful one day. Like..... how do you argue against 172??? funny huh, how this subject won't give up and go away. Bit like Labour. B'stards!
rgds

[jeffreyarcher]

You may wish to get back to them and say that since they will not comply with their obligations under the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988, Section 1.-(1)(c)(ii) by not telling you what the driver is alleged to have done, you are under no obligation to give them any information.
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—
(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—
(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.
www.legislation.hmso.gov.uk/acts/acts1988/Ukpga_19880053_en_2.htm#mdiv1

Once you have extracted a bit more information about what is being alleged, you are in a better position to decide whether or not to return the NIP at all.

In fact, you could wait 'till the 14 days are up and tell them that since the first NIP was invalid for the reasons above, and it's now too late for them to rectify the situation (by giving you the information on a new NIP), any prosecution is now time-barred anyway.

>> Edited by jeffreyarcher on Friday 12th September 23:54

[lucozade]

agreed as below, get them told man!

[streaky]

BTW - you have checked the "Worst driving" threads on here to make sure none of them was you ... haven't you?

Only joking!

[puzzled]

streaky- haha. actually made me laugh for a second anyway.
Thanks all the same guys. the nip said dangerous and nothing else other than alleged.

that hm website looks very promising i need toread more.

they cant be allowed to get away with this.

from what iread does it mean that what the nip said is really not enough? i though at the time i first read the nip that something ws wrong with it. even said to plod 'what is this all about, how can i know where i was if you wont tell me what ive done'. he didnt want to tell me anyhting and said it was my job to convince him that i am innocent of the allegation once he had my confession.

does this worry anyone else here>?



>> Edited by puzzled on Saturday 13th September 17:16

[puzzled]

one other thing they sent a 7 day wonder to my address but it says driver of vehicle XXXXXX. how can i produce the license of the driver if i don't know who it is? do I ignore the producer or let them copy my details down. car is fully insured btw.

[jeffreyarcher]

I understood that producers could only be given at the time. Is there no reference to any laws on it? E.g., "This notice is issued under Section XXX of the Road Traffic ZZZ Act 19XX".

It sounds like he is trying to catch you 'off guard' with the producer. I most certainly wouldn't return any correspondence (including acting upon the producer) before obtaining legal advice. Further, I wouldn't even speak to them any more either.

>> Edited by jeffreyarcher on Saturday 13th September 19:28

[madant69]

I think you're right about the producer. I thought you had to be told at the time of issue that "you have 7 days from midnight tonight to produce blah blah etc..."

This smacks of a wind up...can you post a scan of the nip?

>> Edited by madant69 on Saturday 13th September 19:54

[dontlift]

I would write back to them with a letter saying that when they have some evidence feel free to charge me see you in court.

[jeffreyarcher]

dontlift said:

I would write back to them with a letter saying that when they have some evidence feel free to charge me see you in court.

I wouldn't do that, it might make you feel better at the time, but implicit in such a statement is an admission that you were the driver.
In such circumstances, the old saying, "Least said, soonest mended" is the best policy.

[deltaf]

Ask Madcop or tonyrec puzzled!

[MoJocvh]

puzzled said:

one other thing they sent a 7 day wonder to my address but it says driver of vehicle XXXXXX. how can i produce the license of the driver if i don't know who it is? do I ignore the producer or let them copy my details down. car is fully insured btw.

Two words spring to mind;

Stitch and Up.

You need to talk to a lawyer.MoJo.

[streaky]

puzzled said:

streaky- haha. actually made me laugh for a second anyway.

Good - a laugh releases endorphins and eases tension and worry .

puzzled said:

[snip]plod ... didnt want to tell me anyhting and said it was my job to convince him that i am innocent of the allegation once he had my confession.

Now that's an interesting set of statements - my job to convince him that i am innocent and once he had my confession - taken together they might be technically correct, but the last implies that the NIP is a 'confession' (see other threads on this).

The 'answer' here is, "It is not my position, nor is it a requirement in law, for me to confess to something I have no knowledge of doing and for which you cannot (or will not) produce evidence of my doing. It is your job to produce the evidence. If I am required to name the driver at the time of the alleged offence, you must provide accurate details sufficient for me to identify the driver."

I'd contact a lawyer for professional advice (the cost of this might be covered by your motoring or home insurance policies). He might want to make arrangement to attend the police station with you to sort this out if a letter from him does not produce the evidence or them dropping the allegation. Your lawyer might want to mention in making the appointment that you'd prefer a day on which a 'senior officer' was present in the station in case the discussion were to give rise to a 'complaint'. Might put the officer with whom you have dealt on his mettle. Do you have his collar number?

It always worries me in cases where the motorist and the police clash and the motorist wins that the personal pride of the officer(s) concerned can be hurt sufficiently for them to target the particular motorist. After a threat that "I'll be watching you" from a sergeant whom I demonstrated to be in serious error, I sold the car (actually arranged beforehand, but ...)

Note that I am not a lawyer.

Streaky

[puzzled]

jeffreyarcher said:

I understood that producers could only be given at the time. Is there no reference to any laws on it? E.g., "This notice is issued under Section XXX of the Road Traffic ZZZ Act 19XX".

def no acts listed, except in the bit tha says "to the police station staff". im going to produce docs but not sign anything maybe cross out driver and write owner???? will be writing nice letter after the 14 day limit. think this is very good approach.

still cant remember what it meant to have happened. crazy.