Recieved an NIP. Now i'm confused.

[Labbetts]

I had a Notice Of Intended Prosecution arrive on my doormat this morning

It confuses me for two reasons:

Firstly it was sent out on the 12th January 2016, exactly 14 days after the incident took place. So It could never have arrived within the allotted 14 day period.

Secondly it says “SPEEDING-EXCEED 40mph - LOCAL ORDER-MANNED EQUIPMENT. Speed of Vehicle 34mph”

One is very confused. Any advice would be most welcome.

[mgtony]

A couple of weeks ago I saw a camera having a fit, flashing away every couple of seconds, whether there was a vehicle there or not. I wonder if it automatically sends out the NIP? Doesn't explain the time frame though!
Wasn't in Haringey by any chance? I could be a witness!

ETA I see it says 'manned' so ignore up there!

[RB Will]

is the offence in a 30 or 40mph zone? Could make the difference if you call and say I have a NIP for 34 in a 40 WTF but if you were doing 34 in a 30 they may still nobble you with it

[V8LM]

I believe it has to be served within 14 days, and that it can be served by sending registered post, recorded delivery service or first class post. So posting within 14 days is I believe within the time limit.

IT is also asking for the details of the driver, not a plead to the offence, so the discussion/argument about what the prosecution is for hasn't started yet.

There will be contact details on the NIP - give 'em a ring.

[Hooli]

It's about time dwaddlers got done for holding people up

[SS2.]

The initial NIP has to be posted in such time that it would be received within 14 calendar days of the alleged offence.

For a NIP issued by 1st class post, there's a presumption that service would be effected 2 business days after posting. Subject to a couple of statutory exceptions, this means that it would require to be posted no later than Day 12, assuming Day 12 was a Monday, Tuesday or Wednesday.

Failure to comply with the requirements of service would be a bar to conviction of the substantive offence, subject to none of the exceptions being applicable of course.

Irrespective whether a NIP is deemed to have been served correctly or not, it doesn't absolve the recipient of their obligation to provide information regarding the identity of the driver.

OP - Is it your name on the V5C ? Are your address details correct ? Have you moved address or acquired the vehicle recently ?

[Labbetts]

Red Devil said:

How do you know it was sent out on 12th? If you can provide sufficient evidence of this (if the NoIP is dated the 12th that would be persuasive) and the 12th is indeed 14 days after the date of the offence then it would be impossible for it to have been served within the statutory time frame

WOW. Thanks for all your swift replies guys.

FYI: The letter is dated the 12/01/2016, so excatly 14 days after the alleged offence took place (29th Dec). So unless they couried it (which they didn't) it could never arrive on time. It didn't arrive until today (2 days outside)

But the offence says says it was for exceeding a 40 MPH limit - at 34MPH.
Even 34MPH in a 30MPH is pretty sh*t to be honest, especially as the road they are reffering to is a dual carridgeway and i'm a slow bd at the best of times. I've been clocked at let off in the past (in my early days) at 42 in a 30.

In any case, i'd rather write than phone up. I probably get through to some numpty that will just 'revise' the error and re-issue the ticket. If anyone has any terminology i can use? (copy / paste) feel free to PM me. Thanks again guys. Muchos Gracias.

[Red Devil]

V8LM said:

I believe it has to be served within 14 days, and that it can be served by sending registered post, recorded delivery service or first class post. So posting within 14 days is I believe within the time limit.

The key issue here is the date of service (i.e. when it is received - see the link below). First class post creates a rebuttable assumption. Registered/recorded does not. Few, if any, forces/SCPs in E&W use the latter.

Labbetts said:

Firstly it was sent out on the 12th January 2016, exactly 14 days after the incident took place. So It could never have arrived within the allotted 14 day period.

How do you know it was sent out on 12th? If you can provide sufficient evidence of this (if the NoIP is dated the 12th that would be persuasive) and the 12th is indeed 14 days after the date of the offence then it would be impossible for it to have been served within the statutory time frame. Of course this assumes the OP is the RK and the police/SCP were not prevented from getting his details from the DVLA.

See this case - http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2009/292... - where previous Magistrates and Crown Court decisions were overturned on appeal.

A postal NoIP means that the OP will have also received a S.172 request because if he had been stopped at the roadside the identity of the driver would be known. This is quite separate from the speeding charge which can only be preferred against the driver. He must respond to the S.172 within 28 days beginning with the day on which the notice is served or he risks 6 points and a fine.

However the out-of-time defence should get any subsequent speeding charge NFA'd. If it does get as far as a court hearing then it ought to be dismissed by the Mags (they might need to be reminded about the above case though).

ETA. Beaten to it by SS2.

If the OP is not the RK on the V5C, somebody must have reacted quickly for the correct details to be obtained and processed by day 14. Even if he is but the DVLA had an incorrect/out-of-date address, I reckon it would be nigh on impossible for the police/SCP to have discovered this and sorted it in such a short time scale.

