Why bother issuing a NIP on day 14?
Discussion
I think I'm right, but if so, why would they bother?
A Notice of Intention to Prosecute (NIP) issued on 30/8/18 alleging an offence on 16/8/18 (i.e. 14 days previously) cannot possibly arrive in time. Given that the vehicle is not leased etc and the V5 details are correct, what's the point of issuing the NIP?
In this case the NIP also took 2 days to arrive (i.e. today, Saturday 1/9/18) although I accept it was sent 1st class and therefore could have arrived 31/8/18, but my reading of the RTOA 1988 still makes it too late...
Unless I'm missing something, a challenge on the basis of late serving will be successful, so what would be the point (unless they're hoping that no challenge is raised).
Just venting/thinking. Challenge will go in Monday, unless I have misunderstood something fundamental.
A Notice of Intention to Prosecute (NIP) issued on 30/8/18 alleging an offence on 16/8/18 (i.e. 14 days previously) cannot possibly arrive in time. Given that the vehicle is not leased etc and the V5 details are correct, what's the point of issuing the NIP?
In this case the NIP also took 2 days to arrive (i.e. today, Saturday 1/9/18) although I accept it was sent 1st class and therefore could have arrived 31/8/18, but my reading of the RTOA 1988 still makes it too late...
Unless I'm missing something, a challenge on the basis of late serving will be successful, so what would be the point (unless they're hoping that no challenge is raised).
Just venting/thinking. Challenge will go in Monday, unless I have misunderstood something fundamental.
Tom1312 said:
Apart from the delay in getting the NIP in the post... Wat's your defence?
Were you caught by a camera or stopped at the time?
I assume it was a camera as I was not stopped at the time. First I knew about it was today. Could have been a public spirited person with a dash-cam...Were you caught by a camera or stopped at the time?
Apart from delay in the NIP, no defence, although I haven't seen the evidence it's 'possible'. Mitigation would be I was on a motorbike and just extending the slip road in heavy traffic.
jaja4421 said:
I think I'm right, but if so, why would they bother?
A Notice of Intention to Prosecute (NIP) issued on 30/8/18 alleging an offence on 16/8/18 (i.e. 14 days previously) cannot possibly arrive in time. Given that the vehicle is not leased etc and the V5 details are correct, what's the point of issuing the NIP?
In this case the NIP also took 2 days to arrive (i.e. today, Saturday 1/9/18) although I accept it was sent 1st class and therefore could have arrived 31/8/18, but my reading of the RTOA 1988 still makes it too late...
Unless I'm missing something, a challenge on the basis of late serving will be successful, so what would be the point (unless they're hoping that no challenge is raised).
Just venting/thinking. Challenge will go in Monday, unless I have misunderstood something fundamental.
It may be human error, the law is a bit silly as it requires the defendant to prove that service wasn't complied with. But I personally feel that they should avoid sending them out. That said, service in 14 days is not an absolute.. it's not just deficiencies in owner records that can be a legitimate ground for meeting the due diligence test, it's a case by case basis. A Notice of Intention to Prosecute (NIP) issued on 30/8/18 alleging an offence on 16/8/18 (i.e. 14 days previously) cannot possibly arrive in time. Given that the vehicle is not leased etc and the V5 details are correct, what's the point of issuing the NIP?
In this case the NIP also took 2 days to arrive (i.e. today, Saturday 1/9/18) although I accept it was sent 1st class and therefore could have arrived 31/8/18, but my reading of the RTOA 1988 still makes it too late...
Unless I'm missing something, a challenge on the basis of late serving will be successful, so what would be the point (unless they're hoping that no challenge is raised).
Just venting/thinking. Challenge will go in Monday, unless I have misunderstood something fundamental.
They don't occur often but for example if an image from CCTV needs a lot of enhancement, or a member of the public submits footage out of time then they are still able to show they met the requirements under S2. RTOA '88
agtlaw said:
jaja4421 said:
Drive on motorway hard shoulder / emergency refuge area.
What Act and or Regulation is specified in the notice?agtlaw said:
Probably best to ignore that nonsense. If you copy the text from the notice then someone will check the schedule to the Act.
I am not being defensive and am not even close to being an expert in this but is it nonsense? I was trying to say nearly always its 14 days from date of offence.. I just widened it to point out the reasonable diligence test under S2 RTOA can be met, despite the V5 being correct etc as in the OPs post. If, for other reasons, the registered keeper could not be identified in time. For example some of the latest youtube prosecutions.
agtlaw said:
My provisional view* is that it’s not on the schedule. Before you complain to the relevant authority about the ‘14 day rule’, check that it applies. Or complain anyway and see what they say?
Thank you again for your time. I have at least learned something - that not all NIPs are equal! I was a little misled by pepipoo's NIP wizard - it must work on the assumption of a speeding offence.- I would have to check Westlaw to be sure.
I will raise the issue with GMP and see what they say (while at the same time fulfilling my s172 obligations).
Is there somewhere I can find the 'standard' or 'usual' punishment for the alleged offence?
I used to live in Malaysia.
Regularly in the news, I used to read about people who had stopped or broken down in the hard shoulder, then been killed by some f
ktard driving, illegally, often at high speed, in that same hard shoulder. One time I drove past some hapless dude, laying dead in the hard shoulder, myself.
No sympathy. If you want to avoid being prosecuted for driving on the hard shoulder, don't drive in the hard shoulder.
Regularly in the news, I used to read about people who had stopped or broken down in the hard shoulder, then been killed by some f
ktard driving, illegally, often at high speed, in that same hard shoulder. One time I drove past some hapless dude, laying dead in the hard shoulder, myself. No sympathy. If you want to avoid being prosecuted for driving on the hard shoulder, don't drive in the hard shoulder.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff