NIP & Failure to Supply
Discussion
I have just received a letter (dated 8th Dec, sent to my old address) from the Hampshire Constabulary informing me that I have not responded to a Notice of Intended Prosecution.
I have telephoned them and explained that I never received the NIP as I moved house around that time. They said the NIP was sent on the 29th October (I moved on the 27th October, two letting agents will be able to back me up on this) and asked me if I knew who was driving the vehicle at the time. I said something like "That was two and a half months ago, I have no idea"
Their response was to say that I needed to request, in writing, a copy of the NIP and a print of the photograph to assist in identifying the driver.
As they have failed to serve me with the NIP within 14 days can they "re-serve" it? And other than not signing anything, any other advice?
I have telephoned them and explained that I never received the NIP as I moved house around that time. They said the NIP was sent on the 29th October (I moved on the 27th October, two letting agents will be able to back me up on this) and asked me if I knew who was driving the vehicle at the time. I said something like "That was two and a half months ago, I have no idea"
Their response was to say that I needed to request, in writing, a copy of the NIP and a print of the photograph to assist in identifying the driver.
As they have failed to serve me with the NIP within 14 days can they "re-serve" it? And other than not signing anything, any other advice?
As far as I am aware from reading these forums the original nip has to be sent within 14 days of the alleged offence, as long as it went to the registered keepers address they've done their bit.
you need to find out when the alleged offence happened and ask them when they posted the original nip, if this is over 14 days you're ok, if not then you'll perhaps have to find another way around it or pay up and hand over your licence.
Cheers
Paul
you need to find out when the alleged offence happened and ask them when they posted the original nip, if this is over 14 days you're ok, if not then you'll perhaps have to find another way around it or pay up and hand over your licence.
Cheers
Paul
tja
Just two points re NOIP.
S 1(3) RTO Act 88 lays down the dictum that it will have deemed to have been served unless the contrary is proved. So its down to you to prove not served in accordance with the law i.e. within 14 days.
You say sent 29th i.e. 13th day.
Service has not been complied with if the NIP arrives outside the 14 day period (ends in your case on 30th)
having been posted so late (within the 14 days)that the Notice could not be expected to arrive in 14 days in the normal course of the post. This is a judgement from High Court (Nicholson v Tapp 1972)
How does your evidence stand up in the light of this.
Postmarked envelope????
DVD
Just two points re NOIP.
S 1(3) RTO Act 88 lays down the dictum that it will have deemed to have been served unless the contrary is proved. So its down to you to prove not served in accordance with the law i.e. within 14 days.
You say sent 29th i.e. 13th day.
Service has not been complied with if the NIP arrives outside the 14 day period (ends in your case on 30th)
having been posted so late (within the 14 days)that the Notice could not be expected to arrive in 14 days in the normal course of the post. This is a judgement from High Court (Nicholson v Tapp 1972)
How does your evidence stand up in the light of this.
Postmarked envelope????
DVD
Dwight VanDriver said:
How does your evidence stand up in the light of this.
Postmarked envelope????
No evidence that it was sent at all as I never received the NIP...they sent it two days after I moved house. The letting agents from the flat I moved out from and the house I moved in to should be able to back up this fact.
They have not served the NIP to me at all, let alone within 14 days.
The follow-up letter was sent to my old place on 8th December...this is AFTER I had notified the DVLA of my change of address.
tja said:
They have not served the NIP to me at all, <...>.
They have actually,
The Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988, Section 1..
1.—(1) Subject to section 2 of this Act, where a person is prosecuted for an offence to which this section applies, he is not to be convicted unless—
(c) within fourteen days of the commission of the offence a notice of the intended prosecution specifying the nature of the alleged offence and the time and place where it is alleged to have been committed, was—
(ii) in the case of any other offence, served on him or on the person, if any, registered as the keeper of the vehicle at the time of the commission of the offence.
*(1A) A notice required by this section to be served on any person may be served on that person—
(c) by sending it by registered post, recorded delivery service or first class post addressed to him at his last known address.
* Sub-section 1A was inserted by an amendment in the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994, Schedule 9, Section 6 (3) (about 1/6 ths the way down).
Further,
The Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988, Section 2.
(3) Failure to comply with the requirement of section 1(1) of this Act is not a bar to the conviction of the accused in a case where the court is satisfied—
(a) that neither the name and address of the accused nor the name and address of the registered keeper, if any, could with reasonable diligence have been ascertained in time for a summons or, as the case may be, a complaint to be served or for a notice to be served or sent in compliance with the requirement, or
tja said:
The follow-up letter was sent to my old place on 8th December...this is AFTER I had notified the DVLA of my change of address.
That's irrelevent. There is no obligation to send a follow up letter.
What about:
The Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988, Section 2:
(2) A notice shall be deemed for the purposes of subsection (1)(c) above to have been served on a person if it was sent by registered post or recorded delivery service addressed to him at his last known address, notwithstanding that the notice was returned as undelivered or was for any other reason not received by him.
