DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Speeding and other criminal offences
*****************************************************
#Post#: 31964--------------------------------------------------
Re: Unidentifiable Photographic Evidence
DIR By: HammyTheHamster
Date: August 2, 2024, 8:50 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: NewJudge link ---
>
> I'm not too sure what the basis of your argument is. From the
title, are you suggesting that the vehicle is unidentifiable
because you cannot read the number plate from the image you have
been provided with? They clearly have identified your car and
you do not seem to dispute you were there police have no
obligation to provide that image, so how would you proceed if
you didn't have it?
>
--- End Quote ---
There isn't anymore - the first few responses kindly confirmed
that there is virtually guaranteed to be a continuous video
and/or higher res photos which will eliminate doubt as to
identifying that vehicle in the image I posted. Thus no point
bothering to ask for further evidence regardless of whether the
police deign to share it.
So case closed as far as I'm concerned, have accepted the NIP
online.
But another strand was about whether a reading of 71mph is
prosecutable/evidence of speeding - not really related to the
original query.
As I said, case closed - thread can be too if anyone mods this
forum.
#Post#: 31971--------------------------------------------------
Re: Unidentifiable Photographic Evidence
DIR By: andy_foster
Date: August 2, 2024, 9:12 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: HammyTheHamster link ---
>
> So case closed as far as I'm concerned, have accepted the NIP
online.
--- End Quote ---
Maybe, maybe not.
You cannot "accept" or decline a NIP.
Some forces allow the driver to admit to being the driver online
- either by scanning the signed s. 172 response, or by
completing a section that is clearly intended to be taken as a
signature. Either way, the s. 172 requirement will require a
"signature" of some description.
Most forces don't. Some allow the recipient of a NIP who was not
the driver to nominate the driver online, as after 30+ years
they have finally grasped that a signature is only relevant when
the recipient of the notice admits to being the driver. We have
seen cases where the driver somehow managed to nominate
themselves online through such systems only to be prosecuted for
failing to name the driver.
A&S used to issue what is referred to as a SuperNIP - a combined
NIP/s. 172 requirement/COFP (and possibly offer of SAC).
Presumably when you say that you have accepted the NIP online,
you mean that you have accepted either a COFP or SAC online?
I would strongly suggest reading the form thoroughly and
ensuring that you have complied with the s. 172 requirements to
name the driver.
--- Quote ---
> As I said, case closed - thread can be too if anyone mods this
forum.
>
--- End Quote ---
As a general rule, threads being closed tend to coincide with
posters being banned.
#Post#: 32003--------------------------------------------------
Re: Unidentifiable Photographic Evidence
DIR By: Southpaw82
Date: August 2, 2024, 1:13 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Operator gives evidence of car caught doing 81. Two photos, one
showing 81 but plate unreadable, one showing same car several
seconds later but readable plate. Seems like beyond a reasonable
doubt to me.
#Post#: 32009--------------------------------------------------
Re: Unidentifiable Photographic Evidence
DIR By: slapdash
Date: August 2, 2024, 2:06 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: andy_foster link ---
>
> A&S used to issue what is referred to as a SuperNIP - a
combined NIP/s. 172 requirement/COFP (and possibly offer of
SAC). Presumably when you say that you have accepted the NIP
online, you mean that you have accepted either a COFP or SAC
online?
>
--- End Quote ---
They still were around this time last year.
You could confirm self as driver and pick an option. That needed
an envolope.
You could nominate somebody else on line.
There was a link provided to book a SAC, obviously in addition
to posting the response.
#Post#: 32031--------------------------------------------------
Re: Unidentifiable Photographic Evidence
DIR By: ManxTom
Date: August 2, 2024, 5:21 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: HammyTheHamster link ---
>
>
> ... So case closed as far as I'm concerned, have accepted the
NIP online...
>
--- End Quote ---
As andy foster has said you need to carefully check the
instructions on the NIP/s172 request.
I know* that Norfolk & Suffolk Constabularies will accept an
online response and "signature", but most police forces insist
that if you're identifying yourself - as opposed to someone else
- then you must return the signed paper form
* Because I got caught myself last year
#Post#: 32078--------------------------------------------------
Re: Unidentifiable Photographic Evidence
DIR By: Rallyman72
Date: August 3, 2024, 6:19 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I got caught by A&S 2 1/2 years ago and got a super NIP, no
option to respond on line, it had to be the good old snail mail.
I did a speed awareness course, cost less than taking a fixed
penalty.
37 in a 30, road I know well but hadn't used for many years and
used to be a 60. It was the day after I cremated my mum ...
*****************************************************
Page 2 of 2
DIR Previous Page