Incorrect Vehicle Model Type on NIP

[whatdoido]

Hi All,

I have just recieved a NIP for a speeding offence which happened about a week ago in Scotland. The original vehicle, a Vauxhall Omega 2.0 16V CD, (with a personalised registration) was written off (but not scrapped yet - it is currently parked in a private driveway) and had it's registration transferred to another vehicle, a Vauxhall Omega 2.5 V6 CD, using the DVLA Cherished Transfer Scheme 6 days prior to the speeding offence.
I would like some advice as to the best thing to do, and whether there are any legal loopholes that may let me off the offence, as the vehicle described in the NIP (Vauxhall Omega 2.0 16V CD) was not the vehicle that caused the offence (Vauxhall Omega 2.5 V6 CD), even though they look similar and bear the same registration number and have the same registered owner, as the wording of the declaration specifically talks about 'the vehicle described overleaf' with none of the declaration options being 'technically applicable' to me. Also as the offence occurred in Scotland, so I am also unsure if any different laws may be applicable.

The letter says:
"In accordance with section 1 of the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1998, I hereby give you notice that it is intended to take proceedings against the driver of motor vehicle [registration number] VAUXHALL OMEGA 2.0 16V CD for the alleged offence (Speed 55mph) Speeding in a 40mph Speed Limit (BUA) 303

at XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

as XX:XX on XX/XX/XXXX

Contrary to section 89 of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984.

THIS ALLEGATION IS SUPPORTED BY PHOTOGRAPHIC AND/OR VIDEO EVIDENCE

IF YOU WERE THE DRIVER of the vehicle at the time of the alleged offence you are required to complete part 1 overleaf.

IF YOU WERE NOT THE DRIVER of the vehicle at the time of the alleged offence you are required to gie any information in your power which may lead to the driver's identification by completing the appropriate part of the statement overleaf."

with the options of the declaration being:

"PART 1 - IF YOU WERE THE DRIVER AT THE TIME OF THE ALLEGED OFFENCE, AND YOU ARE THE PERSON TO WHOM THIS FORM IS ADDRESSED, COMPLETE THIS SECTION ONLY
I was the driver of the vehicle described overleaf at the time of the alleged offence.
[Boxes/Space for: Driver Licence Number, Date of Birth, Full Name, Address, Postcode, Drivers Signature, Occupation, Tel No, Date]"

"PART 2 - IF YOU WERE NOT THE DRIVER AT THE TIME OF THE ALLEGED OFFENCE, COMPLETE THIS SECTION
I was not the driver of the vehicle described overleaf at the time of the alleged offence.
[Boxes/Space for: Full Name, Address, Postcode, Signature, Tel No, Date]"

"PART 3 - IF YOU SOLD, DISPOSED OF, OR RETURNED THE VEHICLE TO THE HIRE COMPANY BEFORE THE TIME OF THE ALLEGED OFFENCE, COMPLETE THIS SECTION
I was not the Owner/Keeper/Hirer of the vehicle at the time stated in the notice because I *sold/disposed of/returned it to:
[Boxes/Space for: Full Name, Address, Postcode, On Date, At (time), Signature, Tel No, Date]"

"PART 4 - IF YOU BOUGHT/ACQUIRED THE VEHICLE AFTER THE DATE OF THE ALLEGED OFFENCE, COMPLETE THIS SECTION
I was not the Owner/Keeper/Hirer of the vehicle at the time stated in the notice because I *bought/acquired it from:
[Boxes/Space for: Full Name, Address, Postcode, Signature, Tel No, Date]"

"PART 5 - I HAVE NEVER BEEN THE *OWNER/KEEPER/HIRER OF THE VEHICLE
[Space for: Signature, Tel No, Date]"

"PART 6 - STATEMENT BY A VEHICLE HIRE FIRM IN LIEU OF PARTS 1 -4 ABOVE
[Boxes/Space for: Full Name, Address, Postcode, Signature, Tel No, Date]"

I would be very grateful if anyone knows whether this offence can be thrown out on a technicality and any suggestions to what I should do.

This seems to be a great Bulletin Board for this kind of thing, so thanks in advance for and help! :-)

>>> Edited by whatdoido on Wednesday 7th April 01:23

[Dwight VanDriver]

I will stick my neck out and say you have no grounds because:

1. NOIP - has been served in time and whilst a mistake has been made on the model of vehicle, this I would submit is not sufficient to invalidate. Consider A.G.(O'Gara) v Callaman 1958 which held that a NOIP was good but mistake in number of car was immaterial.

2. In relation to the Conditional Offer, the offence involved under RTRAct itself states "It shall be unlawful to driver a MOTOR VEHICLE on a road at a speed....."
They ID a motor vehicle as an Omega.

I very much doubt that splitting hairs so fine could be in your favour. But we live in a wierd world where Judges can make a decision that it is law to do something that is not enshrined in the writing of actual law itself.

DVD