Mum got an NIP, 40 in a 30 but the letter is LATE
Discussion
PistonHeaders! Once again if I may call on your expertise. Here are the details.
Offence date: 25/04/2012
Date of letter for NIP: 02/05/2012
Received letter for NIP: 15/05/2012
That's 20 days after the *OFFENCE* but 13 days after the letter of NIP.
It's a private vehicle, registered in her name and she was driving at the time.
So is that they have 14 days after the *OFFENCE* to serve NIP to her or after the date on the LETTER of NIP?
If it after the date of the offence, how does she go about getting rid of it?
How does she prove that she received the letter on the 15th? How do they prove she DIDN'T? It wasn't sent recorded delivery.
On the 'helpful' information sheet they provided (and this is why I hated the UK so much I moved to the US), they provided lots of little bits of information about how all the get out clauses are invalid and how you are still bang to rights but there is ZERO information about what you can do and your rights if the ticket *IS* invalid.
Here is the appropriate section word for word and bolded in the same places:
- My notice arrived more than 14 days after the alleged offence. Is it still valid?
The NIP is initially issued and posted to the registered owner/keeper, according to the details held by the DVLA, within 14 days of the alleged offence. Postal delay will not invalidate service. The registered owner/keeper has the responsibility to ensure that all the details held by the DVLA are correct. This time limit does not apply to any NIP subsequently issued to a named driver, hirer or owner who has been nominated or following further Police enquires. Please be aware that even though your driving license may have the correct address, your vehicle registration document (V5) may not. Also, although you may be a "long lease" hirer of a vehicle, the vehicle may possibly be registered to the hire company and not you as an individual.
Lovely and helpful isn't?
Tells you exactly how in all those instances the NIP is still VALID but at NO POINT does it confirm when the NIP is INVALID, like say, receiving it MORE than 14 days after.
So your advice is much appreciated ladies and gentlemen! I'll feed this back to mum though she'll probably panic and just pay it or comply because that's what the government has taught us to be, good little citizens and that they are never wrong and to never fight the system.
Yes, it's because of things like this that made me hate the UK *so much* that I didn't want to live there anyway, I actually have more rights here in the US believe it or not.
Offence date: 25/04/2012
Date of letter for NIP: 02/05/2012
Received letter for NIP: 15/05/2012
That's 20 days after the *OFFENCE* but 13 days after the letter of NIP.
It's a private vehicle, registered in her name and she was driving at the time.
So is that they have 14 days after the *OFFENCE* to serve NIP to her or after the date on the LETTER of NIP?
If it after the date of the offence, how does she go about getting rid of it?
How does she prove that she received the letter on the 15th? How do they prove she DIDN'T? It wasn't sent recorded delivery.
On the 'helpful' information sheet they provided (and this is why I hated the UK so much I moved to the US), they provided lots of little bits of information about how all the get out clauses are invalid and how you are still bang to rights but there is ZERO information about what you can do and your rights if the ticket *IS* invalid.
Here is the appropriate section word for word and bolded in the same places:
- My notice arrived more than 14 days after the alleged offence. Is it still valid?
The NIP is initially issued and posted to the registered owner/keeper, according to the details held by the DVLA, within 14 days of the alleged offence. Postal delay will not invalidate service. The registered owner/keeper has the responsibility to ensure that all the details held by the DVLA are correct. This time limit does not apply to any NIP subsequently issued to a named driver, hirer or owner who has been nominated or following further Police enquires. Please be aware that even though your driving license may have the correct address, your vehicle registration document (V5) may not. Also, although you may be a "long lease" hirer of a vehicle, the vehicle may possibly be registered to the hire company and not you as an individual.
Lovely and helpful isn't?
Tells you exactly how in all those instances the NIP is still VALID but at NO POINT does it confirm when the NIP is INVALID, like say, receiving it MORE than 14 days after.
So your advice is much appreciated ladies and gentlemen! I'll feed this back to mum though she'll probably panic and just pay it or comply because that's what the government has taught us to be, good little citizens and that they are never wrong and to never fight the system.
Yes, it's because of things like this that made me hate the UK *so much* that I didn't want to live there anyway, I actually have more rights here in the US believe it or not.
This is the only thing I can think they'll do, just claim the mail was delayed or that she received it earlier.
I find it interesting that they DON'T have to send it recorded delivery, again it's one rule for them and another for us.
I'll continually urge people to leave the UK and move elsewhere, I do not hide the fact that I hate that country even though I've lived there for 30 years.
Forgot to add Pepipoo post: http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=7057...
I find it interesting that they DON'T have to send it recorded delivery, again it's one rule for them and another for us.
I'll continually urge people to leave the UK and move elsewhere, I do not hide the fact that I hate that country even though I've lived there for 30 years.
Forgot to add Pepipoo post: http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=7057...
This does help thank you!
Also, the envelope is prepaid with NO date markings on it, again I'm guessing they (the establishment) hoped to do this so as to be able to stop anyone from saying that the letter wasn't in time and they could in fact now send it whenever the hell they felt like it and you still had to comply.
Notice my theme of contempt against 'the establishment' and how they've engineered everything so that in 99% of cases, you're f
ked...
And we're attacking other countries for their lack of human rights? Seems ironic to me...
Also, the envelope is prepaid with NO date markings on it, again I'm guessing they (the establishment) hoped to do this so as to be able to stop anyone from saying that the letter wasn't in time and they could in fact now send it whenever the hell they felt like it and you still had to comply.
Notice my theme of contempt against 'the establishment' and how they've engineered everything so that in 99% of cases, you're f
ked...And we're attacking other countries for their lack of human rights? Seems ironic to me...
WhereamI said:
Of course she could just accept her guilt, pay the fine and move on without trying to wriggle out on a technicality. A guess that since you rant about the British justice system you've yet to get the wrong side of the US one, good luck to you if you do.
Bless you, you're one of those.... Good luck with the world you and your people want to create and choose to live in, also I didn't ask for your moral advice, I asked for LEGAL advice which as it currently seems, she has a LEGAL RIGHT to contend the ticket since a LAW has been broken by the constabulary and she would not be 'wriggling out on a technicality', this is LAW set by them, not us. You people scare me the most as you've already been brain washed into just bending over and accepting what is dished out to you with no questions asked. You've already given up the fight, please don't try and suddenly try and find it again here in this thread.
Everything I have stated in this thread is factual and all information has been taken from the letter sent to Mummy Dearest, there is no interpretation of the events, it was an automatic camera that caught her and at no point has she or I ever disputed the possibility that she was actually speeding but that's not what I am asking here.
And I'm glad I'm not the only one that thought that WhereamI was talking utter tosh. Again thank you all for your help.
And I'm glad I'm not the only one that thought that WhereamI was talking utter tosh. Again thank you all for your help.
Zeeky said:
Simple and incorrect. It is based on the premise that if the defendant raises a defence then the prosecution have to disprove it. The legislation and indeed the case law creates this particular defence as one that the defendant must prove.
The Interpretation Act 1978 uses the words "unless the contrary is proved"
In cases where the defendant has to prove his defence he need do so only on the balance of probabilities and not to the criminal standard.
I must say I have no desire to assist an expat who slags off his country's criminal justice system having chosen to live in one with a relatively corrupt system. He may learn that in time.
I do appreciate your help, just for balance I never said the US doesn't have it's own issues, this much is glaringly obvious to me in the month and a half I've been here however, perhaps I should clarify, in the specifics of traffic/road law I have significantly more rights here to defend myself than I do in the UK, also the entire system here (in regards to traffic/road laws) isn't quite obviously engineered to generate profit with little regard for ACTUAL road safety.The Interpretation Act 1978 uses the words "unless the contrary is proved"
In cases where the defendant has to prove his defence he need do so only on the balance of probabilities and not to the criminal standard.
I must say I have no desire to assist an expat who slags off his country's criminal justice system having chosen to live in one with a relatively corrupt system. He may learn that in time.
Yet.
I can already see the signs it's going that way here, but I'm not sorry I'm not deeply patriotic about something that is broke and continues to get worse, I'm not going to make excuses for 'my country' when its government continues to royally f
k it up. As a genuine question, what is your experience of being/living in the US and what area?'He' knows the corruption already, do you believe this is unique to the US and not the UK? When (not if) you get so utterly fed up with the way things are headed there in the UK, go and do what all the other people who have the option do and leave the country (note: everyone has the option).
Wow, lots of stuff.
Thank you ALL again for your help (and opinions).
Zeeky, whilst I DO think staying is a poor choice, I concede that trying to impress my opinion on you is a little uncalled for and as such I'll certainly apologise for that. Didn't you sort of suggest that my decision to move to the US in particular was a poor one as well though
As for the S172 (if I am correct in understanding that is the form for telling them who was driving) I do whole heatedly believe it is completely and utterly wrong, against human rights, completely against the spirit of innocent until proven guilty and having the right to remain silent, no matter how you cut it. How this has even been allowed to pass here I don't know, especially when we bang on about other places and their human rights, this has NO place here in our country.
It is self implicating/admitting guilt without any need for them to prove it. I'm sure there can be many analogies AGAINST my one but to me it's like being a member of an club (like a gym or something), the Police taking a photo of the outside of that gym currently being robbed and without doing ANY other further investigation, writing you a letter because you are a member of that gym asking you to tell them who robbed it or, they'll arrest you for robbing your gym regardless because they don't NEED any further proof?
And wasn't something recently passed that suggested that if you went to court, even if you were proven innocent you'd STILL be responsible for all the costs? Whhhaaaaaaaaaaaaat?! Seriously wtf?! How are we not up in arms about this?!
As for all the whiny, if she's guilty she's guilty Gestapo, seriously, fk off Heed the phrase "live by the sword, die by the sword", I don't CARE if she is guilty regardless, they have ruled a situation that gives legal right to reject an NIP, end of argument. If you choose not to exercise that right then like I said, you've given up your choice to fight, don't try and fight your point here, I'm not interested.
And lastly, like I said, everything is factual, there is no 'if the OP is telling the truth', if the NIP WASN'T late, why on earth would I waste my time creating a thread? I would have told mother dearest to just sign the form and hope to god that they offer her the get out of jail free *COUGH* sorry, 'Speed Awareness Course', end of story.
Thank you ALL again for your help (and opinions).
Zeeky, whilst I DO think staying is a poor choice, I concede that trying to impress my opinion on you is a little uncalled for and as such I'll certainly apologise for that. Didn't you sort of suggest that my decision to move to the US in particular was a poor one as well though
As for the S172 (if I am correct in understanding that is the form for telling them who was driving) I do whole heatedly believe it is completely and utterly wrong, against human rights, completely against the spirit of innocent until proven guilty and having the right to remain silent, no matter how you cut it. How this has even been allowed to pass here I don't know, especially when we bang on about other places and their human rights, this has NO place here in our country.
It is self implicating/admitting guilt without any need for them to prove it. I'm sure there can be many analogies AGAINST my one but to me it's like being a member of an club (like a gym or something), the Police taking a photo of the outside of that gym currently being robbed and without doing ANY other further investigation, writing you a letter because you are a member of that gym asking you to tell them who robbed it or, they'll arrest you for robbing your gym regardless because they don't NEED any further proof?
And wasn't something recently passed that suggested that if you went to court, even if you were proven innocent you'd STILL be responsible for all the costs? Whhhaaaaaaaaaaaaat?! Seriously wtf?! How are we not up in arms about this?!
As for all the whiny, if she's guilty she's guilty Gestapo, seriously, f
k off Heed the phrase "live by the sword, die by the sword", I don't CARE if she is guilty regardless, they have ruled a situation that gives legal right to reject an NIP, end of argument. If you choose not to exercise that right then like I said, you've given up your choice to fight, don't try and fight your point here, I'm not interested.And lastly, like I said, everything is factual, there is no 'if the OP is telling the truth', if the NIP WASN'T late, why on earth would I waste my time creating a thread? I would have told mother dearest to just sign the form and hope to god that they offer her the get out of jail free *COUGH* sorry, 'Speed Awareness Course', end of story.
Yes, perhaps I should update, she has sent the form back naming herself as the driver.
In addition to sending that back she has written a letter noting that the NIP was delivered late. Whilst this is not proper procedure she on her own thought this couldn't hurt, she has also spoken to a solicitor.
Whilst in most cases people just want to vent and think they have a case against their speeding ticket/conviction/whatever, as I have done myself in the past but amounted to just signing off the forms whilst grumbling, my mum genuinely has a case since the letter was delivered outside of the 14 days. Whether or not this is something she is going to be able to prove is another matter entirely, hats off to her for having a spine though at 65, unlike quite a few people in here it seems.
In addition to sending that back she has written a letter noting that the NIP was delivered late. Whilst this is not proper procedure she on her own thought this couldn't hurt, she has also spoken to a solicitor.
Whilst in most cases people just want to vent and think they have a case against their speeding ticket/conviction/whatever, as I have done myself in the past but amounted to just signing off the forms whilst grumbling, my mum genuinely has a case since the letter was delivered outside of the 14 days. Whether or not this is something she is going to be able to prove is another matter entirely, hats off to her for having a spine though at 65, unlike quite a few people in here it seems.
vonhosen said:
Sec 172 & the NIP are different things. Human rights courts have looked at Sec 172 & they don't agree with you. You don't have to tell them who robbed the gym, you have to tell them who was at the gym. They have to provide evidence of any robbing going on. Going gym isn't regulated, driving a car is. I've had lots of Sec 172's, I've named myself as the driver where I was, but that doesn't mean I was admitting an offence or guilty of it. It was still up to them to prove.
Re NIP, If she can rebutt the presumption of service to that satisfaction of the CPS/court then it's going no further, if she can't (to their satisfaction, not anyone else here) then that's a different matter.
No, you're missing mine and several other people's point. The semantics of it all is completely and utterly irrelevant in regards to mine and the other people's view who can think for themselves.Re NIP, If she can rebutt the presumption of service to that satisfaction of the CPS/court then it's going no further, if she can't (to their satisfaction, not anyone else here) then that's a different matter.
I don't care for the fact they are two different things, nor do I care for the fact that the system has been fudged enough to get the court of human rights to agree with them, no matter how you cut it, it IS against human rights and it doesn't have a place in civilised society, just because it has become, doesn't mean to say it's right or... are you 'one of those' again
Sure 'in theory' you aren't telling them who robbed the gym they need to prove otherwise however, it's splitting hairs because as far as they are concerned they have already proved *someone* was robbing the gym, they're just making you tell them who and *purely* based on that and with NO FURTHER EVIDENCE they'll prosecute. Does that not sound even the slightest bit crazy to you? If not again, you scare me.
Without that knowledge and without them having implemented a system where by they can legally FORCE you to tell them, they wouldn't have enough to implicate anyone, it would never stand up in court, that's WHY they have created this system.
Do you not see that this entire thing has been engineered so that the house always wins? What other businesses work that way and use that term, there for purely making money out of people with no actual other purpose? Do you understand what I'm trying to say?
Or like, in this very instance it doesn't matter if THEY have screwed up and genuinely sent the letter late and broken their very own laws, it doesn't matter because you can't win. Do you not see how their system is completely and utterly open to falsification (this is the wrong word but I'm really not literate enough to think of it this second).... for them?
Got it yet?
Got it yet?
Snowboy said:
I totally understand what you are saying, I just totally disagree with you.
Breaking a law such as speeding (or robbing the gym) is a crime.
Sending a letter 6 days late is a procedural screw up.
I would rather concentrate on the crime rather than the procedure.
I fully understand that the law doesn’t always work this way, but I always find it amusing when a judge dismisses a defence that’s based on nothing but a procedural technicality.
I’m reminded of a case where the police reports said 2AM on the 4th of July.
The entire defence was it was actually 2AM on the 5th of July because it was after midnight.
The Judge just accepted that everyone knew what date it occurred even it was written incorrectly so it didn’t matter.
Okay so, what if there was no actual law that said they had to send NIP within a certain date? Shouldn't matter right because GUILTY IS GUILTY! Breaking a law such as speeding (or robbing the gym) is a crime.
Sending a letter 6 days late is a procedural screw up.
I would rather concentrate on the crime rather than the procedure.
I fully understand that the law doesn’t always work this way, but I always find it amusing when a judge dismisses a defence that’s based on nothing but a procedural technicality.
I’m reminded of a case where the police reports said 2AM on the 4th of July.
The entire defence was it was actually 2AM on the 5th of July because it was after midnight.
The Judge just accepted that everyone knew what date it occurred even it was written incorrectly so it didn’t matter.
Who was driving your car two months ago at 6pm on Thursday March the 1st?
Okay, YOU might be able to genuinely answer that question, I have five people insured on my car, my mum has five people insured on her car, both cars are identical in *every* regard except the number plate, heck I'm not even in the country right now and I genuinely don't know who is driving MY car at any point although I have expressly given permission for all 4 other people to drive it.
What it's genuinely impossible for me to remember/find out two months ago who was driving it? What if all 4 other drivers refuse to tell me who was driving it?
Do you still believe it is right that I be prosecuted on principle even though I'm not even in the same country *JUST* because they've engineered at system for traffic offences that means they don't HAVE to prove *beyond reasonable doubt* who actually caused the offence?
If they don't HAVE to send it within a specified time, should I be forced to?
What happens if ALL evidence is based purely on a Police Officer's opinion and he entirely chose to falsify it because he didn't get a morning blow job that day?
You're so blinded and brain washed by the system that you actually defend something so broken to the point that you cannot even conceive the idea that maybe, just maybe, there are other genuinely possibilities for being innocent or that simply, they've got it wrong?
It may not have happened to you but it has happened to me. Yeah yeah I know, they all say they are innocent but what if, I could actually prove I was innocent and that a Police Officer lied but oh... They've designed another system whereby NO EVIDENCE is required and worse THERE IS NO APPEAL.....
Still sound like you live in a civilised society where you believe you actually have rights? Because it sure doesn't seem like it to me...
Oh, just to update you (and wind up the 'SHE IS GUILTY AND SHOULD DO TIME' brigade)... the Police dropped it, not only that they wrote a letter apologising.
Faith, somewhat restored. Have fun
Edited to add: Thank you to those who provided very useful information and *constructive* criticism... and I'm not talking about the ones that believe unquestionably in our government/police force.
Faith, somewhat restored. Have fun
Edited to add: Thank you to those who provided very useful information and *constructive* criticism... and I'm not talking about the ones that believe unquestionably in our government/police force.
Edited by Moogle on Wednesday 13th June 09:40
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff