Discussion
I can't work this out now, is it legal.
My wife had an Nip about two months ago for DD and she ignored it.
Also the form S172 asking to name the driver which she also ignored.
She is the registered owner and keeper.
I have now recieved an Nip and S172 for the same offence, is it legall to do this just because I am her spouse?
My wife had an Nip about two months ago for DD and she ignored it.
Also the form S172 asking to name the driver which she also ignored.
She is the registered owner and keeper.
I have now recieved an Nip and S172 for the same offence, is it legall to do this just because I am her spouse?
Crikey mate, I thought this nonsense would have been done and dusted by now.
How the hell can they send the nip to you if its not your car and she didnt send back any forms naming you as the driver?
That can't be right, but I'm sure DVD, JeffreyArcher one of the other knowledgeable chaps will come along and tell you the score.
How the hell can they send the nip to you if its not your car and she didnt send back any forms naming you as the driver?
That can't be right, but I'm sure DVD, JeffreyArcher one of the other knowledgeable chaps will come along and tell you the score.
klm
Don't ignore the duty to give information (172) also applies i.e.
" any other person shall if required give any information which it is in his power to give and may lead to the identification of the driver."
also that the defence that that person did not know and could no with reasonable diligence have ascertained who the driver was.
Now from what you say, your not the RK, hence your details will not be on the DVLA file for the vehicle.
So where have they come up with your details. You absolutely sure, and I don't want to cause martial discord,that SWMBO has not put your name down and returned the forms?
Only way I can think of is that BiB has seen the car either outside your abode, or you in it and known to him which to me seems farcical.
Cannot understand either how they have left it so long as dangerous driving is not dealt with by camera (yet) and will require face to face with BiB. May be that following a complaint to BiB, they have gone fishing to try and establish on paper a driver before doing any actual leg work. Is it a Force local to you or from afar?
Consider writing back, for both of you don't want to be done for failing to name, to them to say that you were not the driver, are not the registered Keeper and therefore no knowledge of who a driver could be consequently cannot give any information.As a point of interest ask how your name came to be selected.
DVD
Don't ignore the duty to give information (172) also applies i.e.
" any other person shall if required give any information which it is in his power to give and may lead to the identification of the driver."
also that the defence that that person did not know and could no with reasonable diligence have ascertained who the driver was.
Now from what you say, your not the RK, hence your details will not be on the DVLA file for the vehicle.
So where have they come up with your details. You absolutely sure, and I don't want to cause martial discord,that SWMBO has not put your name down and returned the forms?
Only way I can think of is that BiB has seen the car either outside your abode, or you in it and known to him which to me seems farcical.
Cannot understand either how they have left it so long as dangerous driving is not dealt with by camera (yet) and will require face to face with BiB. May be that following a complaint to BiB, they have gone fishing to try and establish on paper a driver before doing any actual leg work. Is it a Force local to you or from afar?
Consider writing back, for both of you don't want to be done for failing to name, to them to say that you were not the driver, are not the registered Keeper and therefore no knowledge of who a driver could be consequently cannot give any information.As a point of interest ask how your name came to be selected.
DVD
Surely as my wife didn't (beleive me, dhe hasn't) send the s172 back we were expecting a sumons for failure to supply information to land on the door step.
Yes it is the local force, and yes they know both of us use the car as it's easy to spot and bib live near us.
Now that I have an Nip, but my wife didn't name me, surely my Nip is out of the 14 day limit.
Info from the inside is that there is no photo evidence, a bib see the car, NOT the driver and as they have seen me in the car several hours after the offence, they have sent me an Nip, I don't think this can be right surely.
Yes it is the local force, and yes they know both of us use the car as it's easy to spot and bib live near us.
Now that I have an Nip, but my wife didn't name me, surely my Nip is out of the 14 day limit.
Info from the inside is that there is no photo evidence, a bib see the car, NOT the driver and as they have seen me in the car several hours after the offence, they have sent me an Nip, I don't think this can be right surely.
Is the car insured in your name or has it been at some time in the past ? this may be how you have been targeted.
The police ( and hence scamera partnerships) have access to this information although not all insurers contribute yet according to a broker I know.
