Just received a NIP for careless driving - some questions
Discussion
So just had a letter from the Traffic Process Unit, it outlines that my vehicle was involved in an RTC on the 22nd September at 9am. Now I have tracking on my vehicle and we know that this was the wife on the school run, but she has no idea about causing any RTC, certainly it did not involve our vehicle direct.
Now the odd part of the NIP is that most of the wording is crossed out including the NIP statement, all it says is that consideration is being taken to take proceedings against the driver. It is asking under section 172 of the 1988 RTA to identify the driver.
Would it be wise to seek legal advise before sending this off to the Traffic Process Unit, it seems like a long time since the incident to get a request of this type. Personally I am almost certain I know what this alleges to. There is a very dodgy mini roundabout on the road in question and lots of cross traffic (4-ways), if your not committed accidents are easy and lots of fender benders as a result. I guess someone felt my wife got in the way, braked and was hit in the rear.....certainly no-one has hit our car, it's brand new and unmarked.
Now the odd part of the NIP is that most of the wording is crossed out including the NIP statement, all it says is that consideration is being taken to take proceedings against the driver. It is asking under section 172 of the 1988 RTA to identify the driver.
Would it be wise to seek legal advise before sending this off to the Traffic Process Unit, it seems like a long time since the incident to get a request of this type. Personally I am almost certain I know what this alleges to. There is a very dodgy mini roundabout on the road in question and lots of cross traffic (4-ways), if your not committed accidents are easy and lots of fender benders as a result. I guess someone felt my wife got in the way, braked and was hit in the rear.....certainly no-one has hit our car, it's brand new and unmarked.
Its the fact the the NIP part is actually crossed out, and the length of time on the notice. I don't want to identify my wife just to have them hand over the details to the claimants insurer for some pointless drawn out claim process. I guess if the police had solid evidence and witnesses they would have served the NIP direct or knocked on my door by now.
Oh sorry.
I believe a NIP has to be issued within 14 days of the alleged offence, note not received within 14 days. What is the date on it?
Mind you, is it actually an official NIP if the wording has been deleted? If it's someone after insurance details can't they get their insurer to ascertain the vehicles insurer?
I believe a NIP has to be issued within 14 days of the alleged offence, note not received within 14 days. What is the date on it?
Mind you, is it actually an official NIP if the wording has been deleted? If it's someone after insurance details can't they get their insurer to ascertain the vehicles insurer?
Edited by PurpleMoonlight on Sunday 30th October 06:25
Rushjob said:
The fact that the car is alleged to have been involved in an RTC negates the requirement for an NIP to be issued therefore any reference to it on the form has been crossed out.
In these circumstances the 14 day rule does not apply, sorry
Ok thanks, I will return s172 identifying the driverIn these circumstances the 14 day rule does not apply, sorry
Sounds like someone has made a complaint to the police and they are investigating. This isn't what would happen for an insurance claim, that would go through the insurers and not involve the police.
At this point they might not actually have any evidence beyond the complaint, they just want to talk to the driver but need to know who it is. Your car doesn't need to have been directly involved in an accident for the driver to be done for careless driving.
Unless there are independent witnesses or dashcam footage it's unlikely to go much further, unless your wife really did do something very wrong and fesses up to it.
At this point they might not actually have any evidence beyond the complaint, they just want to talk to the driver but need to know who it is. Your car doesn't need to have been directly involved in an accident for the driver to be done for careless driving.
Unless there are independent witnesses or dashcam footage it's unlikely to go much further, unless your wife really did do something very wrong and fesses up to it.
charltjr said:
Sounds like someone has made a complaint to the police and they are investigating. This isn't what would happen for an insurance claim, that would go through the insurers and not involve the police.
At this point they might not actually have any evidence beyond the complaint, they just want to talk to the driver but need to know who it is. Your car doesn't need to have been directly involved in an accident for the driver to be done for careless driving.
Unless there are independent witnesses or dashcam footage it's unlikely to go much further, unless your wife really did do something very wrong and fesses up to it.
Sounds very much to me as if dash cam footage at play.At this point they might not actually have any evidence beyond the complaint, they just want to talk to the driver but need to know who it is. Your car doesn't need to have been directly involved in an accident for the driver to be done for careless driving.
Unless there are independent witnesses or dashcam footage it's unlikely to go much further, unless your wife really did do something very wrong and fesses up to it.
Enirely possible that OP (or partner...) genuinly unaware of incident that took place.
I can't see how this would get as far as a NIP on one persons word alone, and the number plate has been captured somewhere.
charltjr said:
Unless there are independent witnesses or dashcam footage it's unlikely to go much further, unless your wife really did do something very wrong and fesses up to it.
Your wife will need to be careful if called in for an interview to ensure she does not incriminate herself. I suspect legal advice will be to say as little as possible.Well is seems to me that it's not a proper NIP (issued to late and that section crossed out). I think they just want driver details in-case they decide to take it further. I guess if they had real evidence they would have been knocking on my door by now.
If anything happens I will post up on here, probably in for a long wait though....!
If anything happens I will post up on here, probably in for a long wait though....!
un1corn said:
Listen mate, your wife on the school run (like most of them) probably cant drive, crashed, thought "f
k it", drove off, and is now too scared to admit she's a bad driver.
Probably driving a range rover.
Probably live less than 5 miles from school.
Probably parked on the pavement.
A bit harsh there, bearing in mind the OP stated that his car is brand new and unmarked.k it", drove off, and is now too scared to admit she's a bad driver.Probably driving a range rover.
Probably live less than 5 miles from school.
Probably parked on the pavement.
un1corn said:
Listen mate, your wife on the school run (like most of them) probably cant drive, crashed, thought "fk it", drove off, and is now too scared to admit she's a bad driver.
Probably driving a range rover.
Probably live less than 5 miles from school.
Probably parked on the pavement.
If I were 5 miles from the school I'd bloody drive them there as well! This isn't Yorkshire... k it", drove off, and is now too scared to admit she's a bad driver.Probably driving a range rover.
Probably live less than 5 miles from school.
Probably parked on the pavement.
un1corn said:
Listen mate, your wife on the school run (like most of them) probably cant drive, crashed, thought "fk it", drove off, and is now too scared to admit she's a bad driver.
Probably driving a range rover.
Probably live less than 5 miles from school.
Probably parked on the pavement.
3am and tk it", drove off, and is now too scared to admit she's a bad driver.Probably driving a range rover.
Probably live less than 5 miles from school.
Probably parked on the pavement.
t of the day post has already been won
jdwoodbury said:
Personally I am almost certain I know what this alleges to. There is a very dodgy mini roundabout on the road in question and lots of cross traffic (4-ways), if your not committed accidents are easy and lots of fender benders as a result..
I certainly synthase with this.About 300 metres from my work is a very busy and dreadful mini roundabout.
It is constant near misses, road rage, and beeping of horns all day long.
You get 3 types of people using it:
The people who actually treat it as a proper roundabout - they are in the tiny minority.
The "sit there all day" types. They get to the roundabout, have no idea what's going on, and just sit there while everyone else goes.
The "I'm going for it" people. Approach like a bull in a china shop with no intention of stopping or giving way, mostly encouraged due to all the "sit there all day" types.
It's chaos.
un1corn said:
Listen mate, your wife on the school run (like most of them) probably cant drive, crashed, thought "fk it", drove off, and is now too scared to admit she's a bad driver.
Probably driving a range rover.
Probably live less than 5 miles from school.
Probably parked on the pavement.
She does drive a range rover but negative to the other 2 ;-)k it", drove off, and is now too scared to admit she's a bad driver.Probably driving a range rover.
Probably live less than 5 miles from school.
Probably parked on the pavement.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff