Making sense of this response from Police

[zoom_jones]

I received a NIP and wrote back saying I did not know who was driving at the time (the truth).

Summary of their response:

Police said:

I acknowledge receipt of your recent correspondence. Unfortunately I must advise you that there is a delay in providing photographic evidence due to the increased number of requests received each day.

Ok so far, good to see their admin is on top of things.

Police said:

I must also point out that, whilst any correspondence does not delay or extend the period for any response, consideration for a short extension may be given to your case if the time taken to deal with your request goes beyond the 28 days permitted for your response.

So does this mean I have 28 days to respond (again) but because they can't obtain the evidence then the 28 days is being extended but I won't get to find out until the next letter?? How fortuntate!

Police said:

You will be notified of this in any future correspondence

Police said:

You should therefore ensure that you respond promptly to the NIP when you have received the photographic information.

I'll reply in due course within the state time limit as I did with the original NIP.

[chrisgr31]

Well if you don't know who was driving and the photo doesn't identify the driver then you have a valid defense. No ifs, no buts.

[fish]

by what they are saying they are not accepting your letter requesting help with the identification as an acceptable response to the NIP. Thus I imagine they will then issue you with a NIP for falure to supply.....

This whole gulity to proven inocent sucks..

[Eliminator]

fish

I interpret this as follows, adding words in [].

Whilst the delay does not extend the period [automatically] if the period to respond goes over 28 days [because of this delay in getting the photographic evidence to you] then an extension will be [given, though stricly we cannot say that in advance of there actually being a delay and us understanding why you argue that the delay was not your fault, so we use the word "considered"]

Fluent in gibberish, me.

Authentic, fronteer gibberish

[zoom_jones]

fish said:

by what they are saying they are not accepting your letter requesting help with the identification as an acceptable response to the NIP. Thus I imagine they will then issue you with a NIP for falure to supply..... This whole gulity to proven inocent sucks..

No NIP for failure to supply yet but they have basically ignored my response to the letter above asking for clarification in favour of sending a copy of the NIP stating that I have failed to respond satisfactorily within the 28 day period blah blah. So do I wait for the court summons to drop through the door and hope they don't have enough evidence or do I just give in and say it was me driving?

Grrr, This really grates. I'm really up for fighting it, anyone know how much its likely to cost me? Presumably fighting could also affect the amount of points that might be received?

[road-law]

If you genuinely do not know who was driving and have no way of finding out then you have a defence to the charge. If you have to fight it in court then the cost would be about £500, but this may be recoverable from Court funds and a decent solicitor will probably prevent the matter ever getting this far. Check out our panel if you need one, plus our fixed fee tel advice (£40)- www.road-law.co.uk

[jeffreyarcher]

zoom_jones said:

No NIP for failure to supply yet

You won't get one. Probably another threatening letter(s), but not neccessarily.

zoom_jones said:

but they have basically ignored my response to the letter above asking for clarification in favour of sending a copy of the NIP stating that I have failed to respond satisfactorily within the 28 day period blah blah. So do I wait for the court summons to drop through the door and hope they don't have enough evidence

In order to have a reasonable chance of defending it (S172) on the sub-section(4) (reasonable diligence) defence, you should, in practice, endeavour to show exceptional diligence. This is because the magistrates invariably ignore what the law says and apply a higher threshold.

zoom_jones said:

or do I just give in and say it was me driving?

Unfortunately, it's not that easy; although many people just do that because it seems easiest, there is the possibility of an attempt to pervert charge if it comes out that you were not the driver.
There was such a case (Hampshire IIRC) reported on http://news.bbc.co.uk a couple of months back.
It appears that the CTO picked up from the photo that the 'admitting' person could not have been the driver (wrong sex perhaps?).

zoom_jones said:

Presumably fighting could also affect the amount of points that might be received?

Max. points for s172 is three. They can ban you though.

[zoom_jones]

Many Thanks for the info. Guess I'll just keep showing exceptional diligence and see how far it gets.

Will keep you posted!

[jeffreyarcher]

One good thing to do, is to provide a list of the details of the drivers who it might have been.
You should maintain a record of all correspondence (sent & received) with the scammers. Use recorded delivery. They often 'lose' things.

[3dslwebber]

Ive just been to court on Tuesday with this exact issue. If you have to go to court ensure that you have shown complete diligence in trying toi establish the driver. Thats what the magistrate is interested in. Keep all letters sent to the police as evidence for your case.

My closing statement was that "i feel that Northampton Police have railroaded me into either holding my hands up to something which may not have been me [which is perverting the course of justice] or come into court and explain to your worships how Ive been treated"

After a 10 second discussion they agreed to drop the case. The Prosecutor looked pretty uninterested anyway.
Good luck mate.
Regards
Clarkee
www.fduk.org

[Balmoral Green]

Just out of interest, what happens if you send the nip back promptly identifying the driver as a Nigerian friend who was over in the UK for a few weeks and is now in Ulan Bator doing missionary work, his home address is:

Mr Mwengi De Silver, Apartments del Scorchio # 346, Avenue de la Constitution, Buenos Aires, Argentina.
If no luck there, try him at his mums house.

What I mean is, how far do they go if you provide details of who was driving and they cant trace them?

>> Edited by Balmoral Green on Friday 23 April 21:12