m4 speeding weird document

[baskey]

Ok. A mate of mine has had a document through the post saying that south wales police have photographic proof that he was going at 85mph on the m4 over a fortnight ago. BUT it isn't (apparently) a proper summons/fine thing...

Now:

could he ignore it - it wasn't registered or recorded delivery
should they have sent something within a fortnight (i think but don't know that this is an urban myth)
is there anything else he should know/try to get out of this heinous crime...?!

all help, advice etc appreciated.

[puggit]

If he is the registered keeper they must have posted it within a fortnight (give or take a day due to legal arguments )

It doesn't have to be a summons, it needs to be a NIP

[deeps]

So 'Notice of Intended Prosecution' is not stated on the letter?

What is the heading then? Sounds like a wind-up, but nothing would suprise me in S.Wales, the mighty capitol of scamera partnerships.

[deeps]

Oh and what does the letter ask for? What do they want him to do?

[Dwight VanDriver]

Baskey

I would presume that your mate received by First Class Post papers within 15 days (important) of the offence in which it is outlined the offence of speeding and that they are considering the question of prosecuting the driver of the vehicle involved for this. (NOIP section). Also should be a request made by or on behalf of the Chief Officer of Police for details of the driver of the vehicle and this should be returned within the time scale stated (usually 28 days).Offence not to disclose. (OK others just giving the outline).

Once the SCP have established the identity of the driver they will send a Conditional Offer to pay £60 collect 3 points and matter providing no more than 9 points on Licence of driver ends there and then when Offer accepted by payment.

One does not have to accept the Offer and can elect a Court hearing at which stage a summons will be issued.

If you or your mate reads all the paperwork received it will be self explanatory.

dvd

[smeggy]

Just wondering: could the document be one of those new fangled letters saying:
‘You were caught by a civilian operator. Do it again and we’ll prosecute you.’
?

[pdV6]

smeggy said:

Just wondering: could the document be one of those new fangled letters saying: ‘You were caught by a civilian operator. Do it again and we’ll prosecute you.’ ?

...using inadmissable evidence?

[smeggy]

pdV6 said:

smeggy said: Just wondering: could the document be one of those new fangled letters saying: ‘You were caught by a civilian operator. Do it again and we’ll prosecute you.’ ? ...using inadmissable evidence?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/west_yorkshire/39

To be fair, I don't know what came of this idea - did it fizzle out?