Speeding ticket two and a half months after the event!
Speeding ticket two and a half months after the event!
Author
Discussion

alexkp

Original Poster:

16,484 posts

274 months

Saturday 14th October 2006
quotequote all
My missus has just today received a speeding notice through the post. Apparently her car was snapped on the 1st August at 3.20pm.

40mph in a 30mph zone apparently. I know where the scamera is, and it is totally unnescessary and in the middle of an area where the speed limit goes up and down like a yo-yo.

Problem is, neither of us can remember who was driving her car that day - me or her. Genuinely. Two and a half months is a very long time between "offence" and notice.

Any similar experiences? Any thoughts or advice?

Kinky

39,944 posts

299 months

Saturday 14th October 2006
quotequote all
I though they had 15 days to notify you, otherwise you're off the hook .... unless it's a company car, or lease, etc, etc, where the registered owner is someone else .... in which case they do have a longer period of time.

alexkp

Original Poster:

16,484 posts

274 months

Saturday 14th October 2006
quotequote all
Kinky said:
I though they had 15 days to notify you, otherwise you're off the hook .... unless it's a company car, or lease, etc, etc, where the registered owner is someone else .... in which case they do have a longer period of time.


Interesting. It is none of the above.

I think I'll give them a buzz on Monday. Cheers for that.

DeMolay

351 posts

272 months

Saturday 14th October 2006
quotequote all
Kinky said:
I though they had 15 days to notify you,

They have only 14-days to notify you (in other words, to 'serve' it on you). Where did you get 15 from?

Kinky

39,944 posts

299 months

Saturday 14th October 2006
quotequote all
I thought it was always 14 days + the day of the offence itself = 15 days.

But I might be wrong and will be happy to be corrected.

K

ETA: If she is the registered keeper, is the address correct on the V5? I also think they are allowed longer if it's an old address.

No doubt DVD will be along soon, and can confirm the exact situation (noting that mine is all 'hearsay' so to speak).

Edited by Kinky on Saturday 14th October 23:41

alexkp

Original Poster:

16,484 posts

274 months

Sunday 15th October 2006
quotequote all
Kinky said:
I thought it was always 14 days + the day of the offence itself = 15 days.

But I might be wrong and will be happy to be corrected.

K

ETA: If she is the registered keeper, is the address correct on the V5? I also think they are allowed longer if it's an old address.

No doubt DVD will be along soon, and can confirm the exact situation (noting that mine is all 'hearsay' so to speak).

Edited by Kinky on Saturday 14th October 23:41


All up to date and above board as far as I am aware. I will check.

This is very useful stuff chaps.

Graham@Reading

26,553 posts

255 months

Sunday 15th October 2006
quotequote all
DeMolay said:
Kinky said:
I though they had 15 days to notify you,

They have only 14-days to notify you (in other words, to 'serve' it on you). Where did you get 15 from?


Realistically though it can be as much as 20 or so. As long as the date on the NIP is 14 or less from the date of the offence, allowances have to be made for the postal system.

Alex, you can ignore my comment in the camera/Mail thread - didn't see this one until afterwards

streaky

19,311 posts

279 months

Sunday 15th October 2006
quotequote all
Graham@Reading said:
DeMolay said:
Kinky said:
I though they had 15 days to notify you,

They have only 14-days to notify you (in other words, to 'serve' it on you). Where did you get 15 from?


Realistically though it can be as much as 20 or so. As long as the date on the NIP is 14 or less from the date of the offence, allowances have to be made for the postal system.
It would be more accurate to say: "the date of posting of the NIP" [I'll ignore the other inaccuracy in the statement] - Streaky

Dwight VanDriver

6,583 posts

274 months

Sunday 15th October 2006
quotequote all
For offence of speeding before any prosecution can place then :

Notice of Intended Prosecution, if not given at the time,

Section 1 and 2 Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988

.....has to be served on the Reg Keeper or driver if known, within 14 days of the
commission of the offence (14days + day of commission = 15)

.....served = posting by Reg Post, Recorded delivery or first class post. Second
class is not allowed for the first notice.

.....served = if given by post it will be deemed to be given at the time when the
letter would be delivered in the ordinary course of the post:
this must be within 14 days. (Nicholson v Tapp [1972])

Providing the poster's wife is the Reg Keeper of the vehicle or has not recently purchased said vehicle and been late with notification of change of owner then Prosecution have failed in their duty.

