Summons Received
Discussion
For those of you who have been reading this thread: NOT SIGNING NIP LOOPHOLE CLOSED? - www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?t=33739&f=10&h=0&p=24 You maybe aware of my situation, but briefly, I received 3 NIPs within a few weeks of each other earlier in the year – all for less than 10mph over there respective speed limits. I responded to them all with unsigned NIP’s.
One force has done nothing.
Second force sent out a second NIP nearly 2 months after the first. So I wrote back saying I understood that the notice should have been with me in 14 day and as it was not, I am under the impression that it is invalid.
They have now responded by implying that they could not track me down in 14 days. This despite sending me the first NIP within 14 days. How do I respond to that?
The third force has simply sent me a Summons : readit: L. This is the bit where you start to crumble – especially as the wife opened it.
They have given me a hearing date and venue – apparently it’s a PO Box, which will be cosy!!
The evidance is:
· Witness statement from camera operator.
· Truvelo photo – driver unrecognisable, 48 on recently 40 restricted (from 60) dual carrigeway.
· And my unsigned NIP
Any top tips – I’ve no more nails left, if I get prosecuted for all three that’s me banned for 6 months (totting up) and my business up the swaney!!
Oh and by the way I have also noticed that the NIP's are served under different acts:
S2 TSO 1977
S89 RTRA 1984
Is this relevant?
What is the TSO?
Is anybody else in a similar situation?
Thanks
G
One force has done nothing.
Second force sent out a second NIP nearly 2 months after the first. So I wrote back saying I understood that the notice should have been with me in 14 day and as it was not, I am under the impression that it is invalid.
They have now responded by implying that they could not track me down in 14 days. This despite sending me the first NIP within 14 days. How do I respond to that?
The third force has simply sent me a Summons : readit: L. This is the bit where you start to crumble – especially as the wife opened it.
They have given me a hearing date and venue – apparently it’s a PO Box, which will be cosy!!
The evidance is:
· Witness statement from camera operator.
· Truvelo photo – driver unrecognisable, 48 on recently 40 restricted (from 60) dual carrigeway.
· And my unsigned NIP
Any top tips – I’ve no more nails left, if I get prosecuted for all three that’s me banned for 6 months (totting up) and my business up the swaney!!
Oh and by the way I have also noticed that the NIP's are served under different acts:
S2 TSO 1977
S89 RTRA 1984
Is this relevant?
What is the TSO?
Is anybody else in a similar situation?
Thanks
G
blueyes said:
Try this thread:
www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?p=1&f=10&t=60172&h=0
You could also see if this helps (and feel free to crib the relevant bits of my response if it does!):
[url]www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?f=10&h=&t=51875[/url]
GIXERLIX said:
One force has done nothing.
Second force sent out a second NIP nearly 2 months after the first. So I wrote back saying I understood that the notice should have been with me in 14 day and as it was not, I am under the impression that it is invalid.
They have now responded by implying that they could not track me down in 14 days. This despite sending me the first NIP within 14 days. How do I respond to that?
I am totally
here. Are you saying that the second force has sent two NIPs, the first within 14 days?
GIXERLIX said:
Yes - different NIP's, not a duplicate.
The second arrived as if it were the first - 2 months after I returned the unsigned NIP
They have satisfied the requirements of the 14 day rule by sending you the first one within the 14 days.
If, however, they have lost all their records and can't prove it, that's another matter.
They have to send an NIP to the registered keeper within 14 days of the offence, whether the accused is the registered keeper or not.
GIXERLIX said:
Alleged Offence is failier to supply information contrary to S172(3) and Speeding.
I'm trying very hard to understand this, but you're making it very difficult, perhaps you should start again?
GIXERLIX said:
It is a little bit complicated but I'm not sure what else I can tell you. Which bit don't you follow?
You have said that you have been charged with speeding only (by virtue of the acts quoted) and you have also said that you have been charges with speeding and S172 (failure to supply).
BTW, TSO = Temporary Speed Limit Order, i.e. NSL.
Remember this was originally introduced as a fuel economy measure, they then upped it and made it permanent, either by amendment or statutory instrument.
oi ! listen up.
A defence that works, regarding non disclosure. You tell them that until they provide you with SUFFICIENT evidence that confirms YOUR identity, YOU WILL NOT SIGN anything as it does not state anywhere in law that you must confess to a crime you did not commit.
You will also have to supply a list of possible drivers in order for you to have discharged your duty in complying with the relevant act.
If they withhold evidence that assists you in complying with said legal obligations, they are guilty of obstruction.
It seems if there is no photo/video/conclusive evidence, then there is no charge. Remember Means, Motive, and whatever the third M-word was !!!??
Good luck, and FFS buy a radar detector.
A defence that works, regarding non disclosure. You tell them that until they provide you with SUFFICIENT evidence that confirms YOUR identity, YOU WILL NOT SIGN anything as it does not state anywhere in law that you must confess to a crime you did not commit.
You will also have to supply a list of possible drivers in order for you to have discharged your duty in complying with the relevant act.
If they withhold evidence that assists you in complying with said legal obligations, they are guilty of obstruction.
It seems if there is no photo/video/conclusive evidence, then there is no charge. Remember Means, Motive, and whatever the third M-word was !!!??
Good luck, and FFS buy a radar detector.
jeffreyarcher said:
It is a little bit complicated but I'm not sure what else I can tell you. Which bit don't you follow?
You have said that you have been charged with speeding only (by virtue of the acts quoted) and you have also said that you have been charges with speeding and S172 (failure to supply).
BTW, TSO = Temporary Speed Limit Order, i.e. NSL.
Remember this was originally introduced as a fuel economy measure, they then upped it and made it permanent, either by amendment or statutory instrument.
Now I'm confused! I've got three NIP's alleging speeding under various acts.
I have now received a summons from one force for speeding and failure to supply information - is that any clearer?
GIXERLIX said:
Now I'm confused! I've got three NIP's alleging speeding under various acts.
I have now received a summons from one force for speeding and failure to supply information - is that any clearer?
They cannot prosecute the registered keeper for speeding without any evidence. The only evidence they have got is that of the car registered to you exceeding the limit at a specific time and date. I think unless you admit it was you in court, they cannot proceed with that charge as it may not have been you. Suggest you plead not guilty to the speeding whatever happens as it will be thrown out!
As far as the failing to notify driver is concerned, I don't think you will have much of a chance unless you can convince the Magistrates that you genuinely cannot remember who was driving at the time and it could have been one of several different people who have access to the use of your car. It would help if you could bring them along to give evidence on your behalf!
GIXERLIX said:
I've got three NIP's alleging speeding under various acts.
I have now received a summons from one force for speeding and failure to supply information - is that any clearer?
Got you now, sorry.
I am ssuming here that you are not "Yorke compliant", i.e. that you completed the unsigned form.
If so, you must write to the Clerk of the Court where you are to appear.
------------------------------------------------------
Dear ####,
Ref: ######
I have been charged under ##### [the speeding] and @@@@ [the failure to supply]. I wish to inform you that it is my intention to plead 'not guilty' to both of those charges. In order for me to properly prepare my defence, and to maintain my right to a fair trial, please arrange for these cases to be heard separately, and with the speeding charge first.
Yours faithfully,
Gixerlix.
-----------------------------------------------------
The reason for this is to preclude any evidence that you may have given in the S172 trial being used in the speeding one.
jeffreyarcher said:
The reason for this is to preclude any evidence that you may have given in the S172 trial being used in the speeding one.
GIXERLIX said:
How do they prove who filled in the NIP?
Surely al that is important is that it is unsigned?
But you are also being charged with S172 (failure to supply), which you have to defend.
If you don't get them split, and the S172 is heard first, you have to confine your S172 defence to
1) You don't take the stand.
2) A form was sent to your address by the scameraship. 3) It was returned with all the information complete, as required by law.
4) There was no signature, however, there is no requirement, under S172, for a signature.
At the close of the prosecution case you move for dismissal as there is no evidence that you didn't return the form and therefore no case to answer.
If you do say it was you, this may be used against you in the following speeding case.
However, if you get them split, with the S172 second, you can take the stand and say, under oath, "Yes, it was me who completed, but did not sign, this form."
Obviously a much stronger defence.
>> Edited by jeffreyarcher on Monday 13th October 20:55
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff