NIP/Out of Time question
Discussion
Afternoon folks. One of my pupils managed to run a red light a few weeks ago. One of those random inexplicable things that learners do sometimes. Slowed nicely for Amber, light turns red and pupil decides to hit the gas. Couldn’t get on the duals in time so over the stop line we go, 1 second after Red.
NIP comes through to leasing company and then on to me. I’m now sitting on a NIP and about to put it in the name of the pupil. However, the original NIP is dated 4 weeks after the alleged offence and the picture footage has disappeared off the Met website.
I’ll still send the NIP off but to avoid giving my Pupil a heart attack, is it likely that the system has spotted the NIP was out of time and therefore been cancelled? To be clear, the NIP was available to view online, previously.
NIP comes through to leasing company and then on to me. I’m now sitting on a NIP and about to put it in the name of the pupil. However, the original NIP is dated 4 weeks after the alleged offence and the picture footage has disappeared off the Met website.
I’ll still send the NIP off but to avoid giving my Pupil a heart attack, is it likely that the system has spotted the NIP was out of time and therefore been cancelled? To be clear, the NIP was available to view online, previously.
The NIP will be replaced with a prosecution for failure to declare who was driving.
Did the leasing company provide your name and details and then you received the NIP or did they just forward you the letter that was addressed to them? I ask as that will probably determine if its them or you that gets charged with the offence.
I would still recommend filling out the form and declaring the driver, whilst keeping copies of all paperwork on the matter including a copy of the completed form for when you are in front of the magistrate. Worked for me when my driver declaration got lost in the system.
Did the leasing company provide your name and details and then you received the NIP or did they just forward you the letter that was addressed to them? I ask as that will probably determine if its them or you that gets charged with the offence.
I would still recommend filling out the form and declaring the driver, whilst keeping copies of all paperwork on the matter including a copy of the completed form for when you are in front of the magistrate. Worked for me when my driver declaration got lost in the system.
The OP says the ORIGINAL NIP, if by that he means he has a copy of the first one sent to the Lease co then he would appear to have slam dunk late service defence. The OP needs to enlighten us a little more
Edit to say irrespective of the possibility of late service of the first NIP he still needs to respond with the drivers details within the time limit or run the risk of being landed with a failing to furnish charge
Edit to say irrespective of the possibility of late service of the first NIP he still needs to respond with the drivers details within the time limit or run the risk of being landed with a failing to furnish charge
Edited by martinbiz on Wednesday 13th October 13:59
martinbiz said:
The OP says the ORIGINAL NIP, if by that he means he has a copy of the first one sent to the Lease co then he would appear to have slam dunk late service defence. The OP needs to enlighten us a little more
Edit to say irrespective of the possibility of late service of the first NIP he still needs to respond with the drivers details within the time limit or run the risk of being landed with a failing to furnish
That’s it in a nutshell, I viewed the original NIP and the lease co put it in my name. Alleged offence is 18/08 NIP is dated 16/09.Edit to say irrespective of the possibility of late service of the first NIP he still needs to respond with the drivers details within the time limit or run the risk of being landed with a failing to furnish
Edited by martinbiz on Wednesday 13th October 13:59
Yes, I’ll still put it in pupils name. Don’t need that drama.
Sebring440 said:
I thought that if a learner made a mistake, it was the full licence holder who takes the responsibility?
Or is that view out of date now (if it ever was)?
It never was. A comment misconception. I’ve had pupils pick up bus lane fines, yellow box fines etc. On tests. Should the examiner be responsible?Or is that view out of date now (if it ever was)?
The bottom line seems to be,
"Road traffic laws still apply to you
You cannot supervise a learner whilst:
Under the influence of drink or drugs
Using a handheld mobile phone
Not wearing glasses or contact lenses if required to do so while driving
Sleeping
Taking medication that prohibits you from driving
As you are considered to be in control of the vehicle while supervising a learner, the penalties for these offences are the same as they would be if you were driving yourself. This means that depending on the severity of the offence, you could receive a fine, points on your licence, or even be sent to prison."
A supervisor can also be convicted of an offence if the the learner and supervisor are engaged together in, for instance, racing or other very obvious dangerous driving. The most common stated case for this Rubie V Faulkner (1940), where the supervisor was convicted of aiding and abetting a driver in the commission of driving without due care and attention.
In Rubie V Faulkner the learner driver pulled out to overtake a horse and cart on a bend and hit a lorry coming in the opposite direction. The supervisor could fully see the road ahead and failed to take control in an attempt to stop the collision occurring. The court held that he could have said “do not overtake in this area” or, “keep in” when the learner driver attempted to overtake. Note the court didn’t state that the supervisor could/should have grabbed the steering wheel.
"Road traffic laws still apply to you
You cannot supervise a learner whilst:
Under the influence of drink or drugs
Using a handheld mobile phone
Not wearing glasses or contact lenses if required to do so while driving
Sleeping
Taking medication that prohibits you from driving
As you are considered to be in control of the vehicle while supervising a learner, the penalties for these offences are the same as they would be if you were driving yourself. This means that depending on the severity of the offence, you could receive a fine, points on your licence, or even be sent to prison."
A supervisor can also be convicted of an offence if the the learner and supervisor are engaged together in, for instance, racing or other very obvious dangerous driving. The most common stated case for this Rubie V Faulkner (1940), where the supervisor was convicted of aiding and abetting a driver in the commission of driving without due care and attention.
In Rubie V Faulkner the learner driver pulled out to overtake a horse and cart on a bend and hit a lorry coming in the opposite direction. The supervisor could fully see the road ahead and failed to take control in an attempt to stop the collision occurring. The court held that he could have said “do not overtake in this area” or, “keep in” when the learner driver attempted to overtake. Note the court didn’t state that the supervisor could/should have grabbed the steering wheel.
Going back nearly 40 years I was sitting beside a learner driver who was caught speeding by a police officer with a radar gun. He was charged and convicted of speeding and I was charged and convicted with aiding and abetting. He got a fine and 3 points and I got a fine but no points. The judge listened to my story and didn't give me the points but the PF wasn't very happy.
martinbiz said:
The OP says the ORIGINAL NIP, if by that he means he has a copy of the first one sent to the Lease co then he would appear to have slam dunk late service defence. The OP needs to enlighten us a little more
Edit to say irrespective of the possibility of late service of the first NIP he still needs to respond with the drivers details within the time limit or run the risk of being landed with a failing to furnish charge
Unless the car is registered to a finance company which is quite common for lease cars so the lease company are the second in the chain.Edit to say irrespective of the possibility of late service of the first NIP he still needs to respond with the drivers details within the time limit or run the risk of being landed with a failing to furnish charge
giantdefy said:
Unless the car is registered to a finance company which is quite common for lease cars so the lease company are the second in the chain.
Not in this case. The lease co is the registered keep so 1st in line. They’re a specialist instructor company that leases themselves and then sublet the car, so always in their name. Oortam said:
Going back nearly 40 years I was sitting beside a learner driver who was caught speeding by a police officer with a radar gun. He was charged and convicted of speeding and I was charged and convicted with aiding and abetting. He got a fine and 3 points and I got a fine but no points. The judge listened to my story and didn't give me the points but the PF wasn't very happy.
There wer no points 40 years ago. Only endorsements.CarCrazyDad said:
TVR1 said:
That’s it in a nutshell, I viewed the original NIP and the lease co put it in my name. Alleged offence is 18/08 NIP is dated 16/09.
Yes, I’ll still put it in pupils name. Don’t need that drama.
