FAO Turbo Pete

[Wacko]

Need some of your advice mate, a friend of mine has just recieved a NIP through the post saying he was doing 42 in a 30 zone.

Now seeing as the NIP was only delivered normal post could he gamble and just ignore it and say " must have got lost in the post " or should he just take 3 points and £ 60 fixed penalty on the chin.

Would greatly appreciate any advice ! :confused: :confused:

[turbo pete]

Dunno about that. I will have to check up on that. can I get back to you.

Thinkin of the top of my head I guess he could do that. Before they can prosecute they would have to inform of their intention anyway. The NIP will merely be asking him to name the driver.

I would risk it and see what happens. I can think of many more spanners to throw in the works if they came back with another NIP.

I will check with my mags friend tomorrow.

Turbo pete

[Billy]

Yeah, it has to be recorded delivery.

I saw a programme about speeding tickets a while back, and I think they were saying that it costs more money to send NIP's recorded than they recover by doing so. Most people just pay up so there's no financial sense in it, though it does leave you feeling slightly guilty, and sorry (and thankful!) for the naive honest citizens who don't know any better....

[Wacko]

Cheers ta fella ! :) :) :)

[PhilMorrison]

I've just recieved a court date for doing this, I'm being charged for the 84 in a 60 and not replying to the NIP, I never recieved an NIP tho ;) so does any1 know what I should do? I'd like to be able to go into court and say " as stated in section Blah blah blah, of blah blah blah, the NIP must be recieved within 14 after the offence, proof of reciept is required to prove that this is the case, Blah blah blah etc etc" :) AAAAAAny1? :)

[JackaL]

Originally posted by fattyluvshotdogs
I've just recieved a court date for doing this, I'm being charged for the 84 in a 60 and not replying to the NIP, I never recieved an NIP tho ;) so does any1 know what I should do? I'd like to be able to go into court and say " as stated in section Blah blah blah, of blah blah blah, the NIP must be recieved within 14 after the offence, proof of reciept is required to prove that this is the case, Blah blah blah etc etc" :) AAAAAAny1? :)

Errr, if they can't prove you received it... i.e. recorded delivery, you ough to be ok. Although some magistrates are fcukwits who side with the fascist police :mad:

You could also argue that the police didn't take all reasonable steps to ensure it reached you within 14 days (no recorded delivery), and claim that outside the 14 day time period you get away scott free. The words to stress there are REASONABLE STEPS to ENSURE it reached you within 14 DAYS. I'm sure Turbo Pete will tell you what section of the road traffic fascist bullsiht shyte cracpt that is in.

Then get some figures from the post office about lost mail...

But being a motorist, you are always guilty until proven innocent :mad: Fight them with every last breath you have.

Or, do what <ahem> a friend of mine did and blame it on someone else, who doesn't live at the address he specified, and where the new owners don't know where he lives... Especially good if the person specified is a crack addict criminal who the police know all too well and loathe immensely...

Good luck, and if you need a witness, I'm your man.

"I steal ALL his mail, officer" - for which the penalty is probably a £5 fine :rolleyes: - as it's a PROPER crime :mad:

Or, sell your points - I had 2 offers to take my last lot for some money and 3 years increased insurance premium! :)

PM me mate for more ideas, I hate the fascist police barstewards and their picking on easy prey motoristsmore than anyone I know!

They even had speed traps up on our local fast road, I had a chat with the officer, who claimed it was for safety (bollocx!). Even though the van was unmarked! 1 week later 4 people die late one night - when all their traps had been during rush hour to get the most people/revenue! :mad:

[turbo pete]

Ok give me a mo. I have been off work today so I haven't had chance to chat about it woth my mag friend.

However, i will check my RTR act about NIPS.

Back in a tick

[turbo pete]

Prepare to be bored sh1tless.

Taken from theRoad traffic offenders act 1988

Part I
Trial


Introductory

Requirement of warning etc. of prosecutions for certain offences.

1.—(1) Subject to section 2 of this Act, where a person is prosecuted for an offence to which this section applies, he is not to be convicted unless—
(a) he was warned at the time the offence was committed that the question of prosecuting him for some one or other of the offences to which this section applies would be taken into consideration, or
(b) within fourteen days of the commission of the offence a summons (or, in Scotland, a complaint) for the offence was served on him, or
(c) within fourteen days of the commission of the offence a notice of the intended prosecution specifying the nature of the alleged offence and the time and place where it is alleged to have been committed, was—
(i) in the case of an offence under section 28 or 29 of the [1988 c. 52.] Road Traffic Act 1988 (cycling offences), served on him,
(ii) in the case of any other offence, served on him or on the person, if any, registered as the keeper of the vehicle at the time of the commission of the offence.
(2) A notice shall be deemed for the purposes of subsection (1)(c) above to have been served on a person if it was sent by registered post or recorded delivery service addressed to him at his last known address, notwithstanding that the notice was returned as undelivered or was for any other reason not received by him.

