Excess speed advice please
Discussion
I was stopped when I was almost home on the way back from Lemans 24hr.
I was pressing on, 53 in a 30. I realise I could get a ban for that.
The date was 15/6/2015, over four months ago. To date I havn't received a summons. I understand that the department that deals with that are very behind but I will probably receive one before the six months is up.
Now the question.
On the ticket I was given by the police officer it says:-
"I pointed out the offence(s) to the driver/passenger and gave a verbal Notice of Intended Prosecution/Caution (delete as necessary)"
When I look at the ticket none of the options have been deleted.
It seems to me that it cannot be proven that a NIP or Caution were given to the driver. I can't remember either.
Is it worth challenging on that basis?
I was pressing on, 53 in a 30. I realise I could get a ban for that.
The date was 15/6/2015, over four months ago. To date I havn't received a summons. I understand that the department that deals with that are very behind but I will probably receive one before the six months is up.
Now the question.
On the ticket I was given by the police officer it says:-
"I pointed out the offence(s) to the driver/passenger and gave a verbal Notice of Intended Prosecution/Caution (delete as necessary)"
When I look at the ticket none of the options have been deleted.
It seems to me that it cannot be proven that a NIP or Caution were given to the driver. I can't remember either.
Is it worth challenging on that basis?
chrishew said:
It seems to me that it cannot be proven that a NIP or Caution were given to the driver. I can't remember either.
Is it worth challenging on that basis?
The onus is on you to prove that the warning wasn't given - not for the prosecution to prove that it was. RTOA section 1(3)Is it worth challenging on that basis?
The law said:
The requirement of subsection (1) above shall in every case be deemed to have been complied with unless and until the contrary is proved.
If you're not even sure whether it was given yourself, you're going to have an uphill struggle to prove that it wasn't.It could be that you were given a caution and a verbal NIP. As a habit I always NIP and caution for most road offences. You can't go wrong reading something out your're not required to but you can if you forget to read out the NIP.
Not worth challenging. In my notebook I always write "Verbal NIP and caution given to XX, No reply" You will probably find the officer has similar in his notebook.
Not worth challenging. In my notebook I always write "Verbal NIP and caution given to XX, No reply" You will probably find the officer has similar in his notebook.
chrishew said:
Ok. Looks like it was a fair cop!
Review the paperwork and look out for the phrase "verbal NIP" - which is indicative of an officer who isn't familiar with the law. I've had some success with these types - particularly in Thames Valley where they use a TOR which isn't fit for purpose.
Very nice seeing that police are happy to produce and use video evidence when it backs their story. Rightfully so.
Only that video is not released when it contradicts their claim and when asked by a judge to produce said video, it just so happens that there was a technical difficulty with a brand new police station's CCTV on the day in question.
Only that video is not released when it contradicts their claim and when asked by a judge to produce said video, it just so happens that there was a technical difficulty with a brand new police station's CCTV on the day in question.
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff