How long to breathe easily after flashes?
Discussion
Chaps,
I was flashed (by a sneaky Gatso in a temporary speed limit that was only signed after the Scamera on the M6 ... Grrrr
)
Anyway, that was the 23rd Dec (day before Christmas Eve.) My 14 days was up last Thursday.
Can I breathe easily? Or what are the chances of the dreaded NIP arriving in the post yet? I understand that the post mark on the letter has to be within the 14 days, but that it doesn't have to have arrived within these 14 days. Is this correct?
Can I blow that £60 on beer yet?
Oli.
P.S. Just have to add, I think that is my favourite smilie on this site ... sums up my mood brilliantly so often!
I was flashed (by a sneaky Gatso in a temporary speed limit that was only signed after the Scamera on the M6 ... Grrrr
) Anyway, that was the 23rd Dec (day before Christmas Eve.) My 14 days was up last Thursday.
Can I breathe easily? Or what are the chances of the dreaded NIP arriving in the post yet? I understand that the post mark on the letter has to be within the 14 days, but that it doesn't have to have arrived within these 14 days. Is this correct?
Can I blow that £60 on beer yet?
Oli.
P.S. Just have to add, I think that
is my favourite smilie on this site ... sums up my mood brilliantly so often!zcacogp said:
I understand that the post mark on the letter has to be within the 14 days, but that it doesn't have to have arrived within these 14 days. Is this correct?
Not quite. It has to be sent out so that through the usual course of post it must reach you within 14 days. The scuffers should take Christmas/Bank Holidays into consideration too.
If it was sent out in such time as it couldn't have reached you within 14 days, then you may have a legitimate gripe.
There are caveats though, but we'll cross that bridge when we have to.
DeMolay said:
Not quite. It has to be sent out so that through the usual course of post it must reach you within 14 days.
Oh. So if they post it on the 14th day, they cannot reasonably expect it to arrive within the 14 days, therefore it is not valid?
Therefore, the last valid day of posting is the 13th day, assuming that it arrives 1 days later (14th).
I didn't know that.
I did know that the dates are calender days, not working days, so having Christmas and New Year in the middle probably went in my favour.
So, I am currently at risk from the NIP being posted but delayed, or posted and not arriving, I guess?
Think lucky ...
Oli.
zcacogp said:
Not quite. It has to be sent out so that through the usual course of post it must reach you within 14 days.
Oh. So if they post it on the 14th day, they cannot reasonably expect it to arrive within the 14 days, therefore it is not valid?
Precisely. There is settled case law on that very point (Nicholson v Tapp)
zcacogp said:
Therefore, the last valid day of posting is the 13th day, assuming that it arrives 1 days later (14th).
I didn't know that.
Even the 13th day is cutting it fine, though would probably be accepted in a court (providing there were no Bank Holidays etc. where there was no postal service.
zcacogp said:
I did know that the dates are calender days, not working days, so having Christmas and New Year in the middle probably went in my favour.
Indeed so.
zcacogp said:
So, I am currently at risk from the NIP being posted but delayed, or posted and not arriving, I guess?
Think lucky ...
Oli.
I would think you are off the hook by now; whether the NIP was issued or not.
kevinday said:
Let me just add a small caveat here. You should be in luck provided you are the registered keeper of the vehicle.
Good point, good spot, I am. So, perhaps I am in the clear.
kevinday said:
If you are not, then all bets are off, because the 14 days applies to the registered keeper, secondary NIP to named driver can be much later.
Another good point. Why the rules are different for the other situation I have never understood. But there we are.
Oli.
gone said:
If the posting was done within 14 days after the day of offence, the NIP will be lawful. If it is outside that time, then it will not be.
Gone,
While I don't doubt you (and this was my understanding as well), this does contradict what DeMolay said earlier, to wit:
DeMolay said:
Oh. So if they post it on the 14th day, they cannot reasonably expect it to arrive within the 14 days, therefore it is not valid?
Which is correct?
Oli.
The law states that the NIP must be delivered within the 14 days. That means verbally at the time, or in writing, put in the post, delivered personally by hand, left with someone at the last known place of abode. That is classed as service.
If the NIP is put in the post on day 14, it is valid. If it is put in your hand on day 14, it is valid. If it is served on your mum on day 14 being your last know place of abode, it is valid. If it is dispatched by any of these means on day 15 (not including day of offence) it is valid.
If the person sending it knows that it will not reach the intended suspected offender within 14 days, that is not a problem in law. If it is sent to a registered owner who happens to be a company, the sender will expect that it may not reach the driver for many days after the 14 day statutory period allowed. In that case it is still valid! A further NIP will be sent to the driver when the information disclosed by the Section 172 notice is received naming the driver.
In short. If it is dispatched within the 15 days of the offence by any method above, the courts accept service of it. If it falls outside those time restraints, then it is out of time and not valid.
It only needs to be dispatched and not received regardless of who knows it will not be received within 14 days. It is the dispatching or service that is critical to this period and not the likelyhood of its delivery time or actual delivery time.
If the NIP is put in the post on day 14, it is valid. If it is put in your hand on day 14, it is valid. If it is served on your mum on day 14 being your last know place of abode, it is valid. If it is dispatched by any of these means on day 15 (not including day of offence) it is valid.
If the person sending it knows that it will not reach the intended suspected offender within 14 days, that is not a problem in law. If it is sent to a registered owner who happens to be a company, the sender will expect that it may not reach the driver for many days after the 14 day statutory period allowed. In that case it is still valid! A further NIP will be sent to the driver when the information disclosed by the Section 172 notice is received naming the driver.
In short. If it is dispatched within the 15 days of the offence by any method above, the courts accept service of it. If it falls outside those time restraints, then it is out of time and not valid.
It only needs to be dispatched and not received regardless of who knows it will not be received within 14 days. It is the dispatching or service that is critical to this period and not the likelyhood of its delivery time or actual delivery time.
zcacogp said:
If you are not, then all bets are off, because the 14 days applies to the registered keeper, secondary NIP to named driver can be much later.
Another good point. Why the rules are different for the other situation I have never understood. But there we are.
Oli.
Because it may take time to receive the driver information from the registered keeper. The keeper has 28 days to return the NIP with the driver details, so that is at least 6.5 weeks (allowing for post) so the new NIP may be sent 7 or 8 weeks after the offence, then the registered keeper may have named the wrong driver, so it is sent to someone else who returns it denying everything. The only time you can be completely sure you can avoid the speeding offence is if six months has gone by and you have no NIP or summons (although the summons may be served later than that). The summons in those circumstances is likely to be for S172 'Failure to provide' and not speeding.
I believe Gone is incorrect because of the case law situation as DeMolay has said. The original situation was as Gone said, however, case law now prevails (provided the case is in a senior court, not a magistrates court).
gone said:
The law states that the NIP must be delivered within the 14 days. That means verbally at the time, or in writing, put in the post, delivered personally by hand, left with someone at the last known place of abode. That is classed as service.
If the NIP is put in the post on day 14, it is valid. If it is put in your hand on day 14, it is valid. If it is served on your mum on day 14 being your last know place of abode, it is valid. If it is dispatched by any of these means on day 15 (not including day of offence) it is valid.
If the person sending it knows that it will not reach the intended suspected offender within 14 days, that is not a problem in law. If it is sent to a registered owner who happens to be a company, the sender will expect that it may not reach the driver for many days after the 14 day statutory period allowed. In that case it is still valid! A further NIP will be sent to the driver when the information disclosed by the Section 172 notice is received naming the driver.
In short. If it is dispatched within the 15 days of the offence by any method above, the courts accept service of it. If it falls outside those time restraints, then it is out of time and not valid.
It only needs to be dispatched and not received regardless of who knows it will not be received within 14 days. It is the dispatching or service that is critical to this period and not the likelyhood of its delivery time or actual delivery time.
I'm sorry gone, but most of what you write is completely wrong.
For example : if someone is flashed on the 1st of January, then the NIP MUST arrive within 14 days through the normal course of post, i.e. by January 15th. If the NIP is posted on day 14, then it is most certainly invalid. In Nicholson v Tapp (1972) 116 S.J. 527 it was decided that a notice was deemed improperly served if it is posted in such time as it could not reach the recipient within 14 days (i.e. posted on day 14).
Ticket offices should make allowances for Christmas/Bank Holidays etc. Simply popping it in the postbox on the 24th December, 13 days after the offence, is not good enough - and there is sufficient case law to strengthen the argument.
Where did you come by your information?
That information is passed to us during training and is also stated in blackstones books.
Gone is stating what the law says in our referance books.
Case law may overide this though but the law has not been changed in relation to service of summons.
And is still taught now and is also in the 2005 edition of Blackstones.
I read you case law comes from a 1972 case. If it was the case why has this fact not been brought up before?
Edited to add this snippet:
a) No such notice is required if a full or provisional fixed penalty notice has been given or fixed under the Provisions of the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988
b) A notice sent by post must be dispatched so that it would reach the driver within the 14 days within the ordinary course of the post. If this is the case then it will have been deemed to have been served even if it is delivered outside the 14 day period.
c) If there is an accident involving the vehicle in question, of which the driver is aware, then the police do not need to provide a Notice of Intended Prosecution.
d) Failure to comply is no bar where the police could not with reasonable diligence have ascertained the name and address of the accused in time for service of the summons or notice within the 14 day period, or the accused contributed to such failure. [These are our highlights - might apply for example if you drive a hire car, company car or you were not the registered keeper]
e) Service of a notice at the last known address of the accused will suffice for good service.
>> Edited by ^Slider^ on Tuesday 11th January 17:18
Gone is stating what the law says in our referance books.
Case law may overide this though but the law has not been changed in relation to service of summons.
And is still taught now and is also in the 2005 edition of Blackstones.
I read you case law comes from a 1972 case. If it was the case why has this fact not been brought up before?
Edited to add this snippet:
a) No such notice is required if a full or provisional fixed penalty notice has been given or fixed under the Provisions of the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988
b) A notice sent by post must be dispatched so that it would reach the driver within the 14 days within the ordinary course of the post. If this is the case then it will have been deemed to have been served even if it is delivered outside the 14 day period.
c) If there is an accident involving the vehicle in question, of which the driver is aware, then the police do not need to provide a Notice of Intended Prosecution.
d) Failure to comply is no bar where the police could not with reasonable diligence have ascertained the name and address of the accused in time for service of the summons or notice within the 14 day period, or the accused contributed to such failure. [These are our highlights - might apply for example if you drive a hire car, company car or you were not the registered keeper]
e) Service of a notice at the last known address of the accused will suffice for good service.
>> Edited by ^Slider^ on Tuesday 11th January 17:18
kevinday said:
Because it may take time to receive the driver information from the registered keeper. The keeper has 28 days to return the NIP with the driver details, so that is at least 6.5 weeks (allowing for post) so the new NIP may be sent 7 or 8 weeks after the offence, then the registered keeper may have named the wrong driver, so it is sent to someone else who returns it denying everything. The only time you can be completely sure you can avoid the speeding offence is if six months has gone by and you have no NIP or summons (although the summons may be served later than that).
Yes, this much stands to reason. But I suppose I was thinking it it odd that there is no additional 24-day period in which the partnership has to catch the driver (as opposed to the RK). Mind you, that would question when the (second) 14-day clock ticks from; i.e. from the date of the offence (daft, for reasons given above) or from the date that the RK sends back the NIP, or what.
On your second point
kevinday said:I thought that the case had to be laid before the court within 6 months of the offence, in which case more than 6 months and it has died a death. Oh, but the case could be laid 5 months and 28 days, and the summons issued a week later, in which case it would be valid, I guess. I see what you mean.
The only time you can be completely sure you can avoid the speeding offence is if six months has gone by and you have no NIP or summons (although the summons may be served later than that).
Gone, DeMolay, I look forward to the outcome of your discussions. It's interesting (but for academic reasons now, not practical ones from my POV.)
Oli.
^Slider^ said:
That information is passed to us during training and is also stated in blackstones books.
Gone is stating what the law says in our referance books.
Case law may overide this though but the law has not been changed in relation to service of summons.
And is still taught now and is also in the 2005 edition of Blackstones.
I read you case law comes from a 1972 case. If it was the case why has this fact not been brought up before?
Edited to add this snippet:
a) No such notice is required if a full or provisional fixed penalty notice has been given or fixed under the Provisions of the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988
b) A notice sent by post must be dispatched so that it would reach the driver within the 14 days within the ordinary course of the post. If this is the case then it will have been deemed to have been served even if it is delivered outside the 14 day period.
c) If there is an accident involving the vehicle in question, of which the driver is aware, then the police do not need to provide a Notice of Intended Prosecution.
d) Failure to comply is no bar where the police could not with reasonable diligence have ascertained the name and address of the accused in time for service of the summons or notice within the 14 day period, or the accused contributed to such failure. [These are our highlights - might apply for example if you drive a hire car, company car or you were not the registered keeper]
e) Service of a notice at the last known address of the accused will suffice for good service.
>> Edited by ^Slider^ on Tuesday 11th January 17:18
Snippet B is the important one in context with the service of a NIP from an alledged offence caught on a camera.
The effect is that if a NIP is sent by first class post it has to be sent by first class post on Day 13, so that it will arrive on Day 14. Assumming Day 14 isn't a Sunday. If Day 14 is a Sunday then the NIP needs to be posted on Day 12. If sent by second class post then the NIP needs to be sent on Day 11 or 10 (I think you allow 2 working days for 2nd class post).
If the Post Office don;t deliver it in time then it still counts as served as long as posted in accordance with above. So if you get a NIP and it is possibly late always check the post mark.
Yep Chris thats pretty much right.
Remember the 14 day clock starts the day after the offence.
Christmas and new year no post dates would need to be taken into account in this case.
Edited to add:
The NoIP does not HAVE to arrive within the 14 days, it just has to be posted so by normal post would be reasonable to assume it would be recieved within the 14 days.
So according to royal mail - first class post will be recieved the next day. So the courts would deem that if it was posted on day 13 it is served provided day 14 is not a sunday or bank holiday.
Oh and also posted to the last registered keeper's address. If the V5 is not updated correctly then the 14 day rule does not need to be met provided it was served on the RK address within 14 days. As due diligence comes into play that the notice could not have been served on the person who commited the offence within the 14 days.
>> Edited by ^Slider^ on Tuesday 11th January 17:52
Remember the 14 day clock starts the day after the offence.
Christmas and new year no post dates would need to be taken into account in this case.
Edited to add:
The NoIP does not HAVE to arrive within the 14 days, it just has to be posted so by normal post would be reasonable to assume it would be recieved within the 14 days.
So according to royal mail - first class post will be recieved the next day. So the courts would deem that if it was posted on day 13 it is served provided day 14 is not a sunday or bank holiday.
Oh and also posted to the last registered keeper's address. If the V5 is not updated correctly then the 14 day rule does not need to be met provided it was served on the RK address within 14 days. As due diligence comes into play that the notice could not have been served on the person who commited the offence within the 14 days.
>> Edited by ^Slider^ on Tuesday 11th January 17:52
DeMolay said:
Where did you come by your information?
See Sliders points.
I am not wrong
Case law does not constitute a change in the law!
It gives guidance to those who will be reviewing evidence for decisions at a later date in relation to that particular legislation.
As he states, 1st class post should guarantee next day delivery!
Having the NIP planted in your sticky mit on day 14 will satisfy the conditions for delivery in time.
14 days not including the day of offence would cater for the notice to be posted on 13th day to get there in time!
The law has not been changed as Slider points out. The use of case law is for a lawyer to bring the facts before a court which would then deliberate on the merits of the case law. The court will either agree with the findings or dismiss the arguement on the particular point the lawyer wishes to illustrate in relation to that particular information which he/she is defending.
chrisgr31 said:
If sent by second class post then the NIP needs to be sent on Day 11 or 10 (I think you allow 2 working days for 2nd class post).
I understood that delivery by 2nd class post wasn't deemed to be a sufficient means of service. The act says (and here I can only give the gist) "Valid means of service will be deemed to be verbal delivery in person, Registered or Garunteed delivery, delivery by hand or First Class Post." No mention of 2nd class post.
I seem to remember reading this on Pepipoo, but I, or they, could be wrong.
Where's DVD when you need him? He would have something to say on this, for sure.
Oli.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff