Incorrect NIP - advice please
Discussion
I've just got a NIP for doing 72mph on the A339 near Alton. Not a big deal as I have a clean license.
The trouble is the NIP states the speed limit as 30MPH. I've been back and checked, there are no posted limits and no lamp posts so it must be a 60 limit? In which case, what do I do about the NIP? Should I attempt to get it re-issued with the correct limit on it or do I just fill it in and return it?
The trouble is the NIP states the speed limit as 30MPH. I've been back and checked, there are no posted limits and no lamp posts so it must be a 60 limit? In which case, what do I do about the NIP? Should I attempt to get it re-issued with the correct limit on it or do I just fill it in and return it?
thanuk said:
I've just got a NIP for doing 72mph on the A339 near Alton.
The trouble is the NIP states the speed limit as 30MPH. I've been back and checked, there are no posted limits and no lamp posts so it must be a 60 limit? In which case, what do I do about the NIP? Should I attempt to get it re-issued with the correct limit on it or do I just fill it in and return it?
Say nothing. They will just fix it.
With a bit of luck (unlikely) the error will continue all the way through to the summons.
Even if the summons is correct, you may be successful with the defence that the NIP was sufficiently inaccurate that you were 'misled'.
There are two elements in this. Firstly the requirement by law to serve, for the offence of speeding , a NOIP within 14 days and, secondly, a Conditional Offer when the drivers identity is established to either accept the offence and have it dealt with within 28 days or elect for a Court date in the future. There is a tendency to blur both together which is not strictly correct.
On the NOIP side, as far back as 1905 in the case Beresford v St Albans JJ it was established that the NOIP was intended to give an idea of the OFFENCE of which the defendant will be accused and to guard against the possibility of being taken unawares. This was repeated in R v Bilton 1964. The NOIP only has to say .....prosecution for exceeding a speed limit.... without stating Act and Section. The NOIP mentioned does outline the offence of speed, so there is an good argument that it is valid despite the defect alleged as to what limit infringed. (JA - have look at Percival v Ball 1937 where the NOIP'able offence was not outlined and still held to be good service)
As to what limit was infringed then the Conditional Offer part should give the Act and section involved. E.g. Sect 81 Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 (30 mph restricted road) or The 70,60, 50 (Temporary Speed Limit) Order 1977 and Section 86 and Schedule 6 RTRA 84 (National Speed Limits).
As admitted a limit has been exceeded. So we do nothing and await a summons, (there is still the obligation to name the driver) which may or may not bear correct details. If not then IIRC correctly in relation to the defect in the summons then CPS can make an application there and then and have the summons amended. So Their Worships are going to put the black cap on.
So what do you do?. Springs to mind the first thing is to establish what limit has been infringed and then, because of some confusion mentioned, read up on signing at various sites elsewhere to see if it is correct. If you cannot come up with a signing defect, on the premis that nothing ventured nothing gained, wait for 14 days from receipt of the Forms and then write back explaining the defect which in your opinion invalidates the procedure. It might work and they may drop the matter or they may repeat the Conditional Offer when consideration can be given to accepting.
DVD
On the NOIP side, as far back as 1905 in the case Beresford v St Albans JJ it was established that the NOIP was intended to give an idea of the OFFENCE of which the defendant will be accused and to guard against the possibility of being taken unawares. This was repeated in R v Bilton 1964. The NOIP only has to say .....prosecution for exceeding a speed limit.... without stating Act and Section. The NOIP mentioned does outline the offence of speed, so there is an good argument that it is valid despite the defect alleged as to what limit infringed. (JA - have look at Percival v Ball 1937 where the NOIP'able offence was not outlined and still held to be good service)
As to what limit was infringed then the Conditional Offer part should give the Act and section involved. E.g. Sect 81 Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 (30 mph restricted road) or The 70,60, 50 (Temporary Speed Limit) Order 1977 and Section 86 and Schedule 6 RTRA 84 (National Speed Limits).
As admitted a limit has been exceeded. So we do nothing and await a summons, (there is still the obligation to name the driver) which may or may not bear correct details. If not then IIRC correctly in relation to the defect in the summons then CPS can make an application there and then and have the summons amended. So Their Worships are going to put the black cap on.
So what do you do?. Springs to mind the first thing is to establish what limit has been infringed and then, because of some confusion mentioned, read up on signing at various sites elsewhere to see if it is correct. If you cannot come up with a signing defect, on the premis that nothing ventured nothing gained, wait for 14 days from receipt of the Forms and then write back explaining the defect which in your opinion invalidates the procedure. It might work and they may drop the matter or they may repeat the Conditional Offer when consideration can be given to accepting.
DVD
thanuk said:
I don't see anything stating a conditional offer - just a place to write my driving license number and sign. Does this mean no conditional offer is being made?
Unfortunately, it's not possible to tell.
Some areas send the conditional offer with the NIP, some only send it on receipt of a returned NIP admiitting to be the driver.
However, in this case, if they think (which they appear to do) that the speed was 72 in a 30, a conditional offer would not be made at all because of the seriousness of the infringement. That is a possible reason to make them aware of their error. But wait 14 days and see above comments before making the decision.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff