Should I respond at all to a nip if it was sent 14 days?

[AlVal]

Edit: sorry about title, looks like titles don't accept the > symbol

See image below

Given that it was sent more than 14 days after the alleged event, do I need to send any kind of response at all or just completely ignore? I am the registered keeper, no complications there.

Not involved in any accidents or anything like that.

Should I write anything back at all or no need?

Thanks

Edited by AlVal on Thursday 29th December 23:41

[vonhosen]

That's not a NIP, it's a conditional offer.

[AlVal]

vonhosen said:

That's not a NIP, it's a conditional offer.

Soo.. I'm buggered then?

[TriumphStag3.0V8]

AlVal said:

vonhosen said:

That's not a NIP, it's a conditional offer.

Soo.. I'm buggered then?

Pretty much, and too fast for a SAC.

Odd that they went straight to that, there would normally be a NIP, asking who was driving the vehicle. You say it is registered to you - is this definately the first you have heard of it? I assume you were driving the vehicle at that time and place?

But yes, you are buggered. Pay up!

Edited by TriumphStag3.0V8 on Friday 30th December 00:05

[Percy Cushion]

Take the 3 points and then 100 fine for doing 89 on a motorway, we’ve all done it, take the hit and move on

[Cliftonite]

The Police surely cannot send (to the RK) a Conditional Offer of Fixed Penalty (CO) as their first correspondence to them in the matter?! They do not know who was driving the vehicle at the time of the alleged offence!

What if the RK's spouse had been driving, and the RK takes the hit (by accepting the CO) so his spouse could, for example, avoid a totting-up ban?

One for agtlaw to kindly comment?

[AlVal]

Percy Cushion said:

Take the 3 points and then 100 fine for doing 89 on a motorway, we’ve all done it, take the hit and move on

Don't care about the fine, but the state of the licence.

[Tony1963]

AlVal said:

Don't care about the fine, but the state of the licence.

Maybe think a bit more about the speed you’re doing if you don’t want to accumulate points, surely? Yes it can get boring, but that’s just the way it is.

[caziques]

Interesting; there can't be a Conditional Offer without a completed NIP.

If the OP hasn't filled in a NIP, then a speeding prosecution must fail.

[LF5335]

Did you get stopped at the time of the offence?

[anonymous-user]

LF5335 said:

Did you get stopped at the time of the offence?

The letter says automatic camera device.

[Cat]

caziques said:

Interesting; there can't be a Conditional Offer without a completed NIP.

If the OP hasn't filled in a NIP, then a speeding prosecution must fail.

There is no such thing as a completed NIP.

Cat

[Rozzers]

Is this vehicle leased with the V5 in the lease co’s name?

That’s one explanation for the lack of a NIP to your home address.

[Dr Mike Oxgreen]

Rozzers said:

Is this vehicle leased with the V5 in the lease co’s name?

That’s one explanation for the lack of a NIP to your home address.

If you read what he wrote, he says he is the registered keeper.

[stukno]

With the caveat that its a long time since I was incolved in this sort of thing, My recollection is that, if not stopped and served verbally at the time then a written Notice of Intended Prosecution (which has specific wording) must be served on the Registered Keeper within 14 days of the offence being committed.

Failure to do so was a bar to further prosecution.

I would defer to anyone with more up to date knowledge on the subject but the OP should look into this. I think that to ignore the notice would not be advisable. Better to communicate with the sender and point out that no NIP was received. If that is the case that should kill it dead (Barring and changes in the law that I am unaware of)

[youngsyr]

stukno said:

With the caveat that its a long time since I was incolved in this sort of thing, My recollection is that, if not stopped and served verbally at the time then a written Notice of Intended Prosecution (which has specific wording) must be served on the Registered Keeper within 14 days of the offence being committed.

Failure to do so was a bar to further prosecution.

I would defer to anyone with more up to date knowledge on the subject but the OP should look into this. I think that to ignore the notice would not be advisable. Better to communicate with the sender and point out that no NIP was received. If that is the case that should kill it dead (Barring and changes in the law that I am unaware of)

There's also the recent delays in post to take into account: I believe a former ruling held that a NIP only had to be posted to be deemed served, actually receiving it was not required?

[AlVal]

youngsyr said:

There's also the recent delays in post to take into account: I believe a former ruling held that a NIP only had to be posted to be deemed served, actually receiving it was not required?

Sure but the date the letter was written was more than 14days after the alleged offense

[mac96]

AlVal said:

youngsyr said:

There's also the recent delays in post to take into account: I believe a former ruling held that a NIP only had to be posted to be deemed served, actually receiving it was not required?

Sure but the date the letter was written was more than 14days after the alleged offense

But there could also be a NIP not yet received?

I received a letter yesterday which was posted 27th November, post is in chaos.

[stukno]

That may be so but I would have thought that such a delay cannot be open ended - and there must be proof that one was posted within the 14 day period.

Also, as pointed out above, the letter is a conditional offer but how do they know who the driver is? There should be another legal form (I forget the name) which places a legal obligation on the Registered Keeper to identify the driver at the time of the offence.

If the OP has given the full story then there are questions to be asked before responding to the letter

[OutInTheShed]

stukno said:

With the caveat that its a long time since I was incolved in this sort of thing, My recollection is that, if not stopped and served verbally at the time then a written Notice of Intended Prosecution (which has specific wording) must be served on the Registered Keeper within 14 days of the offence being committed.

Failure to do so was a bar to further prosecution.

I would defer to anyone with more up to date knowledge on the subject but the OP should look into this. I think that to ignore the notice would not be advisable. Better to communicate with the sender and point out that no NIP was received. If that is the case that should kill it dead (Barring and changes in the law that I am unaware of)

Maybe someone else got the NIP and responded to it, hence the OP getting this?
IS he the RK?
Has he had it long?