DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Speeding and other criminal offences
*****************************************************
#Post#: 40940--------------------------------------------------
Hire Car 3 NIPs same day round trip - M1 (Northb.) J28-29, M1
(Northb.) J29a-30 & M1 (Southb.) J30-29a - 61 & 59 in a
50
DIR By: Hustler6969
Date: October 15, 2024, 7:36 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Hi gents,
A relative seems to have got himself into a right mess.
Basically to his and his mrs.' shock and horror they received
(delayed) notification from the hire car company a few days ago
that they had gotten themselves three speeding tickets on the
same day round trip journey. NIPs arrived in post yesterday.
Two are about 15 mins apart on the same stretch northbound in
the morning, and the third is around about the same patch
southbound in the afternoon.
It was a hire car and usually him and his mrs. share the
driving. For the last few months, they've been doing this
journey about twice a week (as part of a 4-hr drive each way) so
their memories (especially given that these have arrived delayed
about three-four weeks after the offence having changed hands
via the hire company) are a bit hazy as to who actually was
driving, but of course they'd be willing to take an
educated/informed guess depending on how this is best
approached. The pictures supplied are grainy/dark at best and
pretty indistinguishable as to who exactly is at the wheel.
They are very much disappointed of course, as in over 10-15
years of having their driving licenses they've only had one
other infringement..
Following are the details of each one:
For the alleged offence of Exceeding 50 MPH The speed limit
being 50 mph. At 22/09/2024 08:54:50 hrs
At (place) M 1 J29 Heath (North Bound) J28-J29 - Alleged speed
61mph
For the alleged offence of Exceeding 50 MPH The speed limit
being 50 mph. At 22/09/2024 09:04:48 hrs
At (place) M 1 Near Barlborough (North Bound) J29a-J30 - Alleged
speed 61mph
For the alleged offence of Exceeding 50 MPH The speed limit
being 50 mph. At 22/09/2024 13:24:55 hrs
At (place) M 1 Duckmanton (South Bound) J30-J29a - - Alleged
speed 61mph
Given their predicament (potential to rack up 9 points and be a
whisker away from a ban), I would appreciate your advice on how
best to tackle this, and I also had a few questions of my own to
try to help them:
1) Is there anyway to determine for sure if these (or each of
them) were 'normal' or 'variable speed cameras'? Trying to pin
these down on google street view they appear to me 'normal'
national speed limit cameras, however the NIP claims the speed
limit was 50. I ask this as the relative has done a 'normal'
speeding course within the last three years but ofc if this is a
variable speed limit breach a motorway course should still be
offered? His mrs. record is absolutely clean. I believe they are
generally 'sat-nav followers' and say they couldn't say for sure
what type of camera/limit it may have been, but say they do have
general memories of there often being all of roadworks, average
cameras, variable limits etc., but also that they can't be
certain if it'd be the M1 they are talking about, as parts of
the M6 and M42 are also usually on this route of theirs.
2) There seems to be several recent posts here regarding the
same patch/offence and also writing to CREST/Derbyshire
Constabulary for very close together offences. Is it worth
writing to CREST to consider the first two (about 15 mins apart)
a continuous offence, before nominating/naming drivers? If so,
if someone could provide me what wording to write to them that'd
be very much appreciated.
Any help as always much appreciated.
#Post#: 40959--------------------------------------------------
Re: Hire Car 3 NIPs same day round trip - M1 (Northb.) J28-29,
M1 (Northb.) J29a-30 & M1 (Southb.) J30-29a - 61 & 59 in
DIR By: BertB
Date: October 16, 2024, 4:12 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Combining the first two offences at that location into a single
offence has been done recently by a poster on here.
HTML https://www.ftla.uk/speeding-and-other-criminal-offences/received-2-nips-on-same-journey-17-minutes-apart/msg35421/#msg35421
The general advice is to fill in the S172 response, write a
letter regarding the first two offences to politely enquire as
to considering them a continuous offence and send back together
in a single envelope, obtaining free proof of posting from the
post office.
#Post#: 40999--------------------------------------------------
Re: Hire Car 3 NIPs same day round trip - M1 (Northb.) J28-29,
M1 (Northb.) J29a-30 & M1 (Southb.) J30-29a - 61 & 59 in
DIR By: Hustler6969
Date: October 16, 2024, 6:47 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Hi, yes, I am aware of that post which I was referring to in my
original post.
However, would you not think better that they try asking CREST
in good time BEFORE naming drivers to consider the first two a
continuous offence, such that hopefully before naming they can
know if they’re ultimately dealing with 2 or 3 tickets? And if
it dosen't work, then ask again when naming?
It almost feels like the other poster did so before naming the
driver hence the question.
#Post#: 41024--------------------------------------------------
Re: Hire Car 3 NIPs same day round trip - M1 (Northb.) J28-29,
M1 (Northb.) J29a-30 & M1 (Southb.) J30-29a - 61 & 59 in
DIR By: NewJudge
Date: October 16, 2024, 8:16 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote ---
> However, would you not think better that they try asking CREST
in good time BEFORE naming drivers
--- End Quote ---
No.
Whoever the requests are addressed to has an obligation to name
the driver on each occasion regardless of any issues with the
offences themselves.
The first two certainly have a possibility of being treated as a
single continuous offence but there is no reason to delay naming
the driver in order to make that argument with the police. Of
course to argue that it was a single offence the same person
must have been driving throughout, so that person needs to be
nominated anyway.
If the police decline that request, securing success becomes
complicated because it will mean either accepting a fixed
penalty for the first and asking for the second to be heard in
court, or asking for both to be heard there. Then you can make
the same argument (that the two were a single offence) or that
although they were two separate offences, they were committed
"on the same occasion" (and so warrant only one lot of points).
I don't think you can do that if you accepted a course for the
first offence. You should note that if these arguments fail, it
is going to be very much more expensive than the fixed penalty.
#Post#: 41037--------------------------------------------------
Re: Hire Car 3 NIPs same day round trip - M1 (Northb.) J28-29,
M1 (Northb.) J29a-30 & M1 (Southb.) J30-29a - 61 & 59 in
DIR By: Southpaw82
Date: October 16, 2024, 8:47 am
---------------------------------------------------------
The police would (one hopes) want to know that it was the same
driver on both occasions, otherwise it cannot be a single
offence.
#Post#: 41047--------------------------------------------------
Re: Hire Car 3 NIPs same day round trip - M1 (Northb.) J28-29,
M1 (Northb.) J29a-30 & M1 (Southb.) J30-29a - 61 & 59 in
DIR By: Hustler6969
Date: October 16, 2024, 9:59 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Just a response to the above replies and a follow-up as well on
my original questions.
1) Can anyone verify/confirm if these cameras were variable
limits or fixed limits? Like I say I’d want to understand if the
driver who’s already had a speed awareness course might still
get offered a motorway awareness course. Find it confusing that
on GSV they just look like national speed cameras.
2) In response to the response before last, are you suggesting
if (for the first two offences) the driver was named and it was
politely requested for them to be considered a continuous
offence, and that request was rejected, that it would
automatically result in the second of two offences having to be
defended in court, or would it just be that in the worst case
(of continuous claim rejected) that the named driver is offered
two sets of points/fines (or one course if applicable for the
first and points for the second)? Appreciate if you could
clarify, wouldn’t want to ask for them to be a continuous
offence if if rejected it could lead to a bigger/worse problem.
#Post#: 41064--------------------------------------------------
Re: Hire Car 3 NIPs same day round trip - M1 (Northb.) J28-29,
M1 (Northb.) J29a-30 & M1 (Southb.) J30-29a - 61 & 59 in
DIR By: sparx
Date: October 16, 2024, 11:28 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Likely variable, look here for at least one set of cameras
between M1 28-29 Northbound:
HTML https://www.google.co.uk/maps/place/4M69%2BQ3F,+Alfreton<br
/>complete with the variable signs.