[Labbetts]

Red Devil said:

If the OP is not the RK on the V5C, somebody must have reacted quickly for the correct details to be obtained and processed by day 14. Even if he is but the DVLA had an incorrect/out-of-date address, I reckon it would be nigh on impossible for the police/SCP to have discovered this and sorted it in such a short time scale.

Not sure i follow sir.

FYI, i've lived at my current adress for 12 years, so no problem there. Car is a Personal Lease Vehicle, so although i don't own it i am the RK. It's all abiove board and up to date.

I'm guessing NY caused something of a backlog.

[eybic]

Is the V5 in your name?

[Labbetts]

eybic said:

Is the V5 in your name?

Well unbeknown to me, apparently not. It's VW FS.
You learn something new every day.
Does that mean the 14 day rule doesn't apply?

[eybic]

Labbetts said:

eybic said:

Is the V5 in your name?

Well unbeknown to me, apparently not. It's VW FS.
You learn something new every day.
Does that mean the 14 day rule doesn't apply?

It does move the goalposts somewhat yes. The RK must be served within 14 days so it's entirely possible that was the case.

[Labbetts]

eybic said:

Labbetts said:

eybic said:

Is the V5 in your name?

Well unbeknown to me, apparently not. It's VW FS.
You learn something new every day.
Does that mean the 14 day rule doesn't apply?

It does move the goalposts somewhat yes. The RK must be served within 14 days so it's entirely possible that was the case.

I'll forget that approach then.

Which brings me back to the bigger issue - in that there is no offence according the this correpondance. Unless driving 6MPH under the limit is now illegal.

[ferrariF50lover]

Unfortunately for you, yes.

Let's clear up the other issue. You know the road, you've got the name of it on the NIP, is it a 40 or a 30?

[V8LM]

Red Devil said:

V8LM said:

I believe it has to be served within 14 days, and that it can be served by sending registered post, recorded delivery service or first class post. So posting within 14 days is I believe within the time limit.

See this case - http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2009/292... - where previous Magistrates and Crown Court decisions were overturned on appeal.

ETA. Beaten to it by SS2.

Thanks both.

[Labbetts]

ferrariF50lover said:

Unfortunately for you, yes.

Let's clear up the other issue. You know the road, you've got the name of it on the NIP, is it a 40 or a 30?

I don't actually know the road that well (A414 London Road / Harlow)
The part they are reffering to though is a dual carridgeway in pretty open countryside, so i suspect it will be a 40. That's my recollection anyway. In any case, that's what's stated on the NIP so not sure what else i can go off ?!?

[Red Devil]

Labbetts said:

eybic said:

Is the V5 in your name?

Well unbeknown to me, apparently not. It's VW FS.
You learn something new every day.
Does that mean the 14 day rule doesn't apply?

Correct. The original NoIP will have gone to VW FS. Unfortunately the 14 day rule applies only to them, not to you. Not wanting to risk a S.172 conviction they have reacted pdq and dobbed you in.

What you now need to do is scrutinise the NoIP you have received. If, as is likely, you have been served with your own S.172 you must respond to it within the 28 day time scale I mentioned earlier. The police/SCP cannot automatically assume you were indeed the actual driver at the time of the alleged speeding offence.

[SS2.]

Labbetts said:

Does that mean the 14 day rule doesn't apply?

The requirements of service (including the 14 day rule) still apply, but only to the initial NIP.

This would have been issued to VW (being the the Registered Keeper) and would clearly have been served within time.

Have to say it's a mighty fast turnaround by all parties to get the subsequent s.172 request back to you so soon.

[agtlaw]

You must reply to the request for driver information.

The RTOA 1988 requires the police to specify:

- the nature of the alleged offence
- the time where it is alleged to have been committed
- the place where it is alleged to have been committed

Errors in the notice do not automatically render it invalid.

You may wish to send a cover letter when you return the completed form. Point out the mistake. If you're lucky then no further action will be taken.

[Labbetts]

Red Devil said:

Labbetts said:

eybic said:

Is the V5 in your name?

Well unbeknown to me, apparently not. It's VW FS.
You learn something new every day.
Does that mean the 14 day rule doesn't apply?

Correct. The original NoIP will have gone to VW FS. Unfortunately the 14 day rule applies only to them, not to you. Not wanting to risk a S.172 conviction they have reacted pdq and dobbed you in.

What you now need to do is scrutinise the NoIP you have received. If, as is likely, you have been served with your own S.172 you must respond to it within the 28 day time scale I mentioned earlier. The police/SCP cannot automatically assume you were indeed the actual driver at the time of the alleged speeding offence.

Yep. More than happy to do that asap.
Just not sure what the offence is? Can't imagine these things get dished out by accident, but it's a pretty ridcilous mistake. I've never heard of it.