Notice of intended prosecution

[dennilson]

On August 21 our vehicle activated a speed camera driving at 40 in a 30 limit. The vehicle is shared by my Son and Wife, neither of whom could remember the incident or could definitely say it was them driving. The notice of intended prosecution was sent out to my Wife (registered keeper) to which she responded . Approximately 3 weeks after this the Police attend our address with a photo of the vehicle being driven by my Son. They then report him for the offence. I argued that he has not had a notice of intended prosecution within the 14 days and the failings were on the investigating officers (Merseyside Police, theres a surprise) by not being bothered to check the photographs in relation to this offence. I am very confused and unsure if they can prosecute having not issued a NIP, albeit a technical point of law. Confused Mike

[Hymie]

The way the law works in cases like this, is if you are rich and/or famous – you get off.

Otherwise – you’re nicked.

[bednobs]

seriously, how can you blame the police for your son not remembering he was driving. Of course they don't look at every single picture unless there is need to - most people who receive NIP's would know who was driving, or could at least work it out from the location/time.
I am not a law person, but common sense tells me that as the NIP WAS delivered within the 14 days, it can be counted - simply not the police's fault that your wife and son couldn't remember!
You WILL NOT get away with this. Is he being offered a fixed penalty, or being taken to court?

[dennilson]

I think you are getting a bit emotional there BEDNOBS, the reason for the NIP is to inform you that an offence has been committed within a reasonable time scale. If the NIP has gone to the registered keeper - at a different address - then how can the driver respond without photographic evidence. You sound like one of those half wits that work in the Central Ticket Offices anyway

[dh001]

Surely you were informed that an offence had been committed (by way of NIP)

[bednobs]

how kind of you!
If the original NIP was delivered in the time i can't see where your arguement is coming from. Probably because i'm a halfwit i suppose! (although not quite so halfwitted as to not be able to remember where/when i drove in the last two weeks, or halfwitted enough to break the speed limit by a third)

[caththecrazy]

NIP has been issued - it isn't down to the police to know who was driving the vehicle. They are always issued to the registered keeper. (I think there is a section on the form about the driver?)

How would the police know that the driver was your son from the photo? It could have been a neighbour, nephew etc

Your son didn't bother tro check the speed limit

[fadeout73]

Speed Limits are in place for a reason, I wish drivers would keep within them!!!!

[buildersmate]

The requirement of the police is that they deliver the NIP to the registered keeper. They did this.
The registered keeper then responded saying she was unable to identify the driver.
Then, and only then, the prosecuting authorities consult the camera evidence to find the offender.
All of this has now happened.
End of job.
You won't get anywhere by bleating that the police didn't get the NIP to the offender within 14 days - they don't have to.

[ABerrant]

BTW there is an obligation on the Registered Keeper to provide details of the driver; the Police have no obligation to check photographs. If an RK is unsure of the driver it is in their own interest to request any photographic evidence to minimise the risk of the Police prosecuting RK for failing to identify driver (maximum penalty 6 points, £1000).

[north star]

@builsermate - no it doesn't happen like that, if the repsonse to the NIP (s172 asking for the drivers details) is a non specific 'I cant remember, it was either X or Y', if your lucky you may get reminder to provide the actual driver details or if not then you will get a summons for 'failing to provide', the Safety Camera Partnership (lol) do not examine the photos for the identity of any possible drivers.

What the OP should have done was to write to the SCP and ask for any photos which may be helpful in identtfying the driver, specifically NOT using the words 'evidence' or 'proof'. They are not obliged to provide any photos or indeed any information until the case goes to court but most are reasonable and will provide some photos.

@ OP what information did your wife provide when she responded to the NIP?

[dennilson]

She stated she was driving as she assumed that Merseyside Police had checked the photos before sending out the NIP. This obviously was not the case, resulting in my Son, = not residing at her address - not receiving any NIP or notification that he had committed the offence. Surely there are massive flaws in the legal process which needs challenging, you are not telling me that you are aware of every speed camera or anpr device all of the time.

[ABerrant]

So your complaint hinges on your wife's incorrect assumption. Hardly the safest position from which to challenge legislative/judicial procedure.

[bednobs]

if she had to state she was driving, then they must have asked her who was driving surely? if she said it was her, you can hardly blame them for thinking it was her?
How do you expect them to know what your wife looks like i wonder? imagine a situation where it was a friend of hers driving - are you saying you expect the police to know who her friend was by looking at a picture, then sending the NIP to her?

[north star]

The law requires that the first NIP be served on the registered keeper within 14 days of the alleged offence. The date of the offence is day 0.