Notice of intended Prosecution
31 May 2001, 08:44 PM
#2
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: A land of lap-dancers and Lanson Black Label
Posts: 9,400
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
....ooooops.... dude methinks ur in for the high jump......6 to 9 points and a fair old fine......if ur summonsed get urself a very good solicitor - a ban could be looming......and then trade the scoob for a bicycle cos ur insurance will be huge,for the record my first points were for 49mph in a 30 - I was given 3 points instantly but the officer said that the only mitigating factors were that it was on a dual carraigeway in a non residential area at midnight........ best of luck chap
31 May 2001, 08:54 PM
#3
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 533
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Have YOU been videoed/photographed or has your CAR been v'd/p'd, just a thought.
My car was done on Jn 15 on the M1 last year and I knew I was not there. I left it with the chappie who was in my car to sort out the nominating of who was driving etc. Not entirely sure who got the points though.........
My car was done on Jn 15 on the M1 last year and I knew I was not there. I left it with the chappie who was in my car to sort out the nominating of who was driving etc. Not entirely sure who got the points though.........
31 May 2001, 09:03 PM
#4
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 1998
Posts: 1,785
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not wanting to get your hopes up or anything.. but all the staff in my office (bar one) got a £30 fine + 3 points all on the same day for doing around 40 on a 30mph dual carriageway..
However, the one person that DIDN'T get this got a Notice of Intended Prosecution for doing 50+ on the same 30mph zone (same day).
This was over a year ago now and they've not yet been given a court date.
So despite government claims that they're stamping down on speeders, they're just taking easy pickings of those doing a few miles over the limit which can be dealt with by post, and forgetting those that did much faster and need a court appearance.
It's a tax on driving in my view.
[This message has been edited by DavidBrown (edited 31 May 2001).]
However, the one person that DIDN'T get this got a Notice of Intended Prosecution for doing 50+ on the same 30mph zone (same day).
This was over a year ago now and they've not yet been given a court date.
So despite government claims that they're stamping down on speeders, they're just taking easy pickings of those doing a few miles over the limit which can be dealt with by post, and forgetting those that did much faster and need a court appearance.
It's a tax on driving in my view.
[This message has been edited by DavidBrown (edited 31 May 2001).]
01 June 2001, 07:52 AM
#5
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Dec 1999
Posts: 422
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I got laser gunned doing 59 in a 30!!! 10:30pm on a short stretch of dual carrageway nothing about. Got a fixed penalty of 60 quid and 3 points. The police man involved was ok, not patronising at all. In short I felt fairly nicked 
Stu
Stu
01 June 2001, 08:07 AM
#6
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jan 2000
Posts: 1,999
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Alanjack - depends where you were (assuming you were the driver).
Some counties will FPN at +5 over the speed limit and send summons at +15 (where you are likely to face a short ban, 5-6 points and a heavy fine
), however some still work on old policies and only give FPN at anything upto +25mph (in which case you were 1mph lucky!).
If you do get to court, you are likely to be hit quite hard. Doing 24mph (c30%) over the limit on a motorway is seen as reckless. Doing 24mph over a 30 limit (80% over
) is likely to earn you big grief and little sympathy from a court!
Some counties will FPN at +5 over the speed limit and send summons at +15 (where you are likely to face a short ban, 5-6 points and a heavy fine
), however some still work on old policies and only give FPN at anything upto +25mph (in which case you were 1mph lucky!).If you do get to court, you are likely to be hit quite hard. Doing 24mph (c30%) over the limit on a motorway is seen as reckless. Doing 24mph over a 30 limit (80% over
) is likely to earn you big grief and little sympathy from a court!
01 June 2001, 08:14 AM
#7
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jan 2000
Posts: 1,999
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Stupot:
<B>I got laser gunned doing 59 in a 30!!! 10:30pm on a short stretch of dual carrageway nothing about. Got a fixed penalty of 60 quid and 3 points. The police man involved was ok, not patronising at all. In short I felt fairly nicked
Stu[/quote]
Stu, you were lucky, at almost double the speed limit, most tax collectors, (...sorry police officers
) would virtually gun you down on the spot! Or at least give you a trip to a magistrates court for them to do it instead!!
Looks like you found the one police officer that has brains/common sense/perspective/reason/morals* (*delete as appropriate)
To put it into perspective I got nicked at exactly 100 on the motorway (40% over the limit rather than your 97% over the limit) and got 6 points, £350 fine and only escaped a 4 week ban and bigger fine by paying a very good solicitor £700
<B>I got laser gunned doing 59 in a 30!!! 10:30pm on a short stretch of dual carrageway nothing about. Got a fixed penalty of 60 quid and 3 points. The police man involved was ok, not patronising at all. In short I felt fairly nicked
Stu[/quote]
Stu, you were lucky, at almost double the speed limit, most tax collectors, (...sorry police officers
) would virtually gun you down on the spot! Or at least give you a trip to a magistrates court for them to do it instead!! Looks like you found the one police officer that has brains/common sense/perspective/reason/morals* (*delete as appropriate)
To put it into perspective I got nicked at exactly 100 on the motorway (40% over the limit rather than your 97% over the limit) and got 6 points, £350 fine and only escaped a 4 week ban and bigger fine by paying a very good solicitor £700
Trending Topics
01 June 2001, 08:15 AM
#8
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jan 2000
Posts: 1,999
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Stupot:
<B>I got laser gunned doing 59 in a 30!!! 10:30pm on a short stretch of dual carrageway nothing about. Got a fixed penalty of 60 quid and 3 points. The police man involved was ok, not patronising at all. In short I felt fairly nicked
Stu[/quote]
Stu, you were lucky, at almost double the speed limit, most tax collectors, (...sorry police officers ) would virtually gun you down on the spot! Or at least give you a trip to a magistrates court for them to do it instead!!
Looks like you found the one police officer that has brains/common sense/perspective/reason/morals* (*delete as appropriate)
To put it into perspective I got nicked at exactly 100 on the motorway (40% over the limit rather than your 97% over the limit) and got 6 points, £350 fine and only escaped a 4 week ban and bigger fine by paying a very good solicitor £700
<B>I got laser gunned doing 59 in a 30!!! 10:30pm on a short stretch of dual carrageway nothing about. Got a fixed penalty of 60 quid and 3 points. The police man involved was ok, not patronising at all. In short I felt fairly nicked
Stu[/quote]
Stu, you were lucky, at almost double the speed limit, most tax collectors, (...sorry police officers
) would virtually gun you down on the spot! Or at least give you a trip to a magistrates court for them to do it instead!! Looks like you found the one police officer that has brains/common sense/perspective/reason/morals* (*delete as appropriate)
To put it into perspective I got nicked at exactly 100 on the motorway (40% over the limit rather than your 97% over the limit) and got 6 points, £350 fine and only escaped a 4 week ban and bigger fine by paying a very good solicitor £700
01 June 2001, 09:34 AM
#9
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 1,347
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Looks like plead guilty by post, which you should have an option to do once you have returned your NIP to confirm you were the driver. Don't ask to see the photo, it just gets peoples backs up (police, courts)
The CPS (criminal prosecution service) will then investigate (a man/woman in a little mud hut) to determine wether you should be allowed to plead by post. If you are, then they send you a summons, with an option to plead by post. Do that, and you should be looking at £60.00-£100.00 and maybe 3-6 points, however I would say IMHO that you are more likely to stay nearer 3. My friend was caught a works van a few months back, going from a 30 into a sixty doing 56 (i think) and was given 3 points and £100.00 fine plus £25.00 costs. Not too bad really.
So, whack it back and confirm you were the driver, don't blag that it was your Nan/Dog/Horse driving-The pictures can be super imposed now to see what the driver really looks like from front or back! and then await the CPS charge. Depending on how severe they see the offense (deaths, accidents on that road) will depend on how you get to play it. If its court and no option by post, take a solicitor or ask for mitigating circumstances (you need a reason to do this) as to why you were speeding (rushing to Mcdonalds does not work)
Good luck mate.
Ronnie
The CPS (criminal prosecution service) will then investigate (a man/woman in a little mud hut) to determine wether you should be allowed to plead by post. If you are, then they send you a summons, with an option to plead by post. Do that, and you should be looking at £60.00-£100.00 and maybe 3-6 points, however I would say IMHO that you are more likely to stay nearer 3. My friend was caught a works van a few months back, going from a 30 into a sixty doing 56 (i think) and was given 3 points and £100.00 fine plus £25.00 costs. Not too bad really.
So, whack it back and confirm you were the driver, don't blag that it was your Nan/Dog/Horse driving-The pictures can be super imposed now to see what the driver really looks like from front or back! and then await the CPS charge. Depending on how severe they see the offense (deaths, accidents on that road) will depend on how you get to play it. If its court and no option by post, take a solicitor or ask for mitigating circumstances (you need a reason to do this) as to why you were speeding (rushing to Mcdonalds does not work)
Good luck mate.
Ronnie
01 June 2001, 09:53 AM
#10
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Feb 2001
Posts: 2,959
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My understanding is that if you get caught, they have to send this notice to you within 14 days - you'll then get a ticket.
I think your very lucky - 56 or above and you'd be off to court and face a ban.
As it is you'll get 3 points and a fine. That is if they do decide to go ahead - they can chose not to.
54 in a 30 - DOH!!!!!!!
Jza
I think your very lucky - 56 or above and you'd be off to court and face a ban.
As it is you'll get 3 points and a fine. That is if they do decide to go ahead - they can chose not to.
54 in a 30 - DOH!!!!!!!
Jza
01 June 2001, 11:05 AM
#11
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 74
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Did you get the option to take a 3-point/£60 fine? If so, take it.
Bear in mind that it took a good solicitor to get me off a ban for doing 99 on the motorway - I think you'll be close to a ban. If so, it's likely to be 56 days or something like that, though you might be lucky and get a month.
If you don't get a ban but get points instead, it's likely to be 5/6 points rather than 3, and I should think the fine will be substantially higher than £60, depending on your income.
Insurance? I don't think it'll make much of a difference, to be honest. If you get a ban, or once you get over 6 points, that's a different story.
Good luck
Bros
Bear in mind that it took a good solicitor to get me off a ban for doing 99 on the motorway - I think you'll be close to a ban. If so, it's likely to be 56 days or something like that, though you might be lucky and get a month.
If you don't get a ban but get points instead, it's likely to be 5/6 points rather than 3, and I should think the fine will be substantially higher than £60, depending on your income.
Insurance? I don't think it'll make much of a difference, to be honest. If you get a ban, or once you get over 6 points, that's a different story.
Good luck
Bros
01 June 2001, 11:15 AM
#12
Scooby Senior
Join Date: Feb 2000
Posts: 8,204
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ronnie wrote <B>The pictures can be super imposed now to see what the driver really looks like from front or back! and then await the CPS charge</B>
Ron, they can't mess around or alter the pictures as it is regarding as tampering with the evidence. If they magnify the number plate and use fancy filters to enhance the lettering it is inadmissable in court.
Check out the 'A textbook case, and how it was overturned.
Ron, they can't mess around or alter the pictures as it is regarding as tampering with the evidence. If they magnify the number plate and use fancy filters to enhance the lettering it is inadmissable in court.
Check out the 'A textbook case, and how it was overturned.
02 June 2001, 08:29 PM
#14
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 4,983
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
last yr - 10 days after getting the scoob i got pulled over on a motorway doing 95.
at 12:30am on a sunday morning with absolutely nothing else on the road.
took over 2 months b4 anything came in the post and then my chance at a court appearance was within 10 days !
choose not to appear in person and got 4 points and £350 fine which i must say i think was over the top for the actual offence.
steve
at 12:30am on a sunday morning with absolutely nothing else on the road.
took over 2 months b4 anything came in the post and then my chance at a court appearance was within 10 days !
choose not to appear in person and got 4 points and £350 fine which i must say i think was over the top for the actual offence.
steve
02 June 2001, 08:56 PM
#15
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 364
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You probably won't get banned. I got caught doing 69mph in a 40 limit. I got 6 points and £135 fine. I now have 11 points on my licence. You only have to say that your job is dependant on driving and they won't ban you.
31 May 2003, 02:14 AM
#18
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 172
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hey, all these advices are OK as far as they go, but everyone is missing the important point, which is that S172 is *broken* and you don't have to take a hit *at all*.
Everone on this thread should look up this link and *read the whole page* :-
http://www.safespeed.org.uk/unsigned.html
Everone on this thread should look up this link and *read the whole page* :-
http://www.safespeed.org.uk/unsigned.html
31 May 2003, 08:07 AM
#19
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 150
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Im with softwizz on that one, are you using the process yourself or just incredibly well informed?
only problem with it is getting a solicitor local willing to back you up using it as they get a much lesser fee...
only problem with it is getting a solicitor local willing to back you up using it as they get a much lesser fee...
31 May 2003, 08:45 AM
#20
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 486
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AlanJack,
I wouldn't start to panic just yet! Plead guilty by post and send a really good letter of mittigating circumstances (even if they don't exist then make them up). I was caught a few years ago doing the same speed in a 30 and dealt with the situation by post. Received 5 points and £180 fine. I think you are being ambitious if you expect to receive 3 points and £60 fine though.
Good luck,
Dan
I wouldn't start to panic just yet! Plead guilty by post and send a really good letter of mittigating circumstances (even if they don't exist then make them up). I was caught a few years ago doing the same speed in a 30 and dealt with the situation by post. Received 5 points and £180 fine. I think you are being ambitious if you expect to receive 3 points and £60 fine though.
Good luck,
Dan
31 May 2003, 09:41 AM
#21
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 172
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You *bet* I'm using the process.
I got my NIP at the beginning of March for an alleged offence in late Feb. I sent back the completed but unsigned NIP at the end of March, following the SafeSpeed site's guidelines.
Avon & Somerset force wrote to me on 3rd April saying the NIP was not completed correctly and providing another one. I wrote back on 7th April saying "So far as I can tell, the only point on which you are unsatisfied is that I have not signed the form. While I am keen to comply with all my legal obligations, I do not wish to sign the form. If you would be kind enough to advise me exactly where in law it states that I have an obligation to sign the form I will be pleased to comply."
They wrote back on 17th April, *two* identical letters with further replacement NIPs, with blustering warnings that I was required to sign the forms according to Section 172. I responded on 28th April saying "In response to my request that you advise me exactly where in law it states that I have an obligation to sign the form, you have merely referred me to Section 172 of the Road Traffic Act of 1988. When I look therein, the wording that I find relating to the present case appears to be this:
(2) Where the driver of a vehicle is alleged to be guilty of an offence to which this section applies—
(a) the person keeping the vehicle shall give such information as to the identity of the driver as he may be required to give by or on behalf of a chief officer of police, and
(b) any other person shall if required as stated above give any information which it is in his power to give and may lead to identification of the driver.
While I am keen to comply with all my legal obligations, I do not wish to sign the form, having been advised by my legal representative that I should never sign anything that I do not have to sign. Looking at the relevant wording of Section 172 as shown above, there is clearly no mention of an obligation to sign. If there is some other part of this legislation which applies in the present case, please be kind enough to advise me of the part concerned and of its precise wording, and I will be pleased to comply.
Absent such a legal obligation, I will continue to rely upon my original submission of the completed Notice of Intended Prosecution – for which I have evidence of timely delivery to you - as having complied with my legal obligations."
They wrote back on 2nd May, citing DPP-v-Broomfield and warning me that the clock was ticking on a potential £1000 fine/3 points for failure to complete the NIP. I wrote back on 8th May saying "I note that you suggest by implication that I am now liable to be prosecuted for failure to comply with the section 172 request, citing DPP-v-Broomfield 2002.
I am advised however that DPP-v-Broomfield should only apply to verbal replies. If you have knowledge of any authoritative independent source (i.e. other than the CPS and the Police) to the effect that DPP-v-Broomfield would apply in an unsigned forms case, then please let me have a note of that source without delay."
It's 31st May now and I've not had anything further. The general belief among those of us who are keeping an eye on this story, is that it will take *months* to fix S172 and to fix it will very likely run it into such difficulties with the European courts over the issue of self-incrimination that it will again become broken.
I'll keep you posted if anything happens with my case. But fer g*ds sake lads, read the d*mn website before you start pleading guilty to anything.
[Edited by softwizz - 5/31/2003 9:44:47 AM]
I got my NIP at the beginning of March for an alleged offence in late Feb. I sent back the completed but unsigned NIP at the end of March, following the SafeSpeed site's guidelines.
Avon & Somerset force wrote to me on 3rd April saying the NIP was not completed correctly and providing another one. I wrote back on 7th April saying "So far as I can tell, the only point on which you are unsatisfied is that I have not signed the form. While I am keen to comply with all my legal obligations, I do not wish to sign the form. If you would be kind enough to advise me exactly where in law it states that I have an obligation to sign the form I will be pleased to comply."
They wrote back on 17th April, *two* identical letters with further replacement NIPs, with blustering warnings that I was required to sign the forms according to Section 172. I responded on 28th April saying "In response to my request that you advise me exactly where in law it states that I have an obligation to sign the form, you have merely referred me to Section 172 of the Road Traffic Act of 1988. When I look therein, the wording that I find relating to the present case appears to be this:
(2) Where the driver of a vehicle is alleged to be guilty of an offence to which this section applies—
(a) the person keeping the vehicle shall give such information as to the identity of the driver as he may be required to give by or on behalf of a chief officer of police, and
(b) any other person shall if required as stated above give any information which it is in his power to give and may lead to identification of the driver.
While I am keen to comply with all my legal obligations, I do not wish to sign the form, having been advised by my legal representative that I should never sign anything that I do not have to sign. Looking at the relevant wording of Section 172 as shown above, there is clearly no mention of an obligation to sign. If there is some other part of this legislation which applies in the present case, please be kind enough to advise me of the part concerned and of its precise wording, and I will be pleased to comply.
Absent such a legal obligation, I will continue to rely upon my original submission of the completed Notice of Intended Prosecution – for which I have evidence of timely delivery to you - as having complied with my legal obligations."
They wrote back on 2nd May, citing DPP-v-Broomfield and warning me that the clock was ticking on a potential £1000 fine/3 points for failure to complete the NIP. I wrote back on 8th May saying "I note that you suggest by implication that I am now liable to be prosecuted for failure to comply with the section 172 request, citing DPP-v-Broomfield 2002.
I am advised however that DPP-v-Broomfield should only apply to verbal replies. If you have knowledge of any authoritative independent source (i.e. other than the CPS and the Police) to the effect that DPP-v-Broomfield would apply in an unsigned forms case, then please let me have a note of that source without delay."
It's 31st May now and I've not had anything further. The general belief among those of us who are keeping an eye on this story, is that it will take *months* to fix S172 and to fix it will very likely run it into such difficulties with the European courts over the issue of self-incrimination that it will again become broken.
I'll keep you posted if anything happens with my case. But fer g*ds sake lads, read the d*mn website before you start pleading guilty to anything.
[Edited by softwizz - 5/31/2003 9:44:47 AM]
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
jobegold@hotmail.co.uk
ScoobyNet General
2
27 September 2015 09:44 PM