(3) The requirement of subsection (1) above shall in every case be deemed to have been complied with unless and until the contrary is proved.

(4) Schedule 1 to this Act shows the offences to which this section applies.

Requirement of warning etc: supplementary.

2.—(1) The requirement of section 1(1) of this Act does not apply in relation to an offence if, at the time of the offence or immediately after it, an accident occurs owing to the presence on a road of the vehicle in respect of which the offence was committed.

(2) The requirement of section 1(1) of this Act does not apply in relation to an offence in respect of which—
(a) a fixed penalty notice (within the meaning of Part III of this Act) has been given or fixed under any provision of that Part, or
(b) a notice has been given under section 54(4) of this Act.
(3) Failure to comply with the requirement of section 1(1) of this Act is not a bar to the conviction of the accused in a case where the court is satisfied—
(a) that neither the name and address of the accused nor the name and address of the registered keeper, if any, could with reasonable diligence have been ascertained in time for a summons or, as the case may be, a complaint to be served or for a notice to be served or sent in compliance with the requirement, or
(b) that the accused by his own conduct contributed to the failure.
(4) Where a person is prosecuted on indictment in England and Wales—
(a) for an offence to which section 1 of this Act does not apply, or
(b) for an offence to which that section does apply, but as respects which the requirement of subsection (1) of that section has been satisfied,
that subsection does not prejudice any power of the jury on the charge for that offence, if they find him not guilty of it, to find him guilty of an offence under section 2 or 3 of the [1988 c. 52.] Road Traffic Act 1988 (reckless driving or careless or inconsiderate driving).

(5) In Scotland a person may be convicted of an offence under section 2 of that Act by virtue of section 23(1) or (2) of this Act notwithstanding that the requirement of section 1(1) of this Act has not been satisfied as respects that offence.

(6) A person may be convicted of an offence under section 3 or 29 of that Act (careless and inconsiderate driving or careless and inconsiderate cycling) notwithstanding that the requirement of section 1(1) of this Act has not been satisfied as respects that offence where—
(a) the charge for the offence has been preferred against him by virtue of section 24(3) of this Act, and
(b) that requirement has been satisfied as respects the alleged offence under section 2 or, as the case may be, 28 of that Act (reckless driving or reckless cycling).

[turbo pete]

So they have to inform you within 14 days. Inpractice some courts have allowed 17 days allowing for postage. I would argue this though in person. The law quite clearly says 14days irrespective of the state of the postage system.


What else...


A notice shall be deemed for the purposes of subsection (1)(c) above to have been served on a person if it was sent by registered post or recorded delivery service addressed to him at his last known address, notwithstanding that the notice was returned as undelivered or was for any other reason not received by him.

meaning normal post doesn't count. Your wife or flat mate didn't sign ofr it did they? Or a neighbour? And I assume you haven't changed your address lately and not told DVLA?

So I would wait until 14 days is up.

Then do nothing.


When they write again reply with a letter stating that since you never recieved the original NIP unless they can provide evidence of a recorded delivery or registered post they have failed to comply with RTR Act 1988 Part 1 Para 1c and Para 2. In effect they have failed to comply with the requirment to warn you of possible prosecution.


I like the way they put
(3) The requirement of subsection (1) above shall in every case be deemed to have been complied with unless and until the contrary is proved.

How the Fu** are you supposed to prove they didn't send you mail recorded or registered. Surely the onus is on them to provide evidence they did.



Horse sh1te. I hate law. It is bullsh1t.
And coppers too.
but I hate CPS the most. They are suppposed to be educated professioanls and they couldn't organise a pi22 up in a brewery.

[PhilMorrison]

Cheers m8, thats fantastic :)
What the feck is registered post tho? I know what Recorded delivery is!

[turbo pete]

Spoke to mags friend today. He will get back to me.

[Wacko]

Great stuff :D :D :D

Just suppose you were out of the country , say on holiday for 3 weeks though how might you stand then ?
cheers

[JackaL]

So, my friends, if you get a NIP via normal post

BIN IT

And the police WILL go over the 14 day limit... :D

lol!

If everyone in the country knew that, either the law would change PRETTY DAMN FAST, or the conviction of all speeding motorists would collapse, or the filthy pig scum s**t eating m***** f****** would have to fork out extra cash for recorded delivery... which would make me laugh! :)

[Wacko]

How can you say that ? I think our Police do a wonderful job , where would we be without them !!!! :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

[Johnny]

Nepal probably .. or other anarchistic states where justice is served through mob gangs and ethnic cleansing.

I am sure that would so much more preferable to you ;)