No verbal or written NIP, but summons.
Discussion
Can't seem to find this one on any other topic.
Was stopped by a single officer in a marked police car who had a radar gun. Alleged I was going over the speed limit. We had a bit of banter between us, gave him my details for the producer. Nothing resembling a verbal NIP was given - I asked what happens now, he said 'you'll be hearing from us'. Assumed a NIP would arrive in the post. It didn't.
Over two months later a summons arrived for speeding and not producing documents. The documents were given in, albeit at a different station to that nominated, the nominated one having closed.
Any prosecution for speeding is surely time expired. The problem will be that the officer could insist that he did give the verbal NIP, indeed he's ticked a box to that effect on the summons.
The officer categorically did not give a verbal NIP. So I guess it's his word against mine, but would I be right in saying that his position as a police officer he does not mean he is regarded as an expert witness as regards to what he said or did not at the time of the incident. Expert witness status would only apply to his use of the radar gun or judging my speed.
He represented to me that he would stop in the region of 50 drivers that evening, whereas I was only stopped once, my contention would be that my recollection on the incident would be better than his as I only have to remember 1 of 1 whereas for him it's 1 of 50 for that night, let alone the other 50 per shift he stops!
Any advice gratefully received!
Was stopped by a single officer in a marked police car who had a radar gun. Alleged I was going over the speed limit. We had a bit of banter between us, gave him my details for the producer. Nothing resembling a verbal NIP was given - I asked what happens now, he said 'you'll be hearing from us'. Assumed a NIP would arrive in the post. It didn't.
Over two months later a summons arrived for speeding and not producing documents. The documents were given in, albeit at a different station to that nominated, the nominated one having closed.
Any prosecution for speeding is surely time expired. The problem will be that the officer could insist that he did give the verbal NIP, indeed he's ticked a box to that effect on the summons.
The officer categorically did not give a verbal NIP. So I guess it's his word against mine, but would I be right in saying that his position as a police officer he does not mean he is regarded as an expert witness as regards to what he said or did not at the time of the incident. Expert witness status would only apply to his use of the radar gun or judging my speed.
He represented to me that he would stop in the region of 50 drivers that evening, whereas I was only stopped once, my contention would be that my recollection on the incident would be better than his as I only have to remember 1 of 1 whereas for him it's 1 of 50 for that night, let alone the other 50 per shift he stops!
Any advice gratefully received!
There are no set words at law as to what a verbal NOIP is. "You will be reported for the consideration of the question of prosecution for exceeding a speed limit" used to be standard in my day and strictly more than necessary.
The requirement, for certain traffic offences, is that a driver be warned of intended prosecution. " I think you are exceeding the limit but if on checking I find I am wrong you will hear no more of it" was held to be a good warning (Jesspo v Clarke 1908 ). Necessary to state offence committed. (Watt v Smith 1942). Whilst it appears that you were under no illusion as you admit you were told " you will hear from us" Could it be argued in "The Banter" that you missed certain words that were spoken.?
Gibson v Dalton 1980 - warning must be heard and understood. Those words should indicate you should have? Seems simply " I am nicking you for speeding" would hold up.
Again from days past, RT/1 (producer) in some Forces used to have a ticky box section NOIP ?
Seems your going to have a hard fight, for it is up to you to prove you were not warned and I just know what Plod is going to say in the witness box if tasked...........
Offence not to produce docs to Plod on demand but no conviction if produced within 7 days at a Police Station SPECIFIED by driver. You produced elsewhere than elected. CLANG. However if within time I would have expected Plod to have sorted it out for you if you had explained. However all is not lost as if you enter a NG plea on this there is the defence that it was not reasonably practicable for driver to produce these before proceedings were commenced (because the PS was closed). Not an easy one as you would have to prove othern than a single visit.
DVD
The requirement, for certain traffic offences, is that a driver be warned of intended prosecution. " I think you are exceeding the limit but if on checking I find I am wrong you will hear no more of it" was held to be a good warning (Jesspo v Clarke 1908 ). Necessary to state offence committed. (Watt v Smith 1942). Whilst it appears that you were under no illusion as you admit you were told " you will hear from us" Could it be argued in "The Banter" that you missed certain words that were spoken.?
Gibson v Dalton 1980 - warning must be heard and understood. Those words should indicate you should have? Seems simply " I am nicking you for speeding" would hold up.
Again from days past, RT/1 (producer) in some Forces used to have a ticky box section NOIP ?
Seems your going to have a hard fight, for it is up to you to prove you were not warned and I just know what Plod is going to say in the witness box if tasked...........
Offence not to produce docs to Plod on demand but no conviction if produced within 7 days at a Police Station SPECIFIED by driver. You produced elsewhere than elected. CLANG. However if within time I would have expected Plod to have sorted it out for you if you had explained. However all is not lost as if you enter a NG plea on this there is the defence that it was not reasonably practicable for driver to produce these before proceedings were commenced (because the PS was closed). Not an easy one as you would have to prove othern than a single visit.
DVD
Yeah, it's an interesing one alright. When I said the police station was closed, it was no longer operational. Rang the local police force number and they told me the official replacement, and that was closed inside its published office open hours. Great. Then went to a third station, refused to take my details as I'd left the producer document behind - it says on the top you SHOULD bring this document, not must, but the ever so helpful lady on the desk refused to record my details. Finally found a fourth police station to take and record the info, same force as the closed (no longer operational) station. Was all good fun and I didn't have anything better to do that day...
Dwight VanDriver said:So how is "understood" tested? Did GvD say anything about that? If the warning was lost in "The Banter" as you put it, the words were not understood (per se).
[ ... ]
Gibson v Dalton 1980 - warning must be heard and understood. Those words should indicate you should have? Seems simply " I am nicking you for speeding" would hold up.
charlieCam said:Typical of the education standard reached today!
[ ... ]
Then went to a third station, refused to take my details as I'd left the producer document behind - it says on the top you SHOULD bring this document, not must, but the ever so helpful lady on the desk refused to record my details.
Streaky
The officer definitely didn't say anything relating to the offence in 'the banter,' that was more along the lines of me remarking that it's all the police do these days catch speeders, the officer remarking that he's been doing the job for ten years and he'd catch 50 on a shift 10 years ago, just as he does now. I asked him where were his productivity gains? All good natured.
I understood that the verbal NIP had to be as police guidelines so when it wasn't given and he said you'll hear from us to my inquiry, that a written NIP would arrive if that's what was decided. Nothing whatsoever that the officer said related to prosecution or consideration thereof. When 17 days had expired (14 days plus the extra few for the post) I considered myself lucky, but didn't question it. Over two months later I was understandably unhappy to receive a summons, which was heroically late according to the date on the letter. Gave me 7 days to produce my docs (again..) at a station within the police region of the offence, but the summons arrived 10 days after its date. Blinder.
I was grieved on the evening of being stopped as I'd travelled a reasonably long journey being absolutely anal about keeping to the speed limit ( and thus the journey was long and boring), I overtook a lorry which had about 17 sets of badly adjusted lights such that the inside of my car was illuminated like a nuclear warhead had gone off in there - it was more than a little distracting, not to say dangerous - so I accelerated to get out of the path of Cibie's finest, exactly where, as it transpires, there was a speed gun. Wonderful.
I understood that the verbal NIP had to be as police guidelines so when it wasn't given and he said you'll hear from us to my inquiry, that a written NIP would arrive if that's what was decided. Nothing whatsoever that the officer said related to prosecution or consideration thereof. When 17 days had expired (14 days plus the extra few for the post) I considered myself lucky, but didn't question it. Over two months later I was understandably unhappy to receive a summons, which was heroically late according to the date on the letter. Gave me 7 days to produce my docs (again..) at a station within the police region of the offence, but the summons arrived 10 days after its date. Blinder.
I was grieved on the evening of being stopped as I'd travelled a reasonably long journey being absolutely anal about keeping to the speed limit ( and thus the journey was long and boring), I overtook a lorry which had about 17 sets of badly adjusted lights such that the inside of my car was illuminated like a nuclear warhead had gone off in there - it was more than a little distracting, not to say dangerous - so I accelerated to get out of the path of Cibie's finest, exactly where, as it transpires, there was a speed gun. Wonderful.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff