DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Speeding and other criminal offences
*****************************************************
#Post#: 61346--------------------------------------------------
Re: s172 out of time and police refusal to accept evidence
DIR By: ManxTom
Date: March 8, 2025, 9:34 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: docklander link ---
>
>
> ... An email conversation followed. The owner then sent a
printed photo of the car on CCTV elsewhere. The police emailed
to say they could not see the car properly so an email photo was
sent. The police then wrote to say that CCTV can be manipulated
and this is not admissable as proof. As of around two days ago,
the police stated the matter had now been sent for
prosecution...
>
> ... The owner takes the view they would rather possibly now
complete the s172 and accept they may be mistaken than to take
the matter to court. Is it now too late to do this?...
>
--- End Quote ---
[Edit: cross-posted with @disgruntchelt post #9]
If your brother has genuine and accurately timestamped CCTV
images showing his car to be somewhere entirely different from
the location on the NIP, why would he want to identify himself
as the driver at the NIP location?
The police might be correct in saying that CCTV can be
manipulated, but presumably your brother got the CCTV images
from a source that can verify that the images are authentic and
have not been tampered with, and can provide a sworn statement
to that effect? I'm sure not everybody is able to provide CCTV
images disproving a NIP so why not make the most of it.
Also if this is the second occasion that his car has been
wrongly identified - suggesting that it might have been cloned -
wouldn't it be more sensible to ty to get to the bottom of it
now rather than wait for a third time.
Might seem a bit suspicious to change his mind now...
If your brother was given until 27 Feb (9 days ago) and the
police have already said it's going to prosecution I'd have
thought it might be a bit late to try to retrieve the situation
now. What have the police actually told him and what was the
date of that?
#Post#: 61360--------------------------------------------------
Re: s172 out of time and police refusal to accept evidence
DIR By: docklander
Date: March 8, 2025, 10:43 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: disgruntchelt link ---
>
> I don’t understand. Either the owner knows his car was
elsewhere and wasn’t speeding,
> Or the owner was trying a cunning wheeze to avoid points and a
fine.
>
> In the former I don’t understand why they wouldn’t be willing
to go to court to clear their name. I’m sure the bench would
accept the evidence.
>
> If it is the latter case, you are basically asking can the
owner get out of this without consuming porridge? I guess if
they don’t present any evidence and plead guilty to FTF (and not
guilty to speeding if they’ve been dual charges) the police
might ignore their attempt at perverting the course of justice,
and they’ll just get the 6 points and hefty insurance premiums
for a while.
>
--- End Quote ---
What is FTF?
The investigating officer has basically put the fear of god into
him and are claiming that CCTV can be manipulated and is not
admissible.
#Post#: 61370--------------------------------------------------
Re: s172 out of time and police refusal to accept evidence
DIR By: Southpaw82
Date: March 8, 2025, 12:00 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: docklander link ---
>
> What is FTF?
>
> The investigating officer has basically put the fear of god
into him and are claiming that CCTV can be manipulated and is
not admissible.
>
--- End Quote ---
Failure to furnish.
CCTV can be manipulated but it would be for the court to decide
whether it had been or not. Like all evidence, if it is relevant
it is prima facie admissible. Don’t take legal advice from the
police. They’re the morons who think they can and should exhibit
pages from their pocket notebooks.
#Post#: 61403--------------------------------------------------
Re: s172 out of time and police refusal to accept evidence
DIR By: NewJudge
Date: March 8, 2025, 5:08 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
With the speeding allegation five months old and the extended
deadline to respond over a week passed this will almost
certainly go to court.
I would be rather surprised if proceedings had not already begun
and they will be for "Failing to Provide Driver's Details".
They may "dual charge" your brother and if they do he may have
the opportunity to plead guilty to speeding (providing he was
the driver) so as to avoid the more serious charge.
When he gets the court paperwork he will have to decide how o
proceed.
#Post#: 61481--------------------------------------------------
Legal services - who did you use, what was the cost and did you
win?
DIR By: docklander
Date: March 9, 2025, 12:33 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
I think its ok to post here on the existing thread? (3rd time
lucky)
Looking for advice on possible legal representation. If you used
someone, please let me know what they cost, did they win and
which company or barrister you used?
Thanks all.
#Post#: 61491--------------------------------------------------
Re: s172 out of time and police refusal to accept evidence
DIR By: NewJudge
Date: March 9, 2025, 1:40 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
We haven't see many lawyers on here charge less than £1,000 for
representation in court for a straightforward matter.
However, this is far from straightforward.
You began by saying your brother had provided the police with a
photograph of his car at a different location to the one where
the police allege it was at the time of the offence. But then
you say you he may "... possibly now complete the s172 and
accept they may be mistaken than to take the matter to court."
It is not in his gift now whether or not the matter goes to
court. I would suggest it is now too late to complete the s172
request as it getting to the point where the police have
insufficient time to prosecute the driver for speeding. They
have already extended the deadline (considerably by the sounds
of it).
If he really was the driver his best hope is that he is "dual
charged" with speeding as well. He can then request the usual
"deal" (to plead guilty to speeding on the condition the more
serious charge is dropped). This will be complicated somewhat by
the evidence he initially provided to prove his car was
elsewhere.
Any lawyer will want to get to the bottom of that before he
accompanies your brother in court and that will probably add to
the bill.
#Post#: 61495--------------------------------------------------
Re: s172 out of time and police refusal to accept evidence
DIR By: docklander
Date: March 9, 2025, 2:45 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
I would suggest it is now too late to complete the s172 request
as it getting to the point where the police have insufficient
time to prosecute the driver for speeding.
At what point does it become too late to prosecute a driver for
speeding after the alleged offence?
#Post#: 61507--------------------------------------------------
Re: s172 out of time and police refusal to accept evidence
DIR By: NewJudge
Date: March 9, 2025, 3:48 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Six months from the date of the offence.
#Post#: 61674--------------------------------------------------
Re: s172 out of time and police refusal to accept evidence
DIR By: docklander
Date: March 10, 2025, 11:16 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Police have emailed, today, to say they will still accept a
completed NIP.
Brother is torn as has only the CCTV screen shot and no other
evidence.
The alleged offence is now very close to being 6 months old, in
around 7 days time.
If he has existing points, do they look at that when considering
what points to issue as I believe the indicator for his speed is
4 to 6 points?
#Post#: 61683--------------------------------------------------
Re: s172 out of time and police refusal to accept evidence
DIR By: BertB
Date: March 10, 2025, 11:42 am
---------------------------------------------------------
No, but depending on how many points he currently has, a
successful prosecution may trigger a disqualification under the
totting up process.
Would I be right in assuming that he is on 6 points, so 6 points
for failure to furnish driver details would put him at 12,
versus hoping a magistrate will calculate the original offence
is worth less than 6 points even though he and his car wasn't at
the location?
Where did this CCTV image come from? A neighbour or a business?
It has been mentioned earlier, but the person who provided the
CCTV image can attend court in the case of a NG plea and testify
to its authenticity. Or is that not possible?
Edit, the speeding only has 7 days until timeout? He doesn't
need a solicitor, he needs to complete the form and make sure it
is back to them and acknowledged within that time period
otherwise they will prosecute for FTF with no speeding option.
*****************************************************
Page 2 of 4
DIR Previous Page
DIR Next Page