NIP not here after 19 days is it....

[MisterTommyH]

Went past a scamera van on the 15th December and still haven't received anything.

Have I been lucky, or do you reckon it's still in the post - caught up in the Christmas Rush?

Also does anyone know if the 14 days that they have to post is workings days or days full-stop? As someone has pointed out there have been a lot of bank holidays.

[_Stretchie_]

It took them six months to getting around to doing me in 2006.

I was pulled by da rozzers and not flashed by a scamera.

Just thought it may be useful to know

Sent from my Desire HD using Tapatalk

[MisterTommyH]

Yeah, but the discussion with the feds can be counted as a verbal NIP.

Thanks for the confidence in the voting so far guys...... glass half full people are we.....?

[SpikeTM]

Went past a scamera van on the 15th December and still haven't received anything.

Have I been lucky, or do you reckon it's still in the post - caught up in the Christmas Rush?

Also does anyone know if the 14 days that they have to post is workings days or days full-stop? As someone has pointed out there have been a lot of bank holidays.

They have up to six months to issue it :-dd

[victor_meldrew]

Usually they get the NIP's out in the post pronto - so you would receive after 12 - 14 days ,,, but they DO have up to six months to issue (although its rare), so yours may have been delayed by Christmas, Bank Hols etc ... I'd give it another couple of weeks before starting to breathe again !

Unless of course the rules are different for being stopped by an officer and flashed by an 'impersonal' camera ...?

[christopher]

They have up to six months to issue it :-dd
Really? Isn't the 6 months if you've been stopped and given a verbal NIP?

As far as I was aware in this situation (speed camera van and not being stopped at the roadside) then the NIP must be served to the registered keeper within 14 calendar days excluding the date of offence and no leeway is given for weekends, bank holidays or postal strikes. See 'Gidden v Chief Constable of Humberside (2009)'.

I might be talking complete rubbish so don't take this as gospel. And I voted that it's in the post just to annoy you :p

[MisterTommyH]

Cheers Chris :rolleyes:

But I agree with your argument that as I haven't been stopped I have no way of knowing of an intended prosecution (other than the fact that I went past the van).

They have 14 days to send the NIP to who they reasonably suspect is the registered keeper (or some legal gubbins) - which is me at my home address because they manage to send my tax renewal here every 6 months.

I think they then have 6 months to start a prosecution if they want (statute of limitations?).

I'm betting it comes through the post tomorrow now, but I'm still going to keep hoping.

[-Ralph-]

Tommy and Christopher are correct about the 6 months (kind of), Spike and Victor are not. In the case of a speeding fine from a scamera, to be deemed to have delivered on time, they need have to have posted the NIP such that it can reasonably be expected to reach the registered keeper within 14 days. Even then it is not clear cut. Only when it's dated more than 14 days from the offence, even though it could never have been expected to reach you by that date by post, does it become clear cut. If dated more than 14 days after the offence, write back to them stating that the NIP is 'time barred'.

You have not been given an NIP at the time of the offence. Only for offences where an officer may have to do further investigation before deciding whether he intends to prosecute, such as DWDC, would they have up to six months to issue an NIP and bring the prosecution before the courts. Speeding is not such an offence.

They are not subject to postal delays, etc, which are created around christmas, so you are not in the clear yet.

If the NIP arrives you'll need to see when it was dated.

[Lozzo]

Just to clarify one important point. The date of NIP issue is just that, a date of issue. The 14 days that reference is made to is only in regard to the date the NIP is issued from the date of the alleged offence, which means the day the NIP was sent from the ticket office, not the date you receive it.

If you do not receive the NIP this is not an excuse for not acting on it - you're supposed to know that an NIP was sent and lost in the post, or not sent at all because someone dropped it under a filing cabinet... I mean, after all we're all bloody mind readers, so what's our excuse. Believe me the law is going to win every time, they have covered all bases. It does not matter one bit if you say it wasn't sent, all the ticket office has to do is say they did send it. They need no proof, no registered post, no recorded delivery etc etc - if they say they sent it then that is good enough for the court and whatever you say will be ignored. Of course, the likes of you and I don't stand a chance when the odds are stacked so high against you, because there's nothing you or I can do to prove the ticket office never set it in time, and there's no need for them to provide any proof they did.

Whatever way to go about it you will lose. The whole NIP system is stacked very unfairly in their favour.

If you hadn't already guessed I got prosecuted even though I never received the NIP. They prosecuted me for failure to inform who was driving, I refused to give details at the point they sent that notice because the alleged offence was 4 months previously. I tried to fight it in court but the magistrates sided with the ticket office and I got a fine double that I would normally have received. Bastids

[Shellywoozle]

Where did you get done, car or bike ?

[timwilky]

I noticed a while back whilst moving somewhat quickly an unmarked plod with hair dryer, he was struggling to put it turn it round to get my plate so wacked it open an got out of there.

There is something to be said for increasing your speed before they can react

[MisterTommyH]

Where did you get done, car or bike ?

A38 South just after the intersection of the A38 and Chester Road. And it was Car, forward facing.

[-Ralph-]

Just to clarify one important point. The date of NIP issue is just that, a date of issue. The 14 days that reference is made to is only in regard to the date the NIP is issued from the date of the alleged offence, which means the day the NIP was sent from the ticket office, not the date you receive it.

Not sure what your trying to clarify Lozzo, but this whole argument over whether it should 'arrive' or 'be sent' within 14 days is a red herring and confuses people. Both are correct, from a certain point of view, but only one matters when it comes to the validity of the NIP.

Regards postage, it is exactly as I posted above, it should be sent in time to arrive within 14 days, so in the opinion of my lawyer who dealt with my DWDC case, that means on day 12 at the latest.

What is the 14 day rule?
The 14 day rule relates only to the period of time in which the Police/Process Unit must serve the original Notice. The Police do not have to prove that the Notice reached its intended recipient within 14 days, merely that in the normal course of events, it should have arrived.

Now, how will the courts will determine whether it is dated correctly? Again exactly as I posted above. Even though it really should have been posted on day 12, this wouldn't make it invalid. The court will only accept it as 'time barred' if it is dated more than 14 days after the offence

If you are the registered keeper of the vehicle and the ISSUE date on the Notice of Intended Prosecution is more than 14 days after the offence, then you can reject it. This only applies if it is dated more than 14 days after the alleged offence. It does not apply if it is dated within 14 days but received more than 14 days after the offence. If the NIP has been issued too late, then you should return it to the Process Office stating that you reject it because it is time barred.

So, to summarise -

Postage: Should be within about 12 days if the rules are followed, but actually it doesn't matter a toss in terms of the validity of your NIP and your not going to win anything by arguing the toss over it.

Validity: Look at the Issue date on the NIP.

Of course, the likes of you and I don't stand a chance when the odds are stacked so high against you, because there's nothing you or I can do to prove the ticket office never set it in time, and there's no need for them to provide any proof they did

Yep, once an NIP is issued on time, they can re-issue an NIP at any point within the six month period. All they have to be able to to is provide a copy of the original NIP, and they will only do that if you query the 14 day rule.

If you hadn't already guessed I got prosecuted even though I never received the NIP. They prosecuted me for failure to inform who was driving, I refused to give details at the point they sent that notice because the alleged offence was 4 months previously. I tried to fight it in court but the magistrates sided with the ticket office and I got a fine double that I would normally have received. Bastids

Your prosecution is not relevant in any of this because they didn't prosecute you for the offence, so they didn't need to produce a copy of an NIP issued within 14 days of that offence. They prosecuted you for an offence you committed 4 months later, when you did finally get an NIP, but you refused to fill it in. You have to co-operate and play the game, if you want to have any chance of winning the game.

That means filling in the NIP, THEN (in the case of speeding, may not apply to other offences) asking them to provide a copy of the original dated within the 14 days. How do you prove somebody didn't just back date that copy? You can't, you just have to trust that the police are not being crooks themselves and tampering with evidence.

Your right that it's not an easy system to win against, but it's not impossible. For instance if you receive an NIP after 20 days, which is dated after 18 days, so long as the 14 day rule applies to that offence, you should be onto a winner.

[-Ralph-]

BTW, it's all well and good us posting this on here, but the law is so intricate that even the police don't fully understand the intricacies of it as they are not experts in prosecuting or defending in court.

It actually doesn't matter what the letter of the law says, it only matters how the court interprets the letter of the law, so you can't read it for yourself and draw a correct conclusion.

If you are going to fight the system, with regard to the 14 day rule (ie: rejecting yourself on basis of time barred has failed) or anything else, get yourself a motoring lawyer, don't try to understand it yourself or do it alone. They are in and out of court every day dealing with motoring offences, and they are the only ones who can really tell you where you stand in your particular circumstances. In the case of speeding it'd only be worth really fighting it, if you were caught at silly speed, and you are facing a massive fine, and a ban which may affect your livelihood.

[MisterTommyH]

Still nothing......

[timwilky]

Guess you is off the hook, lucky boy

[Wobbly]

I've been following this with interest but just noticed in your first post you said you went past a camera van, I thought camera vans had forward facing cameras and therefore wouldn't see your plate?

[maviczap]

I've been following this with interest but just noticed in your first post you said you went past a camera van, I thought camera vans had forward facing cameras and therefore wouldn't see your plate?

No, some have forward & rearward facing camera's, depending on the design

[MisterTommyH]

i've been following this with interest but just noticed in your first post you said you went past a camera van, i thought camera vans had forward facing cameras and therefore wouldn't see your plate?

a38 south just after the intersection of the a38 and chester road. And it was car, forward facing.

hth ;)

It also depends which way you go past the camera. There's one location round here where they park in a layby at the top of the hill so they can get the forward facing cars overtaking the lorries in the crawler lane up the hill, and can also get the cars and bikes going downhill away from them. You never know which they are looking at (this one wasn't at that location though).

[Red Herring]

Speeding is an offence that requires the offender to be informed of a potential prosecution within 14 days of the alleged incident. If the police don't stop you at the time and tell you so then they need to serve a "Notice of Intended Prosecution" on the registered keeper within 14 days. As Ralph says they need to show that they sent one and that it should have reasonably arrived within the 14 days for a prosecution to succeed.

Along with, but separate to, the NIP, the police will send a Sect 172 notice to the registered keeper requiring them to provide details of who the driver was at the time of the alleged offence. This is a separate power, and it's an offence to fail to comply with it without good cause. If you don't comply with this then you get prosecuted for failing to provide details, which is what happened to Lozzo. They can't prosecute you for the speeding because they don't know who the driver/rider was, but the courts aren't stupid so expect the sentence to reflect that....

If the NIP and Sect 172 arrive late then fill in the 172 and send it back with a note, as Ralph says, saying you were the rider at the time but as they haven't complied with the rules you don't expect to hear from them again. Best of luck, but it sounds like you won't be needing it.

[darylB]

Also just because you went past a camera van over the speed limit doesn't mean you got flashed, the camers does not automatically read your speed and flash, it's up to the operator to decide if he thinks you are over the limit and press the button, depends what speed you were doing, he may not have even been looking at that particular moment. The exception to this is where there are wires in the road ar a set distance apart and the camera is plugged into these, then the camera is triggered automatically.

Daryl.