As to naming the driver then offence not to do so but a person shall not be guilty if he shows that he did not know and could not with due diligence have ascertained who the driver of the vehicle was. (Section 172 (5) Road Traffic Act 1988)

dvd

Edited by Dwight VanDriver on Sunday 15th October 09:10

Graham@Reading

26,553 posts

255 months

Sunday 15th October 2006
quotequote all
streaky said:
Graham@Reading said:
DeMolay said:
Kinky said:
I though they had 15 days to notify you,

They have only 14-days to notify you (in other words, to 'serve' it on you). Where did you get 15 from?


Realistically though it can be as much as 20 or so. As long as the date on the NIP is 14 or less from the date of the offence, allowances have to be made for the postal system.
It would be more accurate to say: "the date of posting of the NIP" [I'll ignore the other inaccuracy in the statement] - Streaky


What other inaccuracy?

As for your correction, for the person receiving the NIP, there's no way of knowing when it was posted so it's simpler to use the date on it in relation to the date of the offence to determine whether it's "worth" contesting on the grounds of being too late. Being reasonable with regard to the postal service of course.

Edited by Graham@Reading on Sunday 15th October 11:18

jasandjules

72,628 posts

259 months

Sunday 15th October 2006
quotequote all
But, the overall summary of the advice is:

They failed to issue the NIP in time, and they are hoping you will pay your motoring tax like a good boy anyway.

alexkp

Original Poster:

16,484 posts

274 months

Sunday 15th October 2006
quotequote all
Excellent stuff chaps - many thanks.

I will let you know how we get on....

alexkp

Original Poster:

16,484 posts

274 months

Monday 16th October 2006
quotequote all
Ok, spoken to them this morning, and they are saying that the DVLA didn't have the ownership records up to date. They had to contact the company we purchased the car from (brand new - main dealer) on March 1st.

Apparently the police only got a resonse in late September.

I pointed out that we haven't a clue who was driving two and a half months ago. They are now going to send the photographic evidence - and if we can't identify from that then we have to write in.

Here's hoping the picture isn't clear...

(I still think they have taken way too long to process this...)

turbobloke

117,332 posts

290 months

Monday 16th October 2006
quotequote all
If the DVLA don't have ownership records up to date, that's not the RK's problem is it? BiB or legal beagles, this prosecution is out of time shirley?

Plotloss

67,280 posts

300 months

Monday 16th October 2006
quotequote all
turbobloke said:
If the DVLA don't have ownership records up to date, that's not the RK's problem is it? BiB or legal beagles, this prosecution is out of time shirley?


Quite, you cant be held accountable for the DVLA shortcomings, they've got their 14 days.

Hold tight, if they press on the CPS will more than likely drop it.

k50 del

9,767 posts

258 months

Monday 16th October 2006
quotequote all
Can you post this case over on www.pepipoo.com please, the good chaps on there will be very interested in this.

puggit

49,821 posts

278 months

Monday 16th October 2006
quotequote all
Can you post the link to pepipoo thread here too please so we can keep up to date

alexkp

Original Poster:

16,484 posts

274 months

Monday 16th October 2006
quotequote all
Will do K50 and Puggit.

Kinky

39,944 posts

299 months

Monday 16th October 2006
quotequote all
Alex,

Can we assume therefore that Mrs Alex does not have the V5 for the car in her name?

If so, I fear they might use this as an argument against you - putting some spin on the fact that it's your responsibility to ensure you have the necessary and correct paperwork, or somesuch rolleyes

Fingers crossed that the photo is unclear.

K

Dwight VanDriver

6,583 posts

274 months

Monday 16th October 2006
quotequote all
turbobloke said:
If the DVLA don't have ownership records up to date, that's not the RK's problem is it? BiB or legal beagles, this prosecution is out of time shirley?


Not necessarily so TB.

Long established case Carr v Harrison [1966] (reported in The Times 18/11/66) held that the police in approaching the licensing authority in good time had shown reasonable diligence, though the authority had been slow in supplying the information.

Seems from what posted then CPS will argue Section 2 (3) Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988:

...Failure to comply with..... service of Notice..... is not a bar to the conviction of the accused in a case where the Court is satisfied :

that neither the name and address of the accused nor the name and address of the registred keeper, if any, could with reasonable diligence have been ascertained ...for a notice to be served or sent in compliance with the requirements......

Their argument being that they were let down by DVLA due to misinformation during change of ownership.

If they can rely on this there is no time within which they must give notice after they have ascertained the name of the defendant. (Haughton v Harrison [1976]

But surely a come back on the part of the accused that the whole object of the NOIP is to draw the attention of an offender to the offence alleged so that he can recollect the incident and plan his defence. The time delay in this case prevents him from doing so and surely a point to draw attention to in relation to the naming the driver.

dvd