NIP/s172 - 14 day notice exceeded - private lease
Discussion
Hello,
I have received a Requirement to Identify the Driver from Police Scotland for speeding.
The date of issue of the letter is 18 calendar days from the date of the offence. I lease a car privately via VWFS.
I'm unsure if the letter is a NIP or a S172 or both in the same. It says that "it is intended to institute proceedings" (I interpret this as a NIP) but also says "you have been named as being the driver/new owner..." (an S172?).
My question, would the letter have referred to contacting VWFS in the first instance before this version reached me?
Do I have a leg to stand on regarding the notice being served late?
Any help much appreciated.
n.b. I am not disputing any other details of the contents of the letter.
I have received a Requirement to Identify the Driver from Police Scotland for speeding.
The date of issue of the letter is 18 calendar days from the date of the offence. I lease a car privately via VWFS.
I'm unsure if the letter is a NIP or a S172 or both in the same. It says that "it is intended to institute proceedings" (I interpret this as a NIP) but also says "you have been named as being the driver/new owner..." (an S172?).
My question, would the letter have referred to contacting VWFS in the first instance before this version reached me?
Do I have a leg to stand on regarding the notice being served late?
Any help much appreciated.
n.b. I am not disputing any other details of the contents of the letter.
Who is the RK, you or VWFS? I suspect the latter given it is a leased vehicle and the letter says you have been nominated.
You need to be aware that there are two quite separate issues in play.
The S.172 (requirement to name) is from the RTA 1988. Fail to do so and it's an almost slam dunk fine + 6 points.
This obligation has nothing to do with any subsequent prosecution for the speeding offence and has a 28 day window for responding.
S/172 puts the RK in the frame. A speeding prosecution otoh can only be taken against the driver.
Hence the need for S.172 if the vehicle is zapped by a fixed or mobile camera.
They can't know who was driving and it could have been someone other than the RK at the wheel.
The 14 day deadline for service of a NIP relates to Section 1 of the RTOA 1988 (a completely different item of legislation).
See Gidden v Chief Constable of Humberside - http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2009/292...
The above deadline only applies to service at the address on the V5C per DVLA records.
If VWFS is the RK, as the letter suggests might be the case, you have no get-out-of-jail free card available on that score.
Can you post a suitably redacted copy of the letter? That will tell us what you need to do, (if anything at this stage).
You need to be aware that there are two quite separate issues in play.
The S.172 (requirement to name) is from the RTA 1988. Fail to do so and it's an almost slam dunk fine + 6 points.
This obligation has nothing to do with any subsequent prosecution for the speeding offence and has a 28 day window for responding.
S/172 puts the RK in the frame. A speeding prosecution otoh can only be taken against the driver.
Hence the need for S.172 if the vehicle is zapped by a fixed or mobile camera.
They can't know who was driving and it could have been someone other than the RK at the wheel.
The 14 day deadline for service of a NIP relates to Section 1 of the RTOA 1988 (a completely different item of legislation).
See Gidden v Chief Constable of Humberside - http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2009/292...
The above deadline only applies to service at the address on the V5C per DVLA records.
If VWFS is the RK, as the letter suggests might be the case, you have no get-out-of-jail free card available on that score.
Can you post a suitably redacted copy of the letter? That will tell us what you need to do, (if anything at this stage).
senorblm said:
thank you for the reply, I am not the registered keeper, it'll be vwfs.
Undertstandably, they have grassed on you. 
Pretty quickly too.senorblm said:
I'd prefer not to post a picture
If it's a properly redacted copy you won't be giving anything away.However, fair enough, it's entirely your privilege not to do so.
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff