NIP SENT after more than 14 days

[danhay]

A work collegue has received a NIP that is dated 3/11/03 for an offence comitted on 17/10/03. This is more than 14 days.

How should she respond?

[206xsi]

Go to a toy shop, buy a basketball hoop to put over the bin, chuck the NIP in the bin

Oh - better write to them and tell them the error of their ways. Be as rude as possible without being illegal

[danhay]

206xsi said:

Oh - better write to them and tell them the error of their ways. Be as rude as possible without being illegal

It would possibly help if she could at least name the section of the law under which she is ignoring it?

I've done a search on NIPs but it seems to be all unsigned stuff etc...

[kevinday]

I assume she is also the recorded keeper and has not changed addresses recently? If so she is in luck (by 2 days). Jeffrey Archer can probably provide the relevant section numbers etc.

[pdV6]

Is it a company car?

If so- uuuuuunlucky (1st NIP probably went to the fleet manager within 14 days)

[danhay]

It's a private car, she hasn't moved or anything. The date at the top of the letter is 3/11/03, so it can't be the postal strike to blame or anything.

If have discovered this at:

www.hmso.gov.uk/acts/acts1988/Ukpga_19880053_en_2.htm#mdiv1

1.—(1) Subject to section 2 of this Act, where a person is prosecuted for an offence to which this section applies, he is not to be convicted unless—
(a) he was warned at the time the offence was committed that the question of prosecuting him for some one or other of the offences to which this section applies would be taken into consideration, or
(b) within fourteen days of the commission of the offence a summons (or, in Scotland, a complaint) for the offence was served on him, or
(c) within fourteen days of the commission of the offence a notice of the intended prosecution specifying the nature of the alleged offence and the time and place where it is alleged to have been committed, was—
(i) in the case of an offence under section 28 or 29 of the [1988 c. 52.] Road Traffic Act 1988 (cycling offences), served on him,
(ii) in the case of any other offence, served on him or on the person, if any, registered as the keeper of the vehicle at the time of the commission of the offence.

I'm fairly sure that she's off the hook, it's just a question of how she should respond to avoid them coming after her?

[pdV6]

Don't fill in the NIP, simply write back stating that there is a "bar on prosecution" if it wasn't issued within 14 days of the offence.

At least, that's what a friend of mine in a similar situation was advised to do by her company's in-house legal team

[danhay]

Ta pdv6, that sounds reasonable. Did they get any comeback after that do you know?

[206xsi]

Dan - you've just quoted the reason there will be no prosecution!

Although the text keeps mentioning "he" - maybe SHE should be worried

[pdV6]

danhay said:

Ta pdv6, that sounds reasonable. Did they get any comeback after that do you know?

Er, :shufflesfeet: actually she failed miserably, because she hadn't spotted the fact that in this case the original NIP had been sent to the company within the time limit...

[Julian64]

Does that fourteen days actually include delay in postage, such as the postal strike. Or is it valid from the day THEY post it?

[danhay]

206xsi said:

Dan - you've just quoted the reason there will be no prosecution! Although the text keeps mentioning "he" - maybe SHE should be worried

I know why there shouldn't be a prosecution, we just want to make sure they don't continue to blunder ahead with the prosecution before making @rses of themselves in court (she would like to avoid an appearence). No offence aimed at Bib here, it's just that the deskbound beaurocracies of most large organisations seem ill prepared to deal with non standard responses

I know they shouldn't continue with the prosecution, but they shouldn't have sent the NIP out in the first place if it was overdue? Or perhaps they are just trying it on, as most people aren't as eau fait with the legislation as SP&L regulars!

[pdV6]

danhay said:

I know they shouldn't continue with the prosecution, but they shouldn't have sent the NIP out in the first place if it was overdue? Or perhaps they are just trying it on, as most people aren't as eau fait with the legislation as SP&L regulars!

Nail Head

My friend in the example I quoted is now on 9 points as a result. After going back and checking the 1st 2 convictions that she coughed up for earlier in the year, they were both out of time as well. Now, it may transpire that they were both 2nd NIPs as well, but she didn't know or check at the time - just paid up.

[danhay]

Julian64 said:

Does that fourteen days actually include delay in postage, such as the postal strike. Or is it valid from the day THEY post it?

It's the day they post it, I found this out on another thread.

[cammers]

www.pepipoo.com/NewForums2/viewtopic.php?t=87
Have a look at this page. It has a letter that you can copy, add your own details and send off.

[Buffalo]

danhay said:

they shouldn't have sent the NIP out in the first place if it was overdue? Or perhaps they are just trying it on

Having read about that absolute mockery of the British system that happened on the M4, whereby people were prosecuted whilst actually being within the set limit, YET still aren't having convictions quashed unless THEY ask for it...

I would unfortunately have to say they are trying it on. I would be interested to hear what their comeback will be if you refute it on grounds of being legimately out of date.

[danhay]

Buffalo said:

Having read about that absolute mockery of the British system that happened on the M4, whereby people were prosecuted whilst actually being within the set limit, YET still aren't having convictions quashed unless THEY ask for it...

It's typical of what can happen when you substitute an unreasoning camera for human policing by decent BiB.

>> Edited by danhay on Tuesday 4th November 18:28

[Chrisgr31]

danhay said:

Julian64 said: Does that fourteen days actually include delay in postage, such as the postal strike. Or is it valid from the day THEY post it? It's the day they post it, I found this out on another thread.

I have questioned this before and indeed read the other thread in depth, and personally if I received a NIP posted on the 14th day I would challenge it. If I recall the legislation says that the NIP is served if delivered in person or posted first class by the 14th day. Well a NIP can obviously be served in person on day 14, but if posted I'd argue that it cannot be served until the next day, irrespective of what the legislation says.

However so far I haven't had a NIP stuck in the postbox on day 14 so unable to challenge it!

[jeffreyarcher]

Chrisgr31 said:

<...> if I received a NIP posted on the 14th day I would challenge it.

Chrisgr31 said:

<...>irrespective of what the legislation says.

And, pray tell, how much above zero do you think your chances of success with that line will be?

>> Edited by jeffreyarcher on Wednesday 5th November 00:56

[mondeoman]

I'd be tempted to go back and test the legality of the previous two as well - what are the chances of getting them overturned on a point of law ie issued outside of the relevant time-frame?