and yes DD I have done a forum search....
Did I say you hadn't?
|
No, but I thought you might tell me to!!
And you seem to be able to find an answer to everything, whereas I search and never come up with quite the answer I need!!
By the way, it was also my son's birthday today - nice present!!
|
OK, with regard to the 14 days, I\'m not sure if Cheeky\'s post (currently a \"sticky\" at the top of the page) is of any help or not? www.honestjohn.co.uk/forum/post/index.htm?t=24954
If it\'s any consolation, wish him a happy birthday from all of the BackRoom ;o)
|
Thanks for reply DD.
I've read Cheeky's post and also lots of others (including how the Hamiltons avoided a ticket a year or so ago) but the question not answered by these is what if the NIP was not received at all? Would it be assumed that this was the truth or would they assume that the NIP was posted and that the "not received" line was a big fib to try and avoid the penalty? Presumably the NIP people would have postal records that could prove when they posted it and is proof of posting proof of receipt?
If my son can say he never received it (which is the case - he's an honest character) and therefore avoids the penalty because of the "14 day rule" why wouldn't many(most? all?)people use this as an excuse to avoid fines/penalty points?
|
|
|
|
a) yes
b) yes
c) no
d) yes
e) no
But if he realises it was him speeding and he pays the fine, there'll be no hassle. They don't have to accept it when its exceeded their time limits, but they can if they wish and virtually always do.
|
Thanks Mark - your post must have appeared while I was typing my previous one.
In summary, and if I have interpreted the answers correctly, it seems it might be best if he just accepted the situation and coughed up - which is what he was going to do before I said I would try to find more about the 14 day rule.
He doesn't remember the offence, didn't see a camera flash but then he also doesn't know the area so although he is usually someone who sticks to the speed limit, as he said he might have thought it was a 40 limit or not seen the signs.
He'll just have to be extra careful and save up for an increased insurance cost I guess.
Thanks for the help
PhilW
|
Essentially the payment of the fixed penalty is a concession which is offered to you provided you comply with a set of rules and criteria.
Indeed there are also a set of criteria which the authorities are supposed to comply with. One of those is the "14 day rule". Essentially that condition means it must be posted in such a manner that in the normal course of events it could be reasonably expected to arrive before the expiry of the 14 day limit.
Whether it actually arrives or not within 14 days, in fact whether or not it actually arrives at all, is not relevant.
If he was in that area at that time, or at least is unable to prove that he was not, then I would recommend he bit the bullet and paid.
|
Thanks Mark - clearly put and I think he will "bite the bullet" because he knows he was there and that therefore he must have done it, albeit unintentionally.
However, is there not a little disagreement between your second & third paragraphs ("Whether it (NIP) actually arrives or not within 14 days, in fact whether or not it actually arrives at all, is not relevant").
and DVD's statement in the Cheeky sticky above? ("if NOIP is received outside the 14 days then it is questionable that this is lawful and one should write back pointing out the late receipt of the NOIP which invalidates proceedings for speeding").
|
I think that I\'m correct, but it would be fair to say that DVD may well know better than I.
He\'s not been around much lately, perhaps he\'ll show up and clarify. And if not maybe pugugly will drag himself away from his law books long enough to tell us.
|
Phil
Go to
www.tinyurl.com/d2fp
Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988 Section 1
This outlines the law on NOIP. Look in particular at:
1,(c) (ii),
1A (c),
2,
3.
So on flash of camera SCP have an obligation to send NOIP to Reg Keeper to arrive within the normal course of the post within 14 days (not counting day of offence) - Nicholson v Tapp [1972] otherwise they cannot take proceedings. In my day, NOIP was raised in duplicate, the original sent out to Reg. Keeper. The copy was endorsed with a signed Certificate of Service under Mags. Court Act as to date and how served and filed with case papers for production as Court if necessary.
Sending a duplicate NOIP outside the 14 days does not release SCP from their obligation and prove service within 14 days as per the Act.
Whilst 3 appears to put the nail in the coffin it does allow a NOIP to be contested in that the various stages were not complied with and this can start at the Conditional Offer stage - R v Edmonton Justices, ex p Brooks [1960]. Some have written to SCP pointing out defect in service of NOIP and have been successful, presumably where SCP cannot prove the letter of the law has been complied with. All aspects of service mentioned i.e. verbal, summons etc have to be disproved - Sanders v Scott [1961] and a defendant has to prove on a balance of probabilities that NOIP was not given. Merely to raise a doubt in the minds of the Magistrates is not sufficient- Offen v Ransen [1980]
So, if an initial approach to SCP re defective service goes nowhere, then the next avenue is to argue your case before Magistrates which will lead SCP to try and prove service and the Mags to come to a decision.
As to penalty point question I have known them not to have been awarded in certain cases involving due care etc but not speeding unless totting is involved and the hardship card accepted.
Hope this helps.
DVD
PS Mark - I'm still here but I detect a more law abiding lot on site so my comments not required......Given them fags up yet?????
|
|
Nuthall Road, Nottingham is lined with overhead Specs cameras, hence you won't see a flash. Obviously he must have gone between at least two of the cameras too quickly, ie he covered the distance between them too fast and therefore must have exceeded the speed limit.
|
|
|
Thanks very much for that DVD. After what you have said and the "hassle" involved I feel that he will (to quote Mark) "bite the bullet", perhaps after an initial approach, which will probably fail!
It seems a bit unfortunate because he has been driving for nine years without incident and I feel that he is a sensible driver who drives according to the conditions with good awareness, consideration for others and I always feel very much at ease when he is driving - he is not a risk taker.
Thanks to all who responded
PhilW
|
Quick update. Son asked for a copy of NIP to be sent to him last Wed first class post because he was going on holiday on Sunday. Copy did not arrive either Thurs, Fri or Saturday. I have just rung up Notts police and they are sending yet another form. Original was sent 9 the August by Second class post and never arrived. Now 6 weeks since offence and he still hasn't had the NIP thing asking for driver confirmation! Notts police apparently "don't go to the expense" of using recorded delivery or even first class post. Thought occurs that courier delivery might be cheaper than having to send out multiple copies!
|
Phil
\"Original was sent 9 the August by Second class post \"
If this is really true, then I think there is no case to answer, as the mimnimum to consider the NIP served is first class post. Have a look on www.pepipoo.com where there is an active forum. Not that I condone speeding, but we must make the \'partnerships\' accountable, and get them to play by the(ir) \'rules\'.
--
RichardW
Is it illogical? It must be Citroen....
|
I agree. They've cocked up and now are taking advantage of your good nature. Anyone else who hadn't told them probably wouldn't have heard anything more. If they did, they could simply say that they never received it.
Adam
|
Agree with RichardW - I had a look at the RTOA using the link kindly provided by DVD, and it quite clearly states that the NOIP is only deemed served, if posted within 14 days of the alleged offence, if registered post or recorded delivery is used.
Second-class post ain't either of those as far as I am aware! If they use it to "save costs", then they are showing a rather unwise reliance on people's lack of awareness of the law.
|
Be wary folks.
First papers arriving to Reg keeper should be NOIP and S 172 papers to name and shame. Don't get them mixed up. The 14 day rule only applies to the NOIP part. S 172 does not require Reg/Rec Del/First Class post.
DVD
|
DVD and others,
The only thing received so far is RM172(reminder saying he hasn't replied to NIP and saying he could get a £1000 fine if he doesn't). The woman I spoke to at Notts Police and mentioned Road Traffic Act to (as DVD quoted) replied that she hadn't a clue what it said about 14 day rule because she had never read any road traffic act, anyway, she didn't care because the NIP had been sent out on 9th August so they had done what they were supposed to! I pointed out that I wasn't trying to be stroppy or argumentative and that my son would probably have paid up straight away had he been told what the fine was but as things stood it was now 6 weeks from the offence and he still didn't know what speed he was supposed to have done or what the fine was. I remained calm and reasonable but I have to say that the lady concerned was starting to shout at me as if I was being very unreasonable in asking for a copy so that my son knew the fine and could pay it! She did say however that they would grant him another 28 days before taking proceedings!
Thanks for all the input everyone!
PhilW
|
RichardW,
Thanks for link to Pepipoo - some very interesting reading. Also lead me to Safespeed which also has some interesting stuff.
for those interested (Safespeed is particularly about scameras)
link is
www.safespeed.org.uk/
PhilW
P.S. Richard - son was driving a Cit at the time!
|
Phil
Offence 1st August.
They say NOIP sent out 9th August - so they will have a record of this.
Has to arrive before last post of 15th August.
Then it appears on the argument of non receipt there is none as
sub section 3 of Sect 1 RTO kicks in.
If they are bluffing on date sent out then you will have to call them by pleading NG and case at mags Court.
DVD
|
DVD,
Thanks again.
Despite spending hours on this I am still confused by the fact that the RTA says:-
"(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."
yet speaking to woman at Notts police she said it had been sent "second class post".
Subsection 3 is, I presume, to prevent people from receiving the NIP and just ripping it up and then denying receipt. But then if you did really not receive it how on earth can you prove that?
Elsewhere I think you have mentioned that they can use first class, but I can't find this in the act.
I have a feeling that I am being a bit thick about this but I find legal jargon very difficult to understand!
On the other hand I also don't see the need for the "14 day rule" and since it would appear that he did commit the offence it would be easier to just accept the punishment.
Thanks for your patience
Phil
|
Usual warning: me not lawyer....
However, I wonder if part of the explanation lies in the word deemed - i.e. to mean that the notice can be considered by the Court to have been duly served even if it didn't actually turn up, provided that it was sent in accordance with subs (2)?
Thus, if it was sent in a different manner, such as second class post, but actually arrives in time then all is well. And if it doesn't arrive then all you have to do is browbeat the offender into admitting it.
I have to say, if the use of second class post saves a significant amount of money, they must be sending out a very large number of NIPS...
|
"I have to say, if the use of second class post saves a significant amount of money, they must be sending out a very large number of NIPS..."
My calculator says that three million seven pences is two hundred and ten grand.
Enough to buy five more scameras.
|
Look at this way Phil and the Act again.
Act starts off by saying person shall not be convicted for an offence requiring NOIP, in your case speeding, unless NOIP is served within 14 days.
Service can be :
a verbal warning at the time - stop by Pold who must say words to the effect that you will be reported for the consideration of the question of prosecuting you for exceeding a speed limit or similar words so that you are under no illusion that you are being reported.,or
Receipt of a summons within 14 days, or
NOIP served within 14 days on him (driver) OR person registered as the keeper of a vehicle at the time of speeding offence.
Method of service has to be
1. Delivering it to him (personal service) or
2. Addressing it to him and leaving at last known address (personal visit and putting through letter box),or
3. By sending it by Registered Post, Recorded Delivery Service of First Class Post to last known address.
Note SECOND CLASS POST is not mentioned so if it is used then the Notice has not been served in accordance with the Act and therefore void.
Now if they send the NOIP out (Sub Section 2) by either Registerd Post or Recorded Delivery Service then providing it is sent out so that in the ordinary course of the post it can be delivered within 14 days (plus the day of the offence) then that is good service even if it is returned as undelivered or for any reason not received. Bear in mind that in this case FIRST CLASS POST is not covered and as Reg/Record delivery require a signature so presumably it is there to cover the moon light flitter attempting to evade prosecution or by not accepting post. Note again SECOND CLASS post is not mentioned so non delivery claim cannot be used.
Sub Sec 3 tells you that the requirements of Section 1 shall deemed to have been complied with unless and until the contrary is proved . You have to argue its hasn't.
If the woman stated that the first NOIP sent out within 14 days was by SECOND CLASS POST then the SCP have not conformed to the Act and cannot proceed/ issue a Conditional Offer. If they will not accept their wrongdoing then the only other course open is to inform them you wish to plead Not Guilty and have the matter heard at Court, where you will give evidence on oath that the NOIP was not received etc. It will be then for the SCP to show that they have conformed with the letter of the law by sending other than by second class post and in sufficient time for it to be received in 14 days. The Magistrates will then have to decide who is telling porkies.
Like a lot of matters these days, Units are being staffed by people with very little training and no conception just exactly what is required at Law.
May I suggest, and to put your mind at ease, visiting C.A.B. and having a word with their free Duty Solicitor. There may be grounds for disputing the NOIP.
DVD
|
DVD,
You are utterly selfess. Collectively, we owe you many thanks.
I sincerely hope that I never have cause to owe you those thanks personally, but nevertheless, thank you.
|
"Units are being staffed by people with very little training and no conception "
How do you know they are childless?
Try "concept".
|
Oooo Brian, you are a pedant, but see 2b from Dictionary.com
con·cep·tion Pronunciation Key (kn-spshn)
n.
1.
a) Formation of a viable zygote by the union of the male sperm and female ovum; fertilization.
b) The entity formed by the union of the male sperm and female ovum; an embryo or zygote.
2.
a) The ability to form or understand mental concepts and abstractions.
b) Something conceived in the mind; a concept, plan, design, idea, or thought.
3.
a) Archaic. A beginning; a start.
Regards,
John R @ Work :¬)
|
I think that in the context it should be concept.
But my comment was a bit TIC anyway.
|
Brian,
I guessed as much, so was mine.
That's the problem with the English language, some times it is too variable,
Regards,
John R @ Work :¬)
|
DVD,
Thank you very much indeed for that lengthy and comprehensive reply which has clarified the situation so that I now know exactly where my son stands with regard to this. Hope I haven't tried your patience too much!
I am now composing (or should that be conceiving? -no doubt Brian and John will let me know!!)a letter to Notts Police which starts "Dwight Van Driver informs me that............!!!!!
Thanks again - will post again with what happens when son gets back from holiday and I have had further contact with Notts Police.
PhilW
|
|
|
|
|