What are "national speed cameras"? Are you getting confused with
"average" speed cameras used mainly in roadworks on mways?
#Post#: 41075--------------------------------------------------
Re: Hire Car 3 NIPs same day round trip - M1 (Northb.) J28-29,
M1 (Northb.) J29a-30 & M1 (Southb.) J30-29a - 61 & 59 in
DIR By: andy_foster
Date: October 16, 2024, 12:20 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Hustler6969 link ---
>
> Just a response to the above replies and a follow-up as well
on my original questions.
>
> 1) Can anyone verify/confirm if these cameras were variable
limits or fixed limits? Like I say I’d want to understand if the
driver who’s already had a speed awareness course might still
get offered a motorway awareness course. Find it confusing that
on GSV they just look like national speed cameras.
>
> 2) In response to the response before last, are you suggesting
if (for the first two offences) the driver was named and it was
politely requested for them to be considered a continuous
offence, and that request was rejected, that it would
automatically result in the second of two offences having to be
defended in court, or would it just be that in the worst case
(of continuous claim rejected) that the named driver is offered
two sets of points/fines (or one course if applicable for the
first and points for the second)? Appreciate if you could
clarify, wouldn’t want to ask for them to be a continuous
offence if if rejected it could lead to a bigger/worse problem.
>
--- End Quote ---
1. Do NOT bump your thread.
2. Posters usually say what they mean. Rather than asking them
to repeat what they have already told you, try re-reading what
they have already told you. In this case, you might want to
focus on the word "success".
#Post#: 41084--------------------------------------------------
Re: Hire Car 3 NIPs same day round trip - M1 (Northb.) J28-29,
M1 (Northb.) J29a-30 & M1 (Southb.) J30-29a - 61 & 59 in
DIR By: Hustler6969
Date: October 16, 2024, 1:04 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
I'm sorry I don't understand
My question is were a request to be made when naming that two be
considered a single offence could the response be directly a
rejection and referral for the second to court, or is practice
that the request is declined and the offer for course/points be
made again to the offender for both offences?
#Post#: 41092--------------------------------------------------
Re: Hire Car 3 NIPs same day round trip - M1 (Northb.) J28-29,
M1 (Northb.) J29a-30 & M1 (Southb.) J30-29a - 61 & 59 in
DIR By: NewJudge
Date: October 16, 2024, 1:45 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote ---
> ...are you suggesting if (for the first two offences) the
driver was named and it was politely requested for them to be
considered a continuous offence, and that request was rejected,
that it would automatically result in the second of two offences
having to be defended in court,
--- End Quote ---
No.
What I'm saying is that if the police reject that argument and
the driver disagrees with that decision, the only place to make
it again is in court. And to do that he would have to reject any
offer (of a course or fixed penalty) the police might make.
If these allegations are left to take their course these are the
likelihoods:
If the driver is the same for all three allegations he is likely
to be offered either three fixed penalties or two fixed
penalties and a course (if eligible)
If the driver is different for offence #3, the driver on the
first two occasions is likely to be offered either two fixed
penalties or a fixed penalty and a course (if eligible). The
driver on occasion #3 is likely to be offered either a fixed
penalty or a course (if eligible).
Your relative's line of approach should be firstly ask the
police if they would consider the first two as a single
continuous offence. If that is unsuccessful, they will then have
to decide whether to let "nature take its course" as I outlined
above, or whether to make that argument before a court.
It might be best to wait for the outcome of that request (and
also until it is determined whether or not the driver was the
same person on all three occasions) and then come back for more
advice.
At the moment there are too many variables to explain the
possible outcomes without confusion,
*****************************************************
Page 1 of 2
DIR Next Page