NIP, 100mph, dodgy photo evidence
Discussion
Got my first ever NIP in the post today. Quite angry as I believe it must have been a sneakily hidden mobile speed camera. Anyway, the NIP stated that I was allegedly exceeding a 70mph speed limit. It didn't say the speed so I call the ticket office and they told me that I was caught doing dead on 100mph!!! Noooooooooooooooooooooo.
So I said I wasn't sure who the driver was. The lady agreed to go and have a look at the photo to see if it was possible to see. She called me back to say that you couldn't see anything - Chimaera had the roof down - the photo doesn't show the back of anyone's head or anyone in the mirror.
In my books, if I "don't know who was driving" and the photo doesn't show who was driving, they can't prove who was speeding and there is no case. I was told to write on the back that I don't know who was driving & it would then go to court & the magistrate would decide was should happen.
Has this happened to anyone else? Will they really bother to take this to court if the photo doesn't show anything other than my shiny TVR hacking it along a dual carriageway in beautiful sunshine?
A mate suggests I should request the photo to make sure there is no way they can tell who was driving just in case the lady on the phone has iffy eyesight!!
Any other suggestions?
Cheers
Stew
So I said I wasn't sure who the driver was. The lady agreed to go and have a look at the photo to see if it was possible to see. She called me back to say that you couldn't see anything - Chimaera had the roof down - the photo doesn't show the back of anyone's head or anyone in the mirror.
In my books, if I "don't know who was driving" and the photo doesn't show who was driving, they can't prove who was speeding and there is no case. I was told to write on the back that I don't know who was driving & it would then go to court & the magistrate would decide was should happen.
Has this happened to anyone else? Will they really bother to take this to court if the photo doesn't show anything other than my shiny TVR hacking it along a dual carriageway in beautiful sunshine?
A mate suggests I should request the photo to make sure there is no way they can tell who was driving just in case the lady on the phone has iffy eyesight!!
Any other suggestions?
Cheers
Stew
Similar happened to myself a few weeks back. On advice of a copper friend went down the same route as yourself, unable to identify the driver, please send me a copy of the photo so I can help with your investigations. Also said that as many people have access to my vehicle, friends, work colleagues etc, I am unable to say who was driving the car. Photo wasn't any help, as windscreen was too dark to identify the driver, thankfully.
The police wrote back stating that I am legally bound under the Section 172 of the R T Act 1988 to identify the driver blah blah blah. Did some checking on this, and what the 'police forget' to tell you is that also within that section if you have taken reasonable dilligance in attempting to identify the driver but have been unable to and there is no concrete evidence to identify the driver then you cannot be charged. Obvioulsy its down to the judge, if it gets to court, to state what reasonable dilligence is, but in a previous instance a judge dismised a case as he ruled that the onus is on the police to prove that you had not taken reasonable dilligence in identifying the driver and not you to prove you had.
I would write a letter - dont send back the NIP - saying you cant identify the driver at the time because (other people have access to the car etc etc)... please send me a copy of the photo. When you get the photo if it dosent identify anyone say that you cant identify the driver and suggest that they drop the case. Also worth noting that is an offence under the same section as above to identify the wrong driver.
This is the course I have taken, cant say it is successful, yet. However, as I managed to get 3 points last year (non-contested) I think it is only fair to make the government work for the next 3.
The police wrote back stating that I am legally bound under the Section 172 of the R T Act 1988 to identify the driver blah blah blah. Did some checking on this, and what the 'police forget' to tell you is that also within that section if you have taken reasonable dilligance in attempting to identify the driver but have been unable to and there is no concrete evidence to identify the driver then you cannot be charged. Obvioulsy its down to the judge, if it gets to court, to state what reasonable dilligence is, but in a previous instance a judge dismised a case as he ruled that the onus is on the police to prove that you had not taken reasonable dilligence in identifying the driver and not you to prove you had.
I would write a letter - dont send back the NIP - saying you cant identify the driver at the time because (other people have access to the car etc etc)... please send me a copy of the photo. When you get the photo if it dosent identify anyone say that you cant identify the driver and suggest that they drop the case. Also worth noting that is an offence under the same section as above to identify the wrong driver.
This is the course I have taken, cant say it is successful, yet. However, as I managed to get 3 points last year (non-contested) I think it is only fair to make the government work for the next 3.
Surely there must be a law that they cannot charge you without some proof of who was driving. Just being the registered keeper doesn't hold you responsible in other matters like insurance, MOT and road tax etc.. it is the responsibility of the driver at the time in question.
If you were somewhere else when the car was captured then that's an easy way out as you have an alibi but where you were driving in this instance - I find it hard to beleive you can be charged without sufficient evidence.
If you were somewhere else when the car was captured then that's an easy way out as you have an alibi but where you were driving in this instance - I find it hard to beleive you can be charged without sufficient evidence.
[quote]Surely there must be a law that they cannot charge you without some proof of who was driving. [/quote]
Its called evidence. provided you show that you have tried your best, unsucessfully to identify who's driving, or better told them the details of the 7 or 8 people it could have been then thye can't really get you for a s172a) offence. And if they have no evidence such as a policemans sworn statement or a clear photo they should not bring the case in front of the bench. Make sure you keep copies of correspondence. A friend here in N Wales did precisely that earlier this year and the bench told the CPS sarcastically that they did not have any evidence did they ? And the case was dropped
Its called evidence. provided you show that you have tried your best, unsucessfully to identify who's driving, or better told them the details of the 7 or 8 people it could have been then thye can't really get you for a s172a) offence. And if they have no evidence such as a policemans sworn statement or a clear photo they should not bring the case in front of the bench. Make sure you keep copies of correspondence. A friend here in N Wales did precisely that earlier this year and the bench told the CPS sarcastically that they did not have any evidence did they ? And the case was dropped
Update - having sent a letter requesting photo evidence to help ID the driver I received a reply. It basically says that they've looked at the photos and they don't show the driver. It finishes with...
"Sorry for any inconvenience caused and we shall wait to hear from you with your decision on whether you are able to nominate a driver who can take part in the Fixed Penalty Scheme or if you would like to request a court hearing."
So if I request a court hearing, they have no evidence - no photo of a driver and no signed NIP - right?
"Sorry for any inconvenience caused and we shall wait to hear from you with your decision on whether you are able to nominate a driver who can take part in the Fixed Penalty Scheme or if you would like to request a court hearing."
So if I request a court hearing, they have no evidence - no photo of a driver and no signed NIP - right?
?[quote=big_treacle]Update - having sent a letter requesting photo evidence to help ID the driver I received a reply. It basically says that they've looked at the photos and they don't show the driver. It finishes with...
"Sorry for any inconvenience caused and we shall wait to hear from you with your decision on whether you are able to nominate a driver who can take part in the Fixed Penalty Scheme or if you would like to request a court hearing."
So if I request a court hearing, they have no evidence - no photo of a driver and no signed NIP - right?
[/quote
right
"Sorry for any inconvenience caused and we shall wait to hear from you with your decision on whether you are able to nominate a driver who can take part in the Fixed Penalty Scheme or if you would like to request a court hearing."
So if I request a court hearing, they have no evidence - no photo of a driver and no signed NIP - right?
[/quote
right
outlaw said:
[quote=big_treacle]Update - having sent a letter requesting photo evidence to help ID the driver I received a reply. It basically says that they've looked at the photos and they don't show the driver. It finishes with...
"Sorry for any inconvenience caused and we shall wait to hear from you with your decision on whether you are able to nominate a driver who can take part in the Fixed Penalty Scheme or if you would like to request a court hearing."
So if I request a court hearing, they have no evidence - no photo of a driver and no signed NIP - right?
[/quote
right
right.
Looks good. Seems a bit strange that they haven't sent me any threatening letters about failure to disclose drivers. Maybe they've been learning something from the recent court cases and media backlashes against ****ing speed cameras! I guess I'll send them back an unsigned NIP now with a letter politely suggesting that they either take me to court or throw out the case.
<<<< Update >>>>
Its been over 6 months now and I've heard nothing more about my alleged offence so I guess I'm in the clear.
Just to clarify what happened here...
1. i got NIP mid July last year for allegedly doing 100mph on a dual carriageway on one of the nicest days of the summer.
2. i wrote asking for photo evidence to ID driver
3. was told they couldn't ID driver & so could I nominate someone to join their penalty scheme or request court appearance.
4. i laughed and threw NIP in the bin as they clearly had no evidence.
Cheers and good luck people
fight the power
Its been over 6 months now and I've heard nothing more about my alleged offence so I guess I'm in the clear.
Just to clarify what happened here...
1. i got NIP mid July last year for allegedly doing 100mph on a dual carriageway on one of the nicest days of the summer.
2. i wrote asking for photo evidence to ID driver
3. was told they couldn't ID driver & so could I nominate someone to join their penalty scheme or request court appearance.
4. i laughed and threw NIP in the bin as they clearly had no evidence.
Cheers and good luck people
fight the power
Well done!
I have done exactly the same as you, called their bluff, less than a month to go now. I was clocked doing 80 in a 50mph temp speed limit (no work going on at the time), couldn't identify the driver from the photo. So I binned the NIPs following legal advice and sent them a letter telling them it was either my wife or myself. Keeping my fingers crossed.
If all drivers were bloddy minded and refused to co-operate the system would grind to a halt very quickly.
I have done exactly the same as you, called their bluff, less than a month to go now. I was clocked doing 80 in a 50mph temp speed limit (no work going on at the time), couldn't identify the driver from the photo. So I binned the NIPs following legal advice and sent them a letter telling them it was either my wife or myself. Keeping my fingers crossed.
If all drivers were bloddy minded and refused to co-operate the system would grind to a halt very quickly.
big_treacle said:Interesting. If the driver were a foreigner (who by definition cannot take part in the Fixed Penalty Scheme) you (the RK) would have to go to court - Streaky
Update - having sent a letter requesting photo evidence to help ID the driver I received a reply. It basically says that they've looked at the photos and they don't show the driver. It finishes with...
"Sorry for any inconvenience caused and we shall wait to hear from you with your decision on whether you are able to nominate a driver who can take part in the Fixed Penalty Scheme or if you would like to request a court hearing."
Eliminator said:
Just take care.
Saying that you cannot identify the dirver when that is not true would be an unfortunate route to take.
So, for example, if you were asked how you could post on a website that "no work was going on" in the roadwork section, your answer would be......
A BIG IF!
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff