S172 - Registration mark fails to conform.
Discussion
Blanchimont said:
I have also just checked, and the NIP was issued 13 days after the offense, but arrived 15 days after it. Presumably it's the issue date the 14 day rule applies?
ETA:
Offense date: 23/1/22, Notice Issue date: 05/2/22, received 8/2/22.
No NoIP is required to be served (at all) for a number plate 'offence', so there's no rabbit hole for one being served late.ETA:
Offense date: 23/1/22, Notice Issue date: 05/2/22, received 8/2/22.
SS2. said:
No NoIP is required to be served (at all) for a number plate 'offence', so there's no rabbit hole for one being served late.
How does that work then? They need to identify the driver to prosecute them, how else would they do that without an S172 notice which must then be governed by the laws surrounding its use?omniflow said:
I have short plates on my car. I bought them from Four Dot. They are completely legal and they come with a plastic card to keep in the glovebox stating the regulations and listing each and every attribute in those regulations and the way in which these plates meet them. They are spaced correctly, and there is an appropriate space between the letters and the numbers.
If your plates are actually spaced correctly, then I'd take my chances in court. However, if there's no space between the letters and numbers then they're not actually spaced correctly, so you'll lose.
Me too (Four Dot 5-digit plate, fully legal). Still got pulled over by traffic police because it didn't register on his ANPR.If your plates are actually spaced correctly, then I'd take my chances in court. However, if there's no space between the letters and numbers then they're not actually spaced correctly, so you'll lose.
He politely argued they were not legal, I politely disagreed. He disgregarded the FourDot card as "being in their interests".
He agreed to let me go, he then checked it back at base and sent me an email stating "we find the plate is legal with no issues."
I have no major issue with being pulled over and they handled it fairly and professionally. Although I do have to keep explaining to my kids (who were in the car) that daddy is not in trouble with the police!
Odd about ANPR, the bloody speed camera didn't have any issues picking it up a few weeks previous.
Edited by ecs0set on Wednesday 9th February 13:09
BertBert said:
SS2. said:
No NoIP is required to be served (at all) for a number plate 'offence', so there's no rabbit hole for one being served late.
How does that work then? They need to identify the driver to prosecute them, how else would they do that without an S172 notice which must then be governed by the laws surrounding its use?BertBert said:
How does that work then? They need to identify the driver to prosecute them, how else would they do that without an S172 notice which must then be governed by the laws surrounding its use?
The s172 RTA requirement is not the same as a s1 RTOA warning. They are often confused/conflated as they frequently get sent together in cases involving speed cameras.There is no time limit for a s172 requirement. The 14 day time limit only applies to a notice of intended prosecution which is required for some (but as SS2 says not this) traffic offences.
Cat
DodgyGeezer said:
Another thing to bear in mind is that the police don't always know the full rules/regs when it comes to number plates. Be 101% sure of your legality and if you are have your day (so to speak)
Agree with the aboveI got pulled by a PC who gave the reason "your rear number plate is too small so illegal" I pointed out that my car was an import so was legally allowed to have smaller plates as it states on the DVLA website,PC gets on the radio to the traffic sergeant who insisted that as my car was on UK plates the plates had to conform to DVLA regs so were illegal, I drove home printed off the relevant section from DVLA site and took it to the police station with my rectification notice, officer on the desk looked at it and said " on your way sir"
Cat said:
BertBert said:
How does that work then? They need to identify the driver to prosecute them, how else would they do that without an S172 notice which must then be governed by the laws surrounding its use?
The s172 RTA requirement is not the same as a s1 RTOA warning. They are often confused/conflated as they frequently get sent together in cases involving speed cameras.There is no time limit for a s172 requirement. The 14 day time limit only applies to a notice of intended prosecution which is required for some (but as SS2 says not this) traffic offences.
Cat
Funny how these dreadful illegal plates are still very useful for identifying the vehicles keeper and sending a fine.
So by virtue of the fact they have identified you they are perfect at doing the job they are supposed to do.
I understand that rules are required to stop piss taking idiots but when it's readable and on the right car what's the point of all this if it's not pettiness being used to raise revenue?
So by virtue of the fact they have identified you they are perfect at doing the job they are supposed to do.
I understand that rules are required to stop piss taking idiots but when it's readable and on the right car what's the point of all this if it's not pettiness being used to raise revenue?
SS2. said:
Blanchimont said:
SS2. said:
Blanchimont said:
I had a S172 come through yesterday for a "registration mark fails to conform with regulations".
I've got short plates, but are marked accordingly, and are spaced correctly. (Whilst they may be a crime against taste for some, but from what I've found, not illegal)
Have you changed the plates in the past few months ?I've got short plates, but are marked accordingly, and are spaced correctly. (Whilst they may be a crime against taste for some, but from what I've found, not illegal)
Blanchimont in July 2021 said:
I've got a 6 digit reg, and it's on a short plate.
However, It's legal font, and not spaced like a knob (It's got no central space after the numbers, granted).
I'd rather not s
t myself every time I see a police car drive past. It's possible I'll get pulled, yeah. But it's a damn sure less likely than a blatantly mis-spaced, tinted, 4D plate.
However, It's legal font, and not spaced like a knob (It's got no central space after the numbers, granted).
I'd rather not s
t myself every time I see a police car drive past. It's possible I'll get pulled, yeah. But it's a damn sure less likely than a blatantly mis-spaced, tinted, 4D plate. You could consider writing to the issuing office and pointing out why you think the plates are legal. This would give them the opportunity to review the details and, if they see fit, to quietly drop the matter.
Getragdogleg said:
Funny how these dreadful illegal plates are still very useful for identifying the vehicles keeper and sending a fine.
So by virtue of the fact they have identified you they are perfect at doing the job they are supposed to do.
I understand that rules are required to stop piss taking idiots but when it's readable and on the right car what's the point of all this if it's not pettiness being used to raise revenue?
Simple clean line drawn in the sand without ambiguity, just like the drink drive limit or speed limit.So by virtue of the fact they have identified you they are perfect at doing the job they are supposed to do.
I understand that rules are required to stop piss taking idiots but when it's readable and on the right car what's the point of all this if it's not pettiness being used to raise revenue?
You either comply or you don't.
Getragdogleg said:
vonhosen said:
Simple clean line drawn in the sand without ambiguity, just like the drink drive limit or speed limit.
You either comply or you don't.
And yet here we are.You either comply or you don't.
Admittedly we have not seen the plate yet so I'm going to suspend further speculation.
vonhosen said:
Getragdogleg said:
vonhosen said:
Simple clean line drawn in the sand without ambiguity, just like the drink drive limit or speed limit.
You either comply or you don't.
And yet here we are.You either comply or you don't.
Admittedly we have not seen the plate yet so I'm going to suspend further speculation.
Loving the faith in op !
We need your plates to be readable and to a standard so we can track you down via them if you infringe a regulation.
But we can track you down using them if they also infringe a regulation, so they still work for tracking you down but it's something else we can fine you for.
There is (possibly was) a traffic law manual, Wilkinsons. It goes on for days. The law in relation to index plates is not clear cut and unless an officer has either an encyclopaedic memory (in which case, they are wasting their time in traffic dept) or too much time on their hands, such things are often a guess. However, if the error in your plate is spacing not conforming to the requirement, and you suggest there is no spacing apparent, I'm afraid you are toast.
There are times when mitigation might be useful, such as if you recently bought the vehicle, or were assured by the registered supplier of the plates that they were fully compliant. However, probably not worth going to court over.
My suggestion is to put your plea/excuse/complete defence in your reply to the request to ID the driver, include a photo, and hope.
There are times when mitigation might be useful, such as if you recently bought the vehicle, or were assured by the registered supplier of the plates that they were fully compliant. However, probably not worth going to court over.
My suggestion is to put your plea/excuse/complete defence in your reply to the request to ID the driver, include a photo, and hope.
Getragdogleg said:
vonhosen said:
Getragdogleg said:
vonhosen said:
Simple clean line drawn in the sand without ambiguity, just like the drink drive limit or speed limit.
You either comply or you don't.
And yet here we are.You either comply or you don't.
Admittedly we have not seen the plate yet so I'm going to suspend further speculation.
Loving the faith in op !
We need your plates to be readable and to a standard so we can track you down via them if you infringe a regulation.
But we can track you down using them if they also infringe a regulation, so they still work for tracking you down but it's something else we can fine you for.
They are to be made to a clearly legislated & defined standard & they have to satisfy all of that standard.
Any deviation from that standard & they are illegal.
That black/white position is so that there can be no elastic that stretches on the boundaries & an ensuing argument about why this should be legal (when it isn't as a matter of fact). In the same way as saying (when you were doing 35 in a 30 limit) that it wasn't dangerous & I didn't hit anything can open it up to a matter of interpretation as to whether you were exceeding the speed limit or not.
If an allegation is made, that doesn't mean they are illegal.
Whether they are is a matter of fact based on the legislation. They conform with those requirements or they don't.
Derek Smith said:
In my years as a police officer I have been known to be a bit petty. Mostly it was because of circumstances. My lowest was a cabbie whom I reported for leaving his vehicle in specified cab parking rank when second in the queue and for not wearing his badge in a prominant position. He learned the lesson of it being inadvisable to deliberately irritate a PC when commiting cab offences.
I got a reputation after that. I might have considered booking a frog that wasn't hopping, but I have never, ever, been tempted to report the owner of a vehicle with defective plates if they are not intended, not likely to obscure.
Same here.I got a reputation after that. I might have considered booking a frog that wasn't hopping, but I have never, ever, been tempted to report the owner of a vehicle with defective plates if they are not intended, not likely to obscure.
No need to look for the petty stuff, because it's a guarantee that a complete d**khead will drive around the corner with a tinted cover over their license plate.
And sure enough a teen in his dads Camero had one, and he decided to get lippy. I gave him a fix it ticket and he had to go and show the judge that he had;
Installed a catalytic converter.
Installed a muffler/silencer to get the noise level to the legal limit
Installed an EGR valve.
Removed the too dark window tinting.
Removed the "For racing use only" tyres.
Installed factory seat belts.
I didn't issue any citations, but his dad appealed to the judge crying that this was the first time his son had been stopped and I was being an unreasonable asshole. The judge got pissed and told him he had 30 days to get everything fixed. Cost him thousands to make it road legal.
Blanchimont said:
I have also just checked, and the NIP was issued 13 days after the offense, but arrived 15 days after it. Presumably it's the issue date the 14 day rule applies?
ETA:
Offense date: 23/1/22, Notice Issue date: 05/2/22, received 8/2/22.
So, as others have said, this 14 day rule doesn't apply here (but you *have* to conform to S.172 regardless) *but* I will clarify primarily for anyone finding this later. ETA:
Offense date: 23/1/22, Notice Issue date: 05/2/22, received 8/2/22.
The NIP has to be *served* to the registered keeper on or before the 14th day with day zero being the day of the offence.
By served this means delivered, it is assumed that unless evidence is provided to the contrary that if the NIP was sent in time it will arrive in time. If you can *prove* that it wasn't then you might be able to argue that it wasn't.
In your case it doesn't apply but if this was instead speeding then day 1 would be the 24/1/22, day 14 therefore would be the 7th and therefore if you received it on the 8th it would be too late. You would however probably struggle to prove this.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff