NIP questions & advice... mite be interesting

[millasur]

Ok so it arrived, 54 in a 40 zone, however a few things...

As i'm not the keeper etc, the NIP was sent to my mum - it clearly says the person its addressed to must fill it out and ONLY them - as such

PART 1 - fill out - if you WERENT driving, fill in part 2 or 3

Part 2 says - who was driving - my mum has no proof that I was driving (and we have other named drivers) - therefore, she can put "I don't know" in the box and send it back...

then what happens? lol. bit random - I mean will they send one the NIP to other named drivers? or what. lol.

[chrisgr31]

millasur said:

Ok so it arrived, 54 in a 40 zone, however a few things... As i'm not the keeper etc, the NIP was sent to my mum - it clearly says the person its addressed to must fill it out and ONLY them - as such PART 1 - fill out - if you WERENT driving, fill in part 2 or 3 Part 2 says - who was driving - my mum has no proof that I was driving (and we have other named drivers) - therefore, she can put "I don't know" in the box and send it back... then what happens? lol. bit random - I mean will they send one the NIP to other named drivers? or what. lol.

Well on the assumption that your Mum doesn't know who was driving she can return the form stating that there are x drivers insured to drive the car, they all have keys and she doesn't know wh was driving it at the time. Please can they sent photo to help with identification.

They send photo (maybe!) and hopefully the driver isn't clearly identified. She writes back saying photo doesn't help.

Hopefully thats the end of the matter, but I don't know if they can ask who is insured to drive.

[206xsi]

Had a similar case in our family.

The day my stepmother was flashed by a Gatso my father was undergoing a triple heart bypass.

I told him to return the paperwork saying he was in no condition to know who was driving - but he chickened out and she got the points

[millasur]

rah. sounds like my mum. shes telling me shes gunna say it was me driving. stupid cow. She said "its the law you should pay the penalty. its a pretty much straight road with no dangers at like 1 am on a tuesday night. there sure as hell werent any other cars around. I wanna contest it cos its not right, its just theiving. Its not like I was doing 50mph in a built up area or with kids leaving a school. stupid stuipd stupiddddddddddd.

[m-five]

millasur said:

rah. sounds like my mum. shes telling me shes gunna say it was me driving. stupid cow. She said "its the law you should pay the penalty. its a pretty much straight road with no dangers at like 1 am on a tuesday night. there sure as hell werent any other cars around. I wanna contest it cos its not right, its just theiving. Its not like I was doing 50mph in a built up area or with kids leaving a school. stupid stuipd stupiddddddddddd.

So are you saying your mum does know that it was you driving and you were hoping she would lie to protect you - or are you saying she is being mean and implicating you even though she can't prove it was you?

[206xsi]

OK - so someone receives a NIP - correctly returns the form with the named driver on it.

Named driver then denies they were driving - no proof, one person's word against another.

Where does the law stand?! (apart from being an ass )

[millasur]

im complaining because she is implicating me! She can't prove that it was me driving, I don't honestly think anyone can.

[Mr E]

millasur said:

im complaining because she is implicating me! She can't prove that it was me driving, I don't honestly think anyone can.

She's not. She's simply saying that as far as she knows, you were driving the car.

You are required to fill in the NIP that you will receive truthfully. You are not required by law to sign it. The judge may well take a dim view of this action however.

[tonybav]

You have an all you may ever need to know about nips mail.

[pdV6]

Trouble is, you've just posted a confession on a public website. I know you haven't revealed your name in your profile, but you have included a link to your homepage. Best to keep this sort of discussion "theoretical" in case it were to come back to haunt you...

[millasur]

I didn tappear to get the email mate - sorry, please send again if you can.

Mr E it doesntl really matter - she is definately gunna sign it and return it lol, hey, who cares. not about getting flashed again and losing my in license then.

[justme]

206xsi said:

OK - so someone receives a NIP - correctly returns the form with the named driver on it. Named driver then denies they were driving - no proof, one person's word against another. Where does the law stand?! (apart from being an ass )

The law is STUCK (in the UK, because in other countries it's different)
When they were drafting this piece of legislation, they hadn't envisioned the widespread abuse by councils, police forces and ScameraPartnerships.
It was assumed that the registered keeper would also be the driver (which is indeed the case in the vast majority of cases), so such a conflict would be against oneself!
They (thought they) covered company-car drivers (secretary takes the flack) and all's well...

[Tivster]

justme said:

206xsi said: OK - so someone receives a NIP - correctly returns the form with the named driver on it. Named driver then denies they were driving - no proof, one person's word against another. Where does the law stand?! (apart from being an ass ) The law is STUCK (in the UK, because in other countries it's different) When they were drafting this piece of legislation, they hadn't envisioned the widespread abuse by councils, police forces and ScameraPartnerships. It was assumed that the registered keeper would also be the driver (which is indeed the case in the vast majority of cases), so such a conflict would be against oneself! They (thought they) covered company-car drivers (secretary takes the flack) and all's well...

Can you check your audio collection for a different piece of vinyl?

This piece of legislation was drafted to cover the very situation that is outlined here. You appear to believe that it wasn't...
Prior to the creation of the NIP, only drivers caught transgressing or seen/witnessed doing so then stopped would/could get dealt with. There was no redress for such events as hit and run accidents, where the drivers identity could never be proved. As a result the motoring public had to contend with ever spiralling uninsured losses, leading to increasing policy premiums.
The NIP is issued for only a handful of offence types - all outlined in the relevant legislation, speeding being one of them. It therefore is used for the purpose it was destined to fulfill. The fact that it is used as a tool to obtain details of speeders is consequential and the NIP has a high profile because of that.

Tivster

>> Edited by Tivster on Friday 19th September 08:37

[justme]

They're still stuck if the registered keeper *does* try to help, but that doesn't lead to a valid UK-licence holder who accepts responsibility.