It's outside the statute for an NIPYes, I’ll still put it in pupils name. Don’t need that drama.
cho said:
What they do now is send one through saying final reminder so it appears as if you hadn’t replied to the original within date notice which obviously hadn’t been sent out on time
‘Fraid not. The 1st NIP was replied to by leasing company and put in my name online within 2 days. There is NO in date notice.Viewing the online evidence (that has now disappeared) the date of alleged offence and date of original NIP are 4 weeks apart.
That was the original question, has the NIP been cancelled? As nonlonger available to view.
Firstly you *have* to respond back (otherwise you will get 6 points) as this is a S.172 Notice.
If you do that and the *first* nip to the registered keeper was out of time then your pupil is off scot free.
So reply back stating that the driver was your pupil and you have fulfilled your obligations under S.172 however the first NIP was served outside the 14 day window and that therefore you expect that the case will be dropped. Give evidence if you have it.
There are template letters for this online.
If you do that and the *first* nip to the registered keeper was out of time then your pupil is off scot free.
So reply back stating that the driver was your pupil and you have fulfilled your obligations under S.172 however the first NIP was served outside the 14 day window and that therefore you expect that the case will be dropped. Give evidence if you have it.
There are template letters for this online.
Fastdruid said:
Firstly you *have* to respond back (otherwise you will get 6 points) as this is a S.172 Notice.
If you do that and the *first* nip to the registered keeper was out of time then your pupil is off scot free.
So reply back stating that the driver was your pupil and you have fulfilled your obligations under S.172 however the first NIP was served outside the 14 day window and that therefore you expect that the case will be dropped. Give evidence if you have it.
There are template letters for this online.
If the details given are correct, then it is as already stated out of time.If you do that and the *first* nip to the registered keeper was out of time then your pupil is off scot free.
So reply back stating that the driver was your pupil and you have fulfilled your obligations under S.172 however the first NIP was served outside the 14 day window and that therefore you expect that the case will be dropped. Give evidence if you have it.
There are template letters for this online.
However, I guess that the authorities might not discontinue it on effectively a third party's reply.
Surely, the pupil will have to send the letter saying it is time barred after he/she gets their own NIP.
No ideas for a name said:
Fastdruid said:
Firstly you *have* to respond back (otherwise you will get 6 points) as this is a S.172 Notice.
If you do that and the *first* nip to the registered keeper was out of time then your pupil is off scot free.
So reply back stating that the driver was your pupil and you have fulfilled your obligations under S.172 however the first NIP was served outside the 14 day window and that therefore you expect that the case will be dropped. Give evidence if you have it.
There are template letters for this online.
If the details given are correct, then it is as already stated out of time.If you do that and the *first* nip to the registered keeper was out of time then your pupil is off scot free.
So reply back stating that the driver was your pupil and you have fulfilled your obligations under S.172 however the first NIP was served outside the 14 day window and that therefore you expect that the case will be dropped. Give evidence if you have it.
There are template letters for this online.
However, I guess that the authorities might not discontinue it on effectively a third party's reply.
Surely, the pupil will have to send the letter saying it is time barred after he/she gets their own NIP.
A couple of quick thoughts:-
- Does the time limit defence apply IF the RK has still decided to name the driver (well, the instructor in this case)? Or does their failure to challenge it mean that the statutory defence disappears?
- Who would be deemed to be 'in control' of the vehicle? The learner (driving), or the instructor? (Apologies, know this is probably an obvious one for an instructor)
- Whilst it's a clear-cut offence of passing the red line, given the car DID stop before crossing the junction, could that be used as mitigation if it came to it?
- Does the time limit defence apply IF the RK has still decided to name the driver (well, the instructor in this case)? Or does their failure to challenge it mean that the statutory defence disappears?
- Who would be deemed to be 'in control' of the vehicle? The learner (driving), or the instructor? (Apologies, know this is probably an obvious one for an instructor)
- Whilst it's a clear-cut offence of passing the red line, given the car DID stop before crossing the junction, could that be used as mitigation if it came to it?
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff