S172 - Ditch the nip form ?

[DemonDriver]

Hi

I have read lots of posts on this forum about not signing the nip.

I find myself wondering what to do now that a nip landed on my doormat for jumping a red light (with unfair timing in my opinion).

Has anyone tried sending the necessary information without using the official form ?

As far as I can see, S172 does not require any specific form to be used.

I was thinking something along the lines of.

This is a response to nip no. xxxxx.
It provides the information required under S172 of the RTA1988.
This is not a statement.

More than one person has access to the vehicle named in the alleged office, so it is not possible to identify the driver with absolute certainly. However, the person most likely to be driving is named below:-

Name...
Address...
Date of birth...
Driving licence number...

My name, no signature.

Any thoughts on this ?

I also wondered if just name & address would be sufficient as S172, 2.(a) states
'the person keeping the vehicle shall give such information as to the identity of the driver as he may be required to give by or on behalf of a chief officer of police'. Maybe not ?

[DemonDriver]

Bump...

[jeffreyarcher]

I suspect that you may run up against DPP-v-Broomfield. That is something it did comment upon, unlike signing the form, on which it didn't.

[206xsi]

We know there is a necessity to reply to S172 and provide the name of driver etc.

We also know you do not need to use the form provided.

Is there any legislation which states that you must use the correct NIP id number in your reply?

Or could you just give a name, address etc without any other details - ie they won't know which incident to attach it to?

(and don't sign!!)

[jeffreyarcher]

206xsi said:

We also know you do not need to use the form provided.

I don't think that you do know that.

[icamm]

Humm not sure here - BiB? From recolection the only things we know for certain is that you can't reply verbally (ie by phone) and that you can use the form provided.

[kevinday]

I do not have the case notes to hand for the Broomfield case, but IIRC it said that the reply must be in writing, but did not say it must be on the form provided. I may well be wrong on this though.