Man of Honour
- Joined
- 13 Nov 2009
- Posts
- 11,703
- Location
- Northampton
Our mk7.5 GTI did a stellar job of picking up the variable limits on the M25
Speeding notice
- Thread starter smr
- Start date
Our mk7.5 GTI did a stellar job of picking up the variable limits on the M25
Such as?, I am assuming you must work in the justice traffic department or be a police officer to make such a statement? I personally deal with such cases so I am not just making unfounded statements.
Last edited:
Such as difficulty tracing the owner of the vehicle. Issues obtaining information from the DVLA. If the driver isn't the owner. Extenuating circumstances such as acts of God, fire, flood or...pandemics.
To issue a NIP you need to know the vehicle index. A vehicle index will trace the registered keeper. If for example the vehicle is currently in trade as can occasionally happen then it will least the previous owner. By law traders must keep records of who the vehicle was sold to and so you can trace the owner very rapidly that way. You can issue a form that requires you to identify the driver at the same time as a NIP. Extenuiating circs such as acts of god and such like. Well the driver is in luck and the prosecutor SOL. I'm not trying to be patronising but if it's left beyond the reasonable time scale you can't be prosecuted for it. Rightly or wrongly.
Yes, you can.
We'll use a link from someone with actual legal knowledge
https://www.daslaw.co.uk/blog/what-is-a-notice-of-intended-prosecution
Exceptions
There are some exceptions to the 14-day rule. For example, if the police could not have reasonably found the information to send the NIP to you within the 14-day period, it may still be possible to prosecute you.
This is also the case if you have moved without updating your registered address. Even if the NIP goes to your old address and you don’t receive it, this would probably be enough to prosecute you.
Also, there is some extra leeway if you didn’t own the car – for example, if it is a hired car, or you borrowed it. The NIP has to be sent to the registered ‘keeper’ of the vehicle, so even if you were not aware of the NIP, it could be valid if the owner received it.
Using the actual CPS legal guidance. The offence in question is a speeding offence. which is included under S1. as would careless driving as I mentioned before. and must be sent out within the 14 days.
Notice of Intended Prosecution
Section 1 RTOA 1988 provides that a defendant cannot be convicted of certain road traffic offences set out in schedule 1 RTOA 1988 unless he or she has been warned that the question of prosecution would be taken into consideration. Such a warning is normally known as a "notice of intended prosecution", or NIP.
A notice of intended prosecution can be given:
Im not sure how you can get much more concrete than the CPS guidance or the actual legislation from the gov.uk site but again I am happy to be proved wrong.
Notice of Intended Prosecution
Section 1 RTOA 1988 provides that a defendant cannot be convicted of certain road traffic offences set out in schedule 1 RTOA 1988 unless he or she has been warned that the question of prosecution would be taken into consideration. Such a warning is normally known as a "notice of intended prosecution", or NIP.
A notice of intended prosecution can be given:
- either orally or in writing at the time the offence was committed. Such a warning need not be specific but must refer to one or more of the offences to which s.1 RTOA 1988 applies. Whether such a warning was given "at the time" is a question of degree and the High Court will not interfere in a Magistrates' Court finding on the point if there is evidence to support that finding.
- by serving the defendant with a summons within 14 days of the offence; or
- by sending a notice within 14 days of the possibility of prosecution and specifying the nature of the alleged offence and the time and place where it is alleged to have been committed to the driver, registered keeper of the vehicle or rider of the cycle.
- Section 2 (dangerous driving)
- Section 3 (careless driving/driving without reasonable consideration)
- Section 22 (leaving the vehicle in a dangerous position)
- Section 28 (dangerous cycling)
- Section 29 (careless cycling)
- Sections 35 and 36 (disobeying certain traffic signs and police signals) And under the Road Traffic Regulation Act
- Sections 16, 17(4), 88(7) and 89(1) (speeding offences) Or aiding and abetting any of the above.
Im not sure how you can get much more concrete than the CPS guidance or the actual legislation from the gov.uk site but again I am happy to be proved wrong.
You have been proved wrong. You're referring to GUIDANCE. It is just that. Guidance. Not law. That's why it's called guidance.
You'll notice that the text you have quoted says notice CAN not MUST be given within 14 days. That's because there are exemptions.
You'll notice that the text you have quoted says notice CAN not MUST be given within 14 days. That's because there are exemptions.
Last edited:
None of which apply here if everything OP has told us is factual.
per my earlier comments - the date is just wrong
see here http://forums.pepipoo.com/lofiversion/index.php/t104042.html for example
commonsense, rules.
see here http://forums.pepipoo.com/lofiversion/index.php/t104042.html for example
commonsense, rules.
Yes, but you don't know and he doesn't know if there have been circumstances beyond his knowledge. A very common example, and one I could see being prevalent at the minute is the car is a lease or owned under some other credit agreement whereby the leading company is the registered owner. Hence the NIP goes to them. If they're low on staff or shut entirely at the minute then they're not going to respond to the police to indicate who the vehicle user is. Ergo more than 14 days is acceptable.
The example you literally just gave sees the NIP being served to the lease company, which is fine, as its within the 14 days. It doesnt have to go to the suspect within the 14 days just be issued. As I said. the OP already stated that he was the RK of the vehicle. I dont get what you are trying to prove?
He does. I never said he wasn't though, I'm giving an example of why the 14 days isn't a solid legal deadline.
Jesus...
Did I say that he wasn't the RK? No.
Did you say it must be sent within 14 days? Yes.
Did I tell you that was rubbish? Yes.
Does my example show a situation in which the 14 day rule doesn't apply? Yes.
Does that therefore show that there are exemptions to the 14 days? Yes.
Was that my point from the start? Yes.
Perhaps you can give an example that would apply to OP, if we assume all details OP has provided are correct? My post you quoted was purely related to the OP.
An example would be the police have applied to the DVLA for details of who the vehicles keeper is as they don't have that info on their database. The DVLA fail to respond in time.
Vehicle details come back instantly via the Police National Computer.
The police national computer does not have 100% of information. So again...rubbish. The police can and do have to contact the DVLA and insurance companies directly for info.
Its linked to the DVLA. but Im done with this conversation, I think Im correct, you think you are so lets leave it there.