NIPS - Time limit?...Sorry.

[Mastiff]

I know this has been covered many times on here but I cannot find the answer in the search facility, so please excuse me for asking again.

Recieved my first NIPS today, A24 Mickleham Bypass. The offence is dated 25/9/2007.

I thought there was some sort of time limit imposed on when these could arrive after the offence, but I cannot remember what it was (14 days?).

Anyone help?

Thanks in advance...

[Zeek]

Try this for some info regarding 14 days and the postal strike.

http://www.pistonheads.co.uk/gassing/topic.asp?h=0...

Was it the Mickleham Bends GATSO, or did the van get you on the corner after the GATSO?

[Mastiff]

The bend after the Gatso.

Early afternoon, light traffic. Must have had a field day that afternoon, filling the coffers...

[Kinky]

IIRC it's 15 days from the date the offence was committed.

K

[SS2.]

Are you the Registered Keeper or is it a company / leased car ?

[Mastiff]

SS2. said:

Are you the Registered Keeper or is it a company / leased car ?

I think I found the answer to my question in your post on the other link. Basically I will have to put my hands up I think.

Car registered to another member of staff (scheme cars are individually registered) and has been there first.

As said, offence on 25/09/2007 so with the NIP going there first and then to me, I assume I'm FUBAR'D

Oh well, t'was me so there you go....

[goskins17]

As long as the Process Section that sent it out has proof that the NIP was posted within 14 days of the offense, it does matter when you get it. Once it is posted by them it is deemed as served in law. The law was amended to cover this in the RTA 1991.
So basically they got you.

[SS2.]

goskins17 said:

As long as the Process Section that sent it out has proof that the NIP was posted within 14 days of the offense, it does matter when you get it. Once it is posted by them it is deemed as served in law. The law was amended to cover this in the RTA 1991.
So basically they got you.

Do your employers encourage you to deliberately peddle incorrect information ??

From the last time this was covered:

DeMolay said:

goskins17 said:

Mr freeman is wrong,

It only has to posted in 14 days and the CJU sending keeps a record, the act of them posting it is deemed as service by the road traffic act even if you don't receive it. There a was an amendment in the 1991 RTA, to allow process sections to sent the NIP, and have it deemed as served as long as they have proof it was posted, and a declaration is added to the NIP to say so.
Any delay in the post, will not matter as the NIP was put in the first class post system before the 14 days and it good time to arrive.

There are so many factual inaccuracies with this statement that it is difficult to know where to start.

I have discussed this so many times on this forum that I have lost count. DVD, as usual, has explained it succinctly. However, I will say this:

When a NIP is sent out - by first class post - it is only presumed to arrive. The presumption of service is rebuttable with evidence to the contrary.

Service, as dictated by s.7 of the Interpretation Act, is the time when the notice is delivered in the ordinary course of post, unless the contrary is proved:

Where an Act authorises or requires any document to be served by post (whether the expression "serve" or the expression "give" or "send" or any other expression is used) then, unless the contrary intention appears, the service is deemed to be effected by properly addressing, pre-paying and posting a letter containing the document and, unless the contrary is proved, to have been effected at the time at which the letter would be delivered in the ordinary course of post

Service does not mean 'posted'. There is well settled case law on this point (Beer v Davies, MacLeod v Anderson)

MacLeod v Anderson said:

When, however, the date when service was effected is of moment, as it is when service must be effected within a specified time, the second part of section 26 of the Interpretation Act comes into play. In set terms it rules out the date of posting as the date when service was effected. It provides that the service shall be deemed to have been effected at the time at which the letter would be delivered in the ordinary course of post, unless the contrary is proved, that is to say unless lit is proved that the letter was not delivered in the ordinary course of post.

Accordingly, in this case, the prosecutor cannot rely on the date when the notice was posted as being the date when service was effected. Nor can he rely on the date which the Interpretation Act dictates shall be deemed to be the date when service was effected, the date when the notice would be delivered in the ordinary course of post unless the contrary is proved, since it has been proved that it was not so delivered.

Beer v Davies said:

In Reg. v. County of London Quarter Sessions Appeals Committee, Ex parte Rossi,1 the Court of Appeal seem to me to have decided that where a notice is served by registered post or is purported to be served by registered post, it is not enough to prove that it was correctly directed, stamped and posted. That is prima facie enough, but it can be shown that the letter was never delivered, and if it was never delivered then the Court of Appeal has said that there has not been service and that section 26 of the Interpretation Act does not assist.

If someone stands up in court and swears, under oath, that he didn't receive the initial NIP then as long as he is a credible witness the court has no choice but to find him not guilty.

The police have the option of making ALL NIPs irrebuttable by issuing them by recorded delivery, but (apart from one force in Scotland) none of the constabularies do so. Cost being the obvious reason why this is not done routinely.

So Mr Freeman is not wrong: he is quite correct. Proof of postage is not proof of service.

You say you deal with this every day, so I'm assuming you are in the employ of a camera partnership or part of the court process (a CPS prosecutor perhaps?). Whichever it is, I suggest you re-read the legislation and section 2.234 of Wilkinsons Road Traffic which explains it very plainly.

[Zeek]

Mastiff said:

The bend after the Gatso.

Early afternoon, light traffic. Must have had a field day that afternoon, filling the coffers...

I almost got snapped there a few weeks ago, luckily noticed the nazis sitting there while I was heading in the other direction an hour earlier....See them reguarly now, probably once or twice a week in the same location.

[The Griffalo]

goskins17 said:

As long as the Process Section that sent it out has proof that the NIP was posted within 14 days of the offense, it does matter when you get it. Once it is posted by them it is deemed as served in law. The law was amended to cover this in the RTA 1991.
So basically they got you.

Incorrect. It has to be posted such as it would be received by you within 14 days of the offence. Posting on the 14th day is an automatic get out