News1 min ago
Speeding ticket
8 Answers
Got a NIP in the post last month (4 mths after the alleged offence).
It was not me who was driving but they had my name down wrong so I corrected it and sent it back but I have just received another one with exactly the same (wrong)details on.
The reason I did not put the drivers name on is because if 6 mths goes past, a warrant cannot be issued and if you have not accepted the fine and points by then, you have got away with it. I have done this 2 times.
My question is; do you think they have made a mistake as the name on the NIP was Christopher and my name is Christian?
My thinking is that if I take the 28 days that they have given me to respond and then correct it to my actual name, they will then send another NIP and I can then take a further 28 days which will then take me past the 6 month period and it should then be cancelled.
It was not me who was driving but they had my name down wrong so I corrected it and sent it back but I have just received another one with exactly the same (wrong)details on.
The reason I did not put the drivers name on is because if 6 mths goes past, a warrant cannot be issued and if you have not accepted the fine and points by then, you have got away with it. I have done this 2 times.
My question is; do you think they have made a mistake as the name on the NIP was Christopher and my name is Christian?
My thinking is that if I take the 28 days that they have given me to respond and then correct it to my actual name, they will then send another NIP and I can then take a further 28 days which will then take me past the 6 month period and it should then be cancelled.
Answers
1 to 8 of 8
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Compostella. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
The defect on the NIP is not enough to invalidate it. You have obviously received it because you have made corrections to it and sent it back.
As you have failed to say who the driver was I hope you get prosecuted
Your attitude towards the NIP is reflective of the many web sites and specialist motoring lawyers who constantly look for loopholes to get around the perfectly proper enquiries the Police make.
While reflecting on your boast that you have got away with it twice you may want to spare a thought for the family of a young lad who was Killed on a night in Liverpool a few years ago by a hit and run driver. The vehicle keeper claimed he didnt know who the driver was and was prosecuted under s172 - got a nominal fine and 3 points.
If somone killed someone close to you would you be so complacent
As you have failed to say who the driver was I hope you get prosecuted
Your attitude towards the NIP is reflective of the many web sites and specialist motoring lawyers who constantly look for loopholes to get around the perfectly proper enquiries the Police make.
While reflecting on your boast that you have got away with it twice you may want to spare a thought for the family of a young lad who was Killed on a night in Liverpool a few years ago by a hit and run driver. The vehicle keeper claimed he didnt know who the driver was and was prosecuted under s172 - got a nominal fine and 3 points.
If somone killed someone close to you would you be so complacent
The issue here is whether, by returning the NIP with corrections you have accepted that you are the registered keeper of the vehicle.
Under Section 172 of the Road Traffic Act, registered keepers have 28 days to provide details of the driver at the time of an alleged offence. If you return the NIP with corrections it is may be interpreted by the Fixed Penalty Office that you have accepted this responsibility. They may well simply issue a s172 summons as soon as the 28 days have elapsed.
The approach you are adopting is fraught with danger. As seatrout has correctly pointed out, minor errors on the NIP do not invalidate it. and you will have a hard time proving you failed to provide details as you are obliged to. Because you have got away with this in the past is no guarantee that you will continue to do so.
It may also be worth enquiring if the DVLA records for your vehicle are incorrect and if so whether you may be to blame for providing the wrong details. If they are wrong and you knowingly allow the situation to continue that will not be in your favour.
Under Section 172 of the Road Traffic Act, registered keepers have 28 days to provide details of the driver at the time of an alleged offence. If you return the NIP with corrections it is may be interpreted by the Fixed Penalty Office that you have accepted this responsibility. They may well simply issue a s172 summons as soon as the 28 days have elapsed.
The approach you are adopting is fraught with danger. As seatrout has correctly pointed out, minor errors on the NIP do not invalidate it. and you will have a hard time proving you failed to provide details as you are obliged to. Because you have got away with this in the past is no guarantee that you will continue to do so.
It may also be worth enquiring if the DVLA records for your vehicle are incorrect and if so whether you may be to blame for providing the wrong details. If they are wrong and you knowingly allow the situation to continue that will not be in your favour.
Yes, but on the NIP it stiplates that if you were not the driver then you should not pass it on to him/her, but that you should complete the section and return it back to them. I did this but they have sent it back with the original details on.
I know that errors won't invalidate it, I am just playing the system.
With regards to my details being correct, that is a problem for my company's fleet dept, I submitted the correct ones to them.
Seatrout - totally missed the point! This was 34 in a 30 limit that was on a stretch of 60mph dual carriagway that narrows for 200m and bcomes single carriageway with a 30 limit. They fight dirty, we have to fight dirty. Save your patronisations others.
I know that errors won't invalidate it, I am just playing the system.
With regards to my details being correct, that is a problem for my company's fleet dept, I submitted the correct ones to them.
Seatrout - totally missed the point! This was 34 in a 30 limit that was on a stretch of 60mph dual carriagway that narrows for 200m and bcomes single carriageway with a 30 limit. They fight dirty, we have to fight dirty. Save your patronisations others.
I'm confused!
Your original question suggests that you have not provided the name and address of the driver:
"The reason I did not put the drivers name...."
Your latest answer suggests that you have
"....you should complete the section and return it back to them. I did this but they have sent it back with the original details on."
Which is correct?
As far as the DVLA holding the correct details goes, if you are the registered keeper it is your responsibility to ensure that any discrepancies are rectified. This is especially so If you propose to use such discrepancies as part of a defence in matters such as this. You will struggle to succeed if you know that they exist and it will not do to attempt to pass the responsibilty to your company's fleet dept.
Your original question suggests that you have not provided the name and address of the driver:
"The reason I did not put the drivers name...."
Your latest answer suggests that you have
"....you should complete the section and return it back to them. I did this but they have sent it back with the original details on."
Which is correct?
As far as the DVLA holding the correct details goes, if you are the registered keeper it is your responsibility to ensure that any discrepancies are rectified. This is especially so If you propose to use such discrepancies as part of a defence in matters such as this. You will struggle to succeed if you know that they exist and it will not do to attempt to pass the responsibilty to your company's fleet dept.
Sorry, I can see how that is confusing.
I was not the driver, but I have returned the completed NIP.
I am not the registered keeper as it is a company car, so there are variuos links in the chain.
The NIP originally went to the leasing company, then to our companies head office, then to me. Each link in the chain completes the section informing the camera enforcement of the details.
When it arrived with me, my name was incorrect (the fault of my company's fleet office), so I completed the section 2 with my correct name and sent it back but they have issued another NIP with the same incorrect details on.
My plan is to wait the 28 days, then complete section 2 again. They should then send me another NIP made out to my correct name. and give me a further 28 days to complete and return.
Ultimately, my wife was driving but if she gets her NIP close to 6 months after the alleged offence, then she could take the full 28 days that they allow and by that time it should have crossed over the 6 month period thus preventing a summons being able to be issued.
I was not the driver, but I have returned the completed NIP.
I am not the registered keeper as it is a company car, so there are variuos links in the chain.
The NIP originally went to the leasing company, then to our companies head office, then to me. Each link in the chain completes the section informing the camera enforcement of the details.
When it arrived with me, my name was incorrect (the fault of my company's fleet office), so I completed the section 2 with my correct name and sent it back but they have issued another NIP with the same incorrect details on.
My plan is to wait the 28 days, then complete section 2 again. They should then send me another NIP made out to my correct name. and give me a further 28 days to complete and return.
Ultimately, my wife was driving but if she gets her NIP close to 6 months after the alleged offence, then she could take the full 28 days that they allow and by that time it should have crossed over the 6 month period thus preventing a summons being able to be issued.
Thanks compostella. It just shows how easy it is to get the wrong end of the stick. (You see it all the time on AB, sometimes with insolent results - that's why I try to understand questions correctly).
The cannot really see a flaw in your plan. There is an absolute limit of six months for "laying an information" for a summary offence. To be successful your wife will obviously have to refuse the ultimate offer of a fixed penalty and instead insist on a court appearance. She must be sure that six months have elapsed before she does this.
The cannot really see a flaw in your plan. There is an absolute limit of six months for "laying an information" for a summary offence. To be successful your wife will obviously have to refuse the ultimate offer of a fixed penalty and instead insist on a court appearance. She must be sure that six months have elapsed before she does this.
1 to 8 of 8
Latest Posts
Crosswords2 mins ago
ChatterBank3 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles8 mins ago
Crosswords9 mins ago