DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Speeding and other criminal offences
*****************************************************
#Post#: 4276--------------------------------------------------
Duplicate NIP
DIR By: Chris19
Date: September 2, 2023, 8:10 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Hi, back in Feb/23 I received a NIP for speeding 38m in a 30m
road.
I was allowed and attended my awareness course.
Today, 02/09, I received the same NIP with date and time from
Feb.
I can’t find any of my emails that shows I have attended the
course or the original NIP to check on ref.
My husband suggested me to write back and explain. But I want to
check if this is quite normal to get, duplicate NIP within
months, and whatever I should do.
Thanks
#Post#: 4278--------------------------------------------------
Re: Duplicate NIP
DIR By: andy_foster
Date: September 2, 2023, 8:56 am
---------------------------------------------------------
To prosecute the driver for the alleged speeding offence, they
would have to instigate court proceedings within 6 months of the
date of the alleged offence. Assuming that the date you received
the original NIP was after the date of the alleged offence, it
is already too late to do so.
Just as a sanity check, this "same NIP" that you have received,
does it say "Notice of Intended Prosecution" at the top, and/or
contain a warning under s. 1 Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988
that it is intended to instigate proceedings against the
[unnamed] driver of that vehicle for exceeding the speed limit
in <vehicle> at <time> and <place>, or does it say "Single
Justice Procedure Notice" at the top and ask you to enter a plea
within 21 days?
#Post#: 4280--------------------------------------------------
Re: Duplicate NIP
DIR By: Tikli Chestikov
Date: September 2, 2023, 10:21 am
---------------------------------------------------------
When I attended my one, and only (hopefully), SAC in 2015, the
two Smashy And Nicey characters took turns, like a tag-team of
tedium, to say "don't drive so fast" in as many different ways
as possible. With PowerPoint slides. For four hours.
And the worst thing was that they really were trying to make it
interesting. Bless them.
But at the end they did implore us to keep our documentation
from the day to prove we'd attended, apparently it was quite
common to get follow-ups because of administrative cock-ups.
#Post#: 4392--------------------------------------------------
Re: Duplicate NIP
DIR By: guest46
Date: September 5, 2023, 1:24 am
---------------------------------------------------------
It's certainly not normal if - as AF says above - it is
definitely for the same offence (time/day/speed). Although I've
never heard of one, it's possible you were not properly 'logged'
as participating on the SAC (was it online or in person?) so
possibly an IT error.
Although a long time ago, when I did one there was most
certainly e-mail confirmation though.
#Post#: 4601--------------------------------------------------
Re: Duplicate NIP
DIR By: tonys
Date: September 8, 2023, 1:10 am
---------------------------------------------------------
If this "duplicate NIP" includes a S172 request for driver
details, would this still need to be provided, even though a
duplicate?
#Post#: 4602--------------------------------------------------
Re: Duplicate NIP
DIR By: 666
Date: September 8, 2023, 1:24 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: tonys link ---
>
> If this "duplicate NIP" includes a S172 request for driver
details, would this still need to be provided, even though a
duplicate?
>
--- End Quote ---
There is no time limit on s172 requests, so yes.
#Post#: 4604--------------------------------------------------
Re: Duplicate NIP
DIR By: NewJudge
Date: September 8, 2023, 2:37 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: 666 link ---
>
> [quote author=tonys link=topic=471.msg4601#msg4601
date=1694153432]
> If this "duplicate NIP" includes a S172 request for driver
details, would this still need to be provided, even though a
duplicate?
>
--- End Quote ---
There is no time limit on s172 requests, so yes.
[/quote]
Except that this would effectively extend the time for
prosecution (for the s172 offence if no reply is received). As
far as I know there is no case law in E&W addressing this point.
However, there was a case reaching the Scottish Appeal Court
back in 2010:
HTML https://www.scotcourts.gov.uk/search-judgments/judgment?id=77be8aa6-8980-69d2-b500-ff0000d74aa7
In precis, a s172 notice was served and received no reply. Some
months later the police visited the recipient to ask who was
driving at the relevant time and were told by him that he could
not remember who was driving. He was subsequently prosecuted
under s172. The charge was "time barred" using the date of the
original s172 notice but not barred if the date of the police
visit was used. The lower court dismissed the case but the PF
appealed by way of a case stated (or whatever is the Scottish
equivalent), arguing that the request for information creates an
ongoing offence and can be considered to begin again when a
later request is made..
Although the circumstances are not the same (and in any case not
binding on courts in E&W) the principle is similar to that
here. The Scottish Court ruled that there can be no ongoing
responsibility and that repeated requests cannot, generally, be
lawful.
*****************************************************
Page 1 of 1