What penalty?

['Q']

Good Morning

I received a NIP this morning (not unexpected). I was clocked at 82mph in 50 mph roadworks south of Coventry on the A46 by a van on a bridge. This road is usually 70mph as it's a dcway. Also received a warning that if I don't SIGN the NIP I will be liable to a £1k fine etc, they also stated some case last year to back this up. I don't really want to go to court but if I was beaking the limit by 32mph will I get a £60+ 3points or something much worse.

Thanks in advance for any advice.

Q

[Mad Dave]

Sorry mate, but you're going to be needing one of these:

['Q']

O bugger! Perhaps I won't sign the NIP then, or say my wife was driving as we were both in the car at the time. Then she can deny it, then I'll deny I was driving and so on.....

[jjr1]

Get your wife to fill in the details and then don't sign it.

Ignore the police threats about not signing it as they are talking out their arse as usual

['Q']

I was under the impression the non-signing of NIPs loophole had been effectively closed.

Q

[206xsi]

Think again

www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&f=10&t=60172

['Q']

I have been thinking about what course of action to take over my recent NIP. I have done some research and I am really tempted to fight this. Blueyes has kindly forwarded the details of his solicitor and I will be contacting him on Monday.

Couple of questions do safety camera vans (Talivans) actually take a picture of the driver? The Warwickshire police have sent me a "Bluster" letter with the NIP stating I am NOT entitled to any photographic evidence or calibration certificates and only the prosecution have access to these if the case comes to court - is this correct? Thanks for any clarification.

I also have a brother in law who has lived in Germany for 20 odd years, he is basically a citizen has a German driving license etc, would they pursue it if I named him on the form? With his consent of course.

Q

[outlaw]

'Q' said:

I have been thinking about what course of action to take over my recent NIP. I have done some research and I am really tempted to fight this. Blueyes has kindly forwarded the details of his solicitor and I will be contacting him on Monday. Couple of questions do safety camera vans (Talivans) actually take a picture of the driver? The Warwickshire police have sent me a "Bluster" letter with the NIP stating I am NOT entitled to any photographic evidence or calibration certificates and only the prosecution have access to these if the case comes to court - is this correct? Thanks for any clarification. I also have a brother in law who has lived in Germany for 20 odd years, he is basically a citizen has a German driving license etc, would they pursue it if I named him on the form? With his consent of course. Q

yes they take a pic of the frount of the car ushally.

no there lieing if the case comes to court the defence has to be given the evidence as welll aleast 7 days befor the hearing.

no there wont go after your german m8

ps dont forget not to sign the form.

[jeffreyarcher]

'Q' said:

I was clocked <...> in <...> roadworks

I have yet to see a set of fully compliant road works signs. As well as the usual, e.g. start signs must be in pairs, lit if within 50m of a street lamp (if a trunk or principal road) etc., have you checked the back of the limit start signs?
The Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2002
Direction 42.- (about 7/8ths the way down.)
42. - (1) The back of any sign shown in a diagram in Schedules 1 to 5, 7, Part II of Schedule 10 or in Schedule 12, or prescribed by regulation 53, other than the sign shown in diagram 651, 970, 971, 972, 973.2, 973.3, 2610, 2610.1, 2610.2, 7101.1, 7102, 7103, 7104 or 7105 shall be coloured -
(b) grey, black or in a non-reflective metallic finish in any other case, except that -
(i) information about sites for placing and the ownership of the sign and an identification code for maintenance purposes may be indicated on the back of the sign in characters not exceeding 25 millimetres in height, where they are shown in a contrasting colour, or in characters not exceeding 50 millimetres in height, where they are embossed in the same colour;
Hint: sign 670 is in Schedule 2.

>> Edited by jeffreyarcher on Sunday 5th October 12:39

['Q']

[
I have yet to see a set of fully compliant road works signs. As well as the usual, e.g. start signs must be in pairs, lit if within 50m of a street lamp (if a trunk or principal road) etc., have you checked the back of the limit start signs?
[


I was going too fast to look at the back of the signs at the time. However I'm in Coventry again next week so I'll take my digital camera along if they haven't changed the layout . It could be a bit difficult stopping on a 3 lane dual carriageway though.

Thanks for the advice

Q

[streaky]

'Q' said:

[ I have yet to see a set of fully compliant road works signs. As well as the usual, e.g. start signs must be in pairs, lit if within 50m of a street lamp (if a trunk or principal road) etc., have you checked the back of the limit start signs? [ I was going too fast to look at the back of the signs at the time. However I'm in Coventry again next week so I'll take my digital camera along if they haven't changed the layout . It could be a bit difficult stopping on a 3 lane dual carriageway though. Thanks for the advice Q

It has been reported elsewhere on this Forum (re parking?) that digital photographs are not admissible in court. Use a conventional camera instead or as well. Try to get teh date into the photograph if possible. The newspaper might be OK, make sure the headline is readable if not the date.

[hertsbiker]

errrrr, the not signing "loop hole" is most definately NOT closed. I assume your car is insured to more than just yourself? in which case you have the perfect defense. Ask for the photos, and tell them that unless they clearly identify YOU as the driver, you WILL NOT sign anything.

['Q']

hertsbiker said:

errrrr, the not signing "loop hole" is most definately NOT closed. I assume your car is insured to more than just yourself? in which case you have the perfect defense. Ask for the photos, and tell them that unless they clearly identify YOU as the driver, you WILL NOT sign anything.

Thanks I'll give it a go. Can't afford to lose my license. Also having to incriminate ones self is really making me angry! Don't worry though I've got some French number plates and a Tony B'Lair mask and I'm going out to play with some scameras later!!

[bobthebench]

The Tony Blair mask looks dodgy sitting at traffic lights. Why not just a baseball cap with a big Timmy Mallet style skip, tilted down these can knacker camera identification from above, yet around town look fairly normal, especially if you drive a Corsa or similar.

[hertsbiker]

top tip is to insure your car so ANYONE may drive.
Then simply name a dozen of your friends (with their permission of course) as potential drivers (assure them that nothing will happen to them). Plod can't do f*** all. HOw do I know....................?

[jeffreyarcher]

hertsbiker said:

top tip is to insure your car so ANYONE may drive. Then simply name a dozen of your friends <...> as potential drivers

There is case law (don't know it off hand; if someone needs it, I'll try and find it) that states that an owner cannot be convicted of 'aiding & abetting' driving without insurance if he has lent his vehicle on the express condition that the driver provide his own insurance, and the driver turns out not to have had any.

[outlaw]

i thort of another good one I know but it takes two of you with balls that no the game and wont roll over.


you say you m8 was the driver, he says it was you.
keep it up all the way.

they cant prove wich one of you was driving so no case to answer. they cant do both of you.

another one i got out of a nip with was

the faulse confetion defence.

when i recived the nip i replyed with a very longwinded letter in my ushall stlye.

the jist of it was.

I do not know who the drive was as i lend my car too many peeps.

but section 172 leaves the driver no choice but to confess.

so there for i make a faulse confetion that I was the driver at the time.

how ever if this case gos to court i will have to withdraw my faulse confetion

as it will be inadmisable pluss i wont been able to perjur my self in court by confesing and i have explained i dont realy know who was driving at the time.


so the muppest post me a FPN which i sent back telling hole to shove it in.

end that nip

['Q']

[quote=outlaw]i thort of another good one I know but it takes two of you with balls that no the game and


you say you m8 was the driver, he says it was you.
keep it up all the way.

they cant prove wich one of you was driving so no case to answer. they cant do both of you.

Thanks outlaw but what if they have a picture?

['Q']

I have just received the photographic evidence back from the Police and they all but admit in their letter that the driver is un recognisable. Which I am!

I am a bit puzzled about the wording of the NIP it reads:

"In accordance with section 1 of the road traffic offenders act 1988, I hereby give you notice that it is intended to take proceedings against the driver of the above motor vehicle for the alleged offence.

Exceed 70 mph Speed Limit (Dual Carriageway).

Speed 82mph

Contrary to

Article 3 0f the 70 mph, 60 mph and 50 mph (Temporary Speed Limit) Order 1977 Section 89(1) Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984and Schedule 2 of the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988, Schedule 2 of the Road Traffic Act 1988 EC04".

Now my question is am I being done for doing over 70mph. I went up to Coventry on Monday and the temporary limit is 40mph. I cannot rember what it was on the day of the offence.

Also there was no prior warning of roadworks or temporary speed limits. Does this legally need to be in place.

Thanks for any help.

Also do I just return the NIP unsigned in this case?

Cheers

Q

[toad_oftoadhall]

'Q' said:

I received a NIP this morning (not unexpected). I was clocked at 82mph in 50 mph roadworks south of Coventry on the A46 by a van on a bridge.

You are lucky!

Say you can't remeber who was driving.

You will get 3 points and approx 60 quid fine for refusing to ID the driver.

However you will not then be banned for the speeding offence.