The link that is sometimes made is wishful thinking by the SCP’s and should be rejected. It’s the driver who is insured….to drive a specific car. The fact that the driver may at some time have taken insurance nominating the car does NOT mean that at any time he might be a ‘person (whom ) ………… it is in his power to give (information that)……may lead to the identification of the driver”
I have put a hire car on my own insurance for a few days. During a time I was without use of my car I still maintained my insurance. My ins co charges me a £ 10 ‘admin’ grab for every change. So after handing the hire car back I have left it the insurance in place until the next hire or loan of a friend’s car a few weeks later. Of course during that interval a dreadful speeding crime may have been detected involving that car. I have had that happen to me and North Wales Arrrive Alive’s finest come and try to harass me at home and work and interview all my neighbours. When they phoned me at work over this I asked them to explain over the phone the connection between me and the car at the time of the offence. Not surprisingly they phoned back and said “ I was lucky this time….the case will be dropped!! ”
Stick to your guns !
The police ( and hence scamera partnerships) have access to this information although not all insurers contribute yet according to a broker I know.
The link that is sometimes made is wishful thinking by the SCP’s and should be rejected. It’s the driver who is insured….to drive a specific car. The fact that the driver may at some time have taken insurance nominating the car does NOT mean that at any time he might be a ‘person (whom ) ………… it is in his power to give (information that)……may lead to the identification of the driver”
I have put a hire car on my own insurance for a few days. During a time I was without use of my car I still maintained my insurance. My ins co charges me a £ 10 ‘admin’ grab for every change. So after handing the hire car back I have left it the insurance in place until the next hire or loan of a friend’s car a few weeks later. Of course during that interval a dreadful speeding crime may have been detected involving that car. I have had that happen to me and North Wales Arrrive Alive’s finest come and try to harass me at home and work and interview all my neighbours. When they phoned me at work over this I asked them to explain over the phone the connection between me and the car at the time of the offence. Not surprisingly they phoned back and said “ I was lucky this time….the case will be dropped!! ”
Stick to your guns !
Unfortunately klm in sending the first NOIP to the registered keeper in 14 days of the alleged offence then this is good service even though a driver is traced outside the 14 days.
Obviously they have to prove who the driver was and in your case for failing to name S172 if summoned then they will also have to prove that you have some information that would lead to the identity of the driver at the time of the alleged offence.
Looks like a complete ballsup to me at the moment and as far as I can see can only be resolved one way or another by personal interviews by BiB.
DVD
Obviously they have to prove who the driver was and in your case for failing to name S172 if summoned then they will also have to prove that you have some information that would lead to the identity of the driver at the time of the alleged offence.
Looks like a complete ballsup to me at the moment and as far as I can see can only be resolved one way or another by personal interviews by BiB.
DVD
Dwight VanDriver said:
Unfortunately klm in sending the first NOIP to the registered keeper in 14 days of the alleged offence then this is good service even though a driver is traced outside the 14 days.
Obviously they have to prove who the driver was and in your case for failing to name S172 if summoned then they will also have to prove that you have some information that would lead to the identity of the driver at the time of the alleged offence.
Looks like a complete ballsup to me at the moment and as far as I can see can only be resolved one way or another by personal interviews by BiB.
DVD
So if bib come round I can tell them I am not prepared to talk to them, is there anything they can do if I refuse to talk to them.
Not that I'm being unreasonable, but from personal experience it's never done me any favours talking to them before.
Basicaly dvd, Do I have to talk to bib or not?
I'm in the dark here for I cannot come to terms with what they are trying to do and can only surmise that there has been a complaint of driving standard which in my day was never dealt with by a paper exercise to a Court.
Now if there has been a complaint then on follow up statements would be taken from the complainant and witnesses to build up the case and the offender interviewed to get his side of things.
Plod has every right to ask questions of anybody in an attempt to establish the offending driver. A refusal to help/answer brings the impression Ahhh something to hide.If the finger was pointing at you there would come a stage where you would be cautioned. Whilst you have every right not to say anything then that fact can be looked at at Court not in your favour as you would presumably would not also be silent at Court and bring up matters not mentioned at interview.
Perhaps Dibble or Gone can explain current protocols in relation to dealing with such complaints.
DVD
Now if there has been a complaint then on follow up statements would be taken from the complainant and witnesses to build up the case and the offender interviewed to get his side of things.
Plod has every right to ask questions of anybody in an attempt to establish the offending driver. A refusal to help/answer brings the impression Ahhh something to hide.If the finger was pointing at you there would come a stage where you would be cautioned. Whilst you have every right not to say anything then that fact can be looked at at Court not in your favour as you would presumably would not also be silent at Court and bring up matters not mentioned at interview.
Perhaps Dibble or Gone can explain current protocols in relation to dealing with such complaints.
DVD
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff