Notice of intended prosecution
#1
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Scotland
Posts: 126
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Notice of intended prosecution
A few weeks ago I passed a "safety" camera doing 40 which I thought was the speed limit for the road I was on (dual carriageway with central reservation and continuous barrier, this was not a piece of road which pedestrians would use to cross), i'm not making excuses here the limit was 30 and I got nabbed, had I known the limit was 30 then thats the speed I would have been doing as I saw the camera before I passed it.
My question is this?
According to section 172 of the road traffic act a notice of intended prosecution needs to have been sent within 14 days of the offence taking place.
I received mine 7 weeks after the offence took place, after many attempts I managed to speak to a jobsworth at "Strathclyde safety camera partnership" who informed me that one had been sent out to me within the 14 day period, no recorded delivery was used and I didnt receive it.
Has this happened to any of you guys? Did you fight it in court and did the case get thrown out because of it?
Thanks in advance
My question is this?
According to section 172 of the road traffic act a notice of intended prosecution needs to have been sent within 14 days of the offence taking place.
I received mine 7 weeks after the offence took place, after many attempts I managed to speak to a jobsworth at "Strathclyde safety camera partnership" who informed me that one had been sent out to me within the 14 day period, no recorded delivery was used and I didnt receive it.
Has this happened to any of you guys? Did you fight it in court and did the case get thrown out because of it?
Thanks in advance
#2
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: never the same place twice
Posts: 3,346
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi
2 pieces of advice here mate, firstly, dont bite as there will be a 10+ page thread of abuse and lessons to follow lol
secondly, get yourself to thi website and take it from there, you will find all you need to know right here http://www.pepipoo.com/
cheers
john
2 pieces of advice here mate, firstly, dont bite as there will be a 10+ page thread of abuse and lessons to follow lol
secondly, get yourself to thi website and take it from there, you will find all you need to know right here http://www.pepipoo.com/
cheers
john
#5
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (1)
If you can say Yes to all these questions then you have good case and is worth fighting
Have you owned said vehicle for a long time (year or more)
Is the DVLA V5 doc address correct
Have you lived at same address for a year or more
Are you the registered keeper of the vehicle
Nicholson-v-Tapp [1972] case law to back up your argument
see pepipoo.com
Have you owned said vehicle for a long time (year or more)
Is the DVLA V5 doc address correct
Have you lived at same address for a year or more
Are you the registered keeper of the vehicle
Nicholson-v-Tapp [1972] case law to back up your argument
see pepipoo.com
#6
Scooby Regular
You would have slowed to 30MPH if you knew it was 30??
So, I assume you also 'slowed' to 40 as thats what you thought the speed limit was.
Speeding is speeding - you were doing 40+ in a 30 and only slow down for cameras ....... I suggest you pay your money and slow down
How many people have ACTUALLY 'got off' a speeding fine rather than just talk about it????? Not many I would guess!!
Pete
So, I assume you also 'slowed' to 40 as thats what you thought the speed limit was.
Speeding is speeding - you were doing 40+ in a 30 and only slow down for cameras ....... I suggest you pay your money and slow down
How many people have ACTUALLY 'got off' a speeding fine rather than just talk about it????? Not many I would guess!!
Pete
#7
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: never the same place twice
Posts: 3,346
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i happen to know a certain person who has got an alledged offence thrown out.
there is a difference between alleged and simply getting off with it.
john
there is a difference between alleged and simply getting off with it.
john
Trending Topics
#8
Scooby Regular
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Nott'm Home of the Reds
Posts: 6,431
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by AVI-8
A few weeks ago I passed a "safety" camera doing 40 which I thought was the speed limit for the road I was on (dual carriageway with central reservation and continuous barrier, this was not a piece of road which pedestrians would use to cross), i'm not making excuses here the limit was 30 and I got nabbed, had I known the limit was 30 then thats the speed I would have been doing as I saw the camera before I passed it.
My question is this?
According to section 172 of the road traffic act a notice of intended prosecution needs to have been sent within 14 days of the offence taking place.
I received mine 7 weeks after the offence took place, after many attempts I managed to speak to a jobsworth at "Strathclyde safety camera partnership" who informed me that one had been sent out to me within the 14 day period, no recorded delivery was used and I didnt receive it.
Has this happened to any of you guys? Did you fight it in court and did the case get thrown out because of it?
Thanks in advance
My question is this?
According to section 172 of the road traffic act a notice of intended prosecution needs to have been sent within 14 days of the offence taking place.
I received mine 7 weeks after the offence took place, after many attempts I managed to speak to a jobsworth at "Strathclyde safety camera partnership" who informed me that one had been sent out to me within the 14 day period, no recorded delivery was used and I didnt receive it.
Has this happened to any of you guys? Did you fight it in court and did the case get thrown out because of it?
Thanks in advance
#9
Scooby Regular
Originally Posted by Dazza01
My NIP was sent out 38 days later, i went to court and WON
Which Court and what time was the hearing?
Pete
#10
Originally Posted by pslewis
And how did you win?
Which Court and what time was the hearing?
Pete
Which Court and what time was the hearing?
Pete
since when did you become the peoples crusader for legal issues. If there telling porkies so what!! . You spin bulls*it yourself, or is it the fact someone may have pulled off somthing you didnt!!!
I seem to recall you screaming blue murder and looking for every bit of
available spin to evade your potential NIP!!!. And when it didnt arrive you were just as bolshy in saying so.
stick to being a troll, its the only thing your good at
Mart
#12
Scooby Regular
Originally Posted by Dazza01
Why ?
You can help everyone!!
Pete
#13
Scooby Regular
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Nott'm Home of the Reds
Posts: 6,431
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
#17
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Scotland
Posts: 126
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by pslewis
You would have slowed to 30MPH if you knew it was 30??
So, I assume you also 'slowed' to 40 as thats what you thought the speed limit was.
Speeding is speeding - you were doing 40+ in a 30 and only slow down for cameras ....... I suggest you pay your money and slow down
How many people have ACTUALLY 'got off' a speeding fine rather than just talk about it????? Not many I would guess!!
Pete
So, I assume you also 'slowed' to 40 as thats what you thought the speed limit was.
Speeding is speeding - you were doing 40+ in a 30 and only slow down for cameras ....... I suggest you pay your money and slow down
How many people have ACTUALLY 'got off' a speeding fine rather than just talk about it????? Not many I would guess!!
Pete
Thanks guys for all of the tips, my doubts about the lagality of my nip have been confirmed.
And Pete no I hadn't slowed to 40, I was doing 40 because I thought that I was in a 40 limit, my fault for not looking at the roadsign, I'm generally very careful about where I put my foot down a bit and it's gererally on a quiet country road. I suppose thats the reason why up until now I've been able to drive for nineteen years without a speeding conviction.
#18
Scooby Regular
Originally Posted by AVI-8
Thanks guys for all of the tips, my doubts about the lagality of my nip have been confirmed.
And Pete no I hadn't slowed to 40, I was doing 40 because I thought that I was in a 40 limit, my fault for not looking at the roadsign, I'm generally very careful about where I put my foot down a bit and it's gererally on a quiet country road. I suppose thats the reason why up until now I've been able to drive for nineteen years without a speeding conviction.
And Pete no I hadn't slowed to 40, I was doing 40 because I thought that I was in a 40 limit, my fault for not looking at the roadsign, I'm generally very careful about where I put my foot down a bit and it's gererally on a quiet country road. I suppose thats the reason why up until now I've been able to drive for nineteen years without a speeding conviction.
19 years??
try my 64 years!!!!
Good luck though!
Pete
#19
Originally Posted by pslewis
19 years??
19 years??
try my 64 years!!!!
Good luck though!
Pete
19 years??
try my 64 years!!!!
Good luck though!
Pete
according to this statement would make you 81, rather old for a consultant, and certianly out of the loop with current developments. 17yrs past retirement, your current knowledge would be of little value. or is it another walter mitty statement
mart
#22
A few weeks ago I passed a "safety" camera doing 40 which I thought was the speed limit for the road I was on (dual carriageway with central reservation and continuous barrier, this was not a piece of road which pedestrians would use to cross), i'm not making excuses here the limit was 30 and I got nabbed, had I known the limit was 30 then thats the speed I would have been doing as I saw the camera before I passed it.
My question is this?
According to section 172 of the road traffic act a notice of intended prosecution needs to have been sent within 14 days of the offence taking place.
I received mine 7 weeks after the offence took place, after many attempts I managed to speak to a jobsworth at "Strathclyde safety camera partnership" who informed me that one had been sent out to me within the 14 day period, no recorded delivery was used and I didnt receive it.
Has this happened to any of you guys? Did you fight it in court and did the case get thrown out because of it?
Thanks in advance
My question is this?
According to section 172 of the road traffic act a notice of intended prosecution needs to have been sent within 14 days of the offence taking place.
I received mine 7 weeks after the offence took place, after many attempts I managed to speak to a jobsworth at "Strathclyde safety camera partnership" who informed me that one had been sent out to me within the 14 day period, no recorded delivery was used and I didnt receive it.
Has this happened to any of you guys? Did you fight it in court and did the case get thrown out because of it?
Thanks in advance
Not that i'm saying it would work, (or that its politically correct before any one shouts at me!) but i'd try and avoid it as long as possible, i'm fairly sure theres a time limit for prosecution too. Anyway to cut a long story short, my ex-boss has 6+ outstanding tickets, never replied to them, called them to ask to go to court and theyve never bothered.... And that was over 2 years ago.
EDIT: followed the link above and found this:
6 Month Rule Explained - FightBack Forums
seems to suggest the time limit is 6 months to send it to CPS for prosecution.... Also there's a link on there saying about the 14 days. They have to give you a damn good reason if it didnt arrive in 14 days....
Last edited by nickyrhodes; 06 February 2007 at 02:02 PM.
#23
I got caught a few years back same sort of thing I thought is was a 40 but it was a 30 (only doing 34 at the time).
Lucky for me they offered me a £60 fine and speed awareness lessons.
Lucky for me they offered me a £60 fine and speed awareness lessons.
#24
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (1)
Bad luck mate, the same thing happened to my ex-boss. Apparently as long as they sent it out within the time its valid regardless of whenever you get it. However I dont see how it would stand in court unless they had a receipt to prove it had been sent...
Not that i'm saying it would work, (or that its politically correct before any one shouts at me!) but i'd try and avoid it as long as possible, i'm fairly sure theres a time limit for prosecution too. Anyway to cut a long story short, my ex-boss has 6+ outstanding tickets, never replied to them, called them to ask to go to court and theyve never bothered.... And that was over 2 years ago.
EDIT: followed the link above and found this:
6 Month Rule Explained - FightBack Forums
seems to suggest the time limit is 6 months to send it to CPS for prosecution.... Also there's a link on there saying about the 14 days. They have to give you a damn good reason if it didnt arrive in 14 days....
Not that i'm saying it would work, (or that its politically correct before any one shouts at me!) but i'd try and avoid it as long as possible, i'm fairly sure theres a time limit for prosecution too. Anyway to cut a long story short, my ex-boss has 6+ outstanding tickets, never replied to them, called them to ask to go to court and theyve never bothered.... And that was over 2 years ago.
EDIT: followed the link above and found this:
6 Month Rule Explained - FightBack Forums
seems to suggest the time limit is 6 months to send it to CPS for prosecution.... Also there's a link on there saying about the 14 days. They have to give you a damn good reason if it didnt arrive in 14 days....
If a nip is sent via registered post or better will be deemed to be served, irrespective of whether it is delivered or not. Most safety camera partnerships use first class post, which can be rebutted in court as to its service.
note your boss has been VVV lucky
Andy
#25
Scooby Regular
Talking of Safety Partnerships, i took the time to have a look at the Lancashire Partnership for Road Safety website.
Lancashire Partnership for Road Safety
Just take a look at some of the answers on the Speeding and Safety Cameras FAQ's. Some of the answers are blatantly inaccurate and misleading.
Of course they are justifying their own existence.
Gits.
Lancashire Partnership for Road Safety
Just take a look at some of the answers on the Speeding and Safety Cameras FAQ's. Some of the answers are blatantly inaccurate and misleading.
Of course they are justifying their own existence.
Gits.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
jobegold@hotmail.co.uk
ScoobyNet General
2
27 September 2015 09:44 PM