Speeding, and the 14 day rule.
 

I've read, somewhere, that you have to be sent a NIP within 14 days of the offence?

I know that if they have grounds not to have easily found you, (moved, changed cars, hire car, etc), they can extend it, but what I want to know is, has anyone on here ever succesfully challenged one on the grounds that it didn't arrive inside 14 days?
And is it 14 WORKING days, or just two weeks dead?

And before anyone asks, no.

Technically yes, Statute states that the requirement is to serve an NIP within 14 calendar days. But, because they are sent out non recorded, you would have to prove it was never sent. Someone on Pepipo contested one on these grounds and lost unfortunately, as there defence was simply "it must have got lost in the post and additional NIPs were sent out before prosecution proceeded"

^^ Eh! How can one prove that something did or didn't turn up? If I say it never arrived there is no proof by virtue that it never arrived ... impossible for anyone else to prove otherwise. How is it possible to lose that arguement :(

TX.

It's an argument that goes back to 1818 when someone posted the acceptance of an offer to buy some wool. The Law can assume in some circumstances that if the letter was "properly posted" then the deed is done..........

Shaun

Yeah, and I'm still waiting for that f*cking wool to turn up.

That was the last time I bought anything off someone on ScoobyNet!

Didn't know Flat 4 Online sold wool :D

Shaun

I believe that the 14 days is also plus a bit to allow for postage time.

Les

I thought it was 28 days?

yeh he fleeced another vicim lmfao

Funnily enough, those circumstances seem to not include things being posted to the DVLA or HMRC :mad:

The only 3 I've ever had all arrived well within 14 days, but the last one of those was 9 years ago (long before I got my scoob :D).

If the postmark and/or the date in the letter was more than 14 days after offence, I'd say that's a very good case though.

There is a guy on Pistonheads that has recently won a case regarding this. He thought he may have gone through a speed camera too fast and watched his post coming. Anyway, it arrived on about day 16 so he he opened it in front of his postman as witness. I think the NIP had been sent on day 6 but there had been a postal dispute at the time. I think it went to court a couple of times where the police claimed they only had to show they had posted it within 14 days. Eventually a judge ruled that it had to arrive within 14 days as you had to be able to recall the incident. Or it had to be sent recorded delivery, which apparently they used to be but stopped because of the cost.

I will try and find the case and link to it.

Applies to the date on the letter only, supposedly, this is acceptable because it goes through a franking machine:Suspiciou

Here you go :thumb:

So it has to arrive within 14 days. You have to be able to prove it of course.


Pistonheads


BBC link

If there is any sort of postal strike and they send an NIP in the normal way, then they have clearly not used reasonable diligence to ascertain driver details in a timely manner.

Read through the thread. Everybody thinks that including two previous judges. It was nothing to do with the postal strike as such, it was the fact the NIP arrived after 14 days.

Plenty of threads on PH regarding this and the links you have used. :thumb:

No I agree with it. We pay them enough, they could of sent a local Constable to hand deliver a letter.

As said on PH, its case law now unless they amend/revise the law.

You simply have to rebutt the service, by taking the stand and stating that it was not served within the timescale. The prosecution then have to prove you were lying or undermine your statement/character for the bench not to believe you.

The difference is in the word SERVED, not posted :D