And I hope that I can use this one too:
The Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988, Section 3:
(3) The requirement of subsection (1) above shall in every case be deemed to have been complied with unless and until the contrary is proved.
The Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988, Section 2:
(2) A notice shall be deemed for the purposes of subsection (1)(c) above to have been served on a person if it was sent by registered post or recorded delivery service addressed to him at his last known address, notwithstanding that the notice was returned as undelivered or was for any other reason not received by him.
And I hope that I can use this one too:
The Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988, Section 3:
(3) The requirement of subsection (1) above shall in every case be deemed to have been complied with unless and until the contrary is proved.
tja said:
What about:
The Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988, Section 2:
(2) A notice shall be deemed for the purposes of subsection (1)(c) above to have been served on a person if it was sent by registered post or recorded delivery service addressed to him at his last known address, notwithstanding that the notice was returned as undelivered or was for any other reason not received by him.
And I hope that I can use this one too:
The Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988, Section 3:
(3) The requirement of subsection (1) above shall in every case be deemed to have been complied with unless and until the contrary is proved.
On my reading Section 2 of the Road Traffic Offenders Act says that the Notice is served as long as it was sent. The fact it is returned to the sender, or not receoved by the intended recipient is irrelevant.
In your case the Notice was sent on 29th October fopr an offence on 16th October. The day of the offence doesn't count and therefore the Notice was sent on the 13th day. Although others disagree I fail to see how a Notice is served as soon as it is put in a post box, however as your Noticer was posted on the 13th day, as long as it was sent first class it should have arrived in the post on the 14th day. Therefore I believe it was valid.
Whilst I don't agree with speed cameras in the first place I don't think it is reasonable to get off an offence just because you moved between the date of the offence and the receipt of the NIP. The Scamera Partnership can't be expected to know you were going to move and sent it to the correct address before you informed DVLC!
Chrisgr31 said:
What about:
The Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988, Section 2:
(2) A notice shall be deemed for the purposes of subsection (1)(c) above to have been served on a person if it was sent by registered post or recorded delivery service addressed to him at his last known address, notwithstanding that the notice was returned as undelivered or was for any other reason not received by him.
And I hope that I can use this one too:
The Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988, Section 3:
(3) The requirement of subsection (1) above shall in every case be deemed to have been complied with unless and until the contrary is proved.
On my reading Section 2 of the Road Traffic Offenders Act says that the Notice is served as long as it was sent. The fact it is returned to the sender, or not receoved by the intended recipient is irrelevant.
In your case the Notice was sent on 29th October fopr an offence on 16th October. The day of the offence doesn't count and therefore the Notice was sent on the 13th day. Although others disagree I fail to see how a Notice is served as soon as it is put in a post box, however as your Noticer was posted on the 13th day, as long as it was sent first class it should have arrived in the post on the 14th day. Therefore I believe it was valid.
Whilst I don't agree with speed cameras in the first place I don't think it is reasonable to get off an offence just because you moved between the date of the offence and the receipt of the NIP. The Scamera Partnership can't be expected to know you were going to move and sent it to the correct address before you informed DVLC!
what you dont know is that they work of outdated details that DVLC send em
and the DVLC any the best at updateing things right DVLC
so offten you could give the dvla notice of moveing in advance and this would still happen.
same with so callaed andoned cars.
court the councile read handed trying to lift one of mine againg last week that was off road under a statment.
Luck I court the
ers at it this time Im still looking for the last one they lifted and now dene do as there in the frame for theft. Roadrage said:
what you dont know is that they work of outdated details that DVLC send em
and the DVLC any the best at updateing things right DVLC
Yes but by the posters admission the DVLC had not been notified of the change of address until some time in November, so there was no hope of the Scamera Partnership being able to get the right address.
He might have had a case had he moved on 1st September and notified the DVLC on the same day. I haven't look at the DVLC website but somewhere they probably have a Citizens Charter which states that we will amend our records within x days. If they hadn't met this target one might be able to argue a case of non receipt but thats not the case in this instance.
Chrisgr31 said:
On my reading Section 2 of the Road Traffic Offenders Act says that the Notice is served as long as it was sent. The fact it is returned to the sender, or not receoved by the intended recipient is irrelevant.
In your case the Notice was sent on 29th October fopr an offence on 16th October. The day of the offence doesn't count and therefore the Notice was sent on the 13th day. Although others disagree I fail to see how a Notice is served as soon as it is put in a post box, however as your Noticer was posted on the 13th day, as long as it was sent first class it should have arrived in the post on the 14th day. Therefore I believe it was valid.
The date it actually arrives (if it ever does) is totally irrelevant. The notice is served at the time of posting (I would take this as the time of the post franking). Totally ridiculous but there it is.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff