Speeding - Notice of Intended Prosecution

FlapR · 10 Jan 2015 at 23:12

andi said:
Looks legit to me. Google suggests that's the correct office for the CTO.

Can't explain why it came to you though, is the car definitely in your parent's name?

Yeah, seems legit based on the details its just confusing, the car is definitely registered in my dads name, I checked the V5.

Generally just annoyed with myself as I've never had any points or had any trouble before. There's an FAQ type sheet with it giving the speed ranges and requirements to qualify for a Speed Awareness Course, which I qualify for, so hopefully I'm offered that.

Is it worth requesting the photo/video evidence or should I just get on with it?

Spartacus · 11 Jan 2015 at 03:59

I would say there's a very strong possibility you'll be offered the speed awareness course for 58 in a 50 and a first offence. Good luck

Kaeo · 11 Jan 2015 at 04:37

Just for fun, if you're not the registered keeper of the vehicle, then you do not under section 172 of the road traffic act have to name the driver of the vehicle. Also you shouldn't complete it, especially if you were the driver.

My suggestion would be to request pictures to confirm the identity of the vehicle, then, when they arrive, send another letter stating that you're not the registered keeper of the vehicle.

Edit:- Having read it again, you are definitely registered keeper of the car or whoever is has sent your name in as the driver.

Freefaller · 11 Jan 2015 at 07:20

It looks to me as though you may just have to suck it up and see. Though it is odd that it has come up in your name - have you spoken to your parents about it?

Tefal · 11 Jan 2015 at 08:29

Burnsy2023 said:
Why do that when the RK has a legal obligation to identify the driver under 172 RTA?

Keeps someone in a pointless public sector job

Tefal · 11 Jan 2015 at 08:30

Kaeo said:
Just for fun, if you're not the registered keeper of the vehicle, then you do not under section 172 of the road traffic act have to name the driver of the vehicle. Also you shouldn't complete it, especially if you were the driver.

My suggestion would be to request pictures to confirm the identity of the vehicle, then, when they arrive, send another letter stating that you're not the registered keeper of the vehicle.

Edit:- Having read it again, you are definitely registered keeper of the car or whoever is has sent your name in as the driver.

Yeah and full his dad over who would turn around and go "it was my soon "

FlapR · 11 Jan 2015 at 13:30

Parents definitely haven't sent anything back. My dads not even at the country at the moment (hasn't been since the 5th) and I've spoken to them both about it.

- The offence is dated as the 7/01/15
- The letter is dated 9/01/15
- It arrived on 10/01/15
- I've checked the V5, car is registered in my dads name.

Eliot · 11 Jan 2015 at 13:57

FlapR said:
Parents definitely haven't sent anything back. My dads not even at the country at the moment (hasn't been since the 5th) and I've spoken to them both about it.

- The offence is dated as the 7/01/15
- The letter is dated 9/01/15
- It arrived on 10/01/15
- I've checked the V5, car is registered in my dads name.

You never get nips 3 days after.

That's rapid. Mine ones are always close to the 14 day limit or whatever.
This stinks a bit I think

Rroff · 11 Jan 2015 at 14:05

Eliot said:
You never get nips 3 days after.

That's rapid. Mine ones are always close to the 14 day limit or whatever.
This stinks a bit I think

Never had one myself but family and friends have and its usually in the 5 - 10 day range - had a few sweating it out for a few days until it turned up/hoping it didn't lol.

Jono8 · 11 Jan 2015 at 14:39

FlapR said:
Parents definitely haven't sent anything back. My dads not even at the country at the moment (hasn't been since the 5th) and I've spoken to them both about it.

- The offence is dated as the 7/01/15
- The letter is dated 9/01/15
- It arrived on 10/01/15
- I've checked the V5, car is registered in my dads name.

I would reply to them saying you are not the registered keeper of any car and that they should send the letter to the registered keeper of the vehicle in question.

IAmATeaf · 11 Jan 2015 at 18:12

The address matches this but the telephone number doesn't http://www.ukmotorists.com/Speed Awareness Venues.asp

BuToNz · 11 Jan 2015 at 19:02

I am having trouble understanding how this could be a scam? All that for just your details?

Looks exactly like the one I got a few months back, although mine had a picture.

Jono8 · 11 Jan 2015 at 19:24

BuToNz said:
I am having trouble understanding how this could be a scam? All that for just your details?

Looks exactly like the one I got a few months back, although mine had a picture.

I think the main issue here is that he is not he registered keeper and the letter that is addressed to him is for the registered keeper. How did they get his name?

Burnsy2023 · 11 Jan 2015 at 21:56

Jono8 said:
I would reply to them saying you are not the registered keeper of any car and that they should send the letter to the registered keeper of the vehicle in question.

Jono8 said:
I think the main issue here is that he is not he registered keeper and the letter that is addressed to him is for the registered keeper. How did they get his name?

No. The NIP is perfectly correct. The fact that it's not gone to the RK is irrelevant as he was the driver at the time of the offence and so the NIP has correctly been served.

Burnsy2023 · 11 Jan 2015 at 22:00

Spartacus said:
I would say there's a very strong possibility you'll be offered the speed awareness course for 58 in a 50 and a first offence. Good luck

Cheshire will offer a speed awareness course for that speed if the driver is eligible.

Hades · 11 Jan 2015 at 22:03

Burnsy2023 said:
No. The NIP is perfectly correct. The fact that it's not gone to the RK is irrelevant as he was the driver at the time of the offence and so the NIP has correctly been served.

But he is not the RK. Surely he is under no obligation to provide the name of the driver (himself). The RK has not been served and so is also not (yet) under a legal obligation to provide the name of the driver.

InvaderGIR · 11 Jan 2015 at 22:09

Burnsy2023 said:
No. The NIP is perfectly correct. The fact that it's not gone to the RK is irrelevant as he was the driver at the time of the offence and so the NIP has correctly been served.

You're glossing over the fact that OP wasn't stopped, they just magically worked out he was driving which is what he's confused about. In theory if the camera caught him speeding then it'd be sent to the RK as they don't know who was driving.

Rroff · 11 Jan 2015 at 22:11

BuToNz said:
I am having trouble understanding how this could be a scam? All that for just your details?

Looks exactly like the one I got a few months back, although mine had a picture.

Some of the "best" scams start off very simply and innocently then hook their intended victims in.

Burnsy2023 · 11 Jan 2015 at 22:22

Hades said:
But he is not the RK. Surely he is under no obligation to provide the name of the driver (himself). The RK has not been served and so is also not (yet) under a legal obligation to provide the name of the driver.

It's not a s172 notice. It's a NIP for the driver, which has reached the driver at the time of the offence. The OP can't say that he didn't receive a NIP as he did. This isn't a loophole he can argue at court.

InvaderGIR said:
You're glossing over the fact that OP wasn't stopped, they just magically worked out he was driving which is what he's confused about. In theory if the camera caught him speeding then it'd be sent to the RK as they don't know who was driving.

Indeed. It is strange how they got it right, but ultimately, they have correctly served a NIP.

Scuzi · 11 Jan 2015 at 22:24

Your dad has registered the car in your name to cover up his illicit activities.