Next: Give him a medal
From: -=D@n=- on 20 Jul 2006 06:24 Peter wrote: >> I'm in the same situation as you, I have my NIP here on my desk >> ready to do something with. Unlike you though, I'm pretty sure I >> *was* speeding at the time. Saying that, I'm going to have a read on >> www.pepipoo.com to see what I can do. I suggest you do the same. > > I've been looking at the site already, thanks. I don't know if the > idea they suggest is defunct now, as I couldn't find any recent > postings on the forum. Perhaps I wasn't looking hard enough. Hmm, I'll have a proper look at lunchtime. I'll probably just do what you did, ask for the photo. My car is a lease car, so it could have been any of 40 people authorised to drive it ;) -- Talent hits a target no one else can hit. Genius hits a target no one else can see.
From: Steve Smith on 20 Jul 2006 06:28 Peter wrote: > Thanks very much for the reply. The picture's from the front at a very long > distance and you can't see who's driving, because the sun is reflecting off > the windscreen. > > My wife doesn't drive, so I don't think it would be wise for me to say that > it was her driving :-) > > What actually happened was that because I had just moved house, the > correspondence went to my old address and was forwarded to me. I then > filled in the correct address and sent it back to them as indicated. > > However, they've interpreted this as an admission that I was driving, even > though I didn't tick the relevant box. Simply returning the form with my > new address has signalled my admission. > > I don't know if this affects the outcome, but I didn't tick the box. Well that sounds to me like enough of a breach of proper procedure to have the whole thing dropped. I would go to court with it, and explain the whole thing to the mags - they may well be more sympathetic than you think. Steve.
From: Nick Finnigan on 20 Jul 2006 08:29 Peter wrote: > > What actually happened was that because I had just moved house, the > correspondence went to my old address and was forwarded to me. I then > filled in the correct address and sent it back to them as indicated. > > However, they've interpreted this as an admission that I was driving, even > though I didn't tick the relevant box. Simply returning the form with my > new address has signalled my admission. If you fill in any part of the 'I was the driver section', the authorities are likely to use that as an admission that you were the driver; if you filled in the 'this is the address of who I think was driving' section, they won't (AIUI, I've never seen a NIP). Do you think that it wasn't your car, or that you were not driving, or that your speed was not that fast, or the speed limit was not correct?
From: Peter on 20 Jul 2006 10:01 > If you fill in any part of the 'I was the driver section', the > authorities are likely to use that as an admission that you were the > driver; if you filled in the 'this is the address of who I think was > driving' section, they won't (AIUI, I've never seen a NIP). Yes, I suspect that's the case. I'm not sure if it affects my options. > Do you think that it wasn't your car, or that you were not driving, or > that your speed was not that fast, or the speed limit was not correct? It's my car but the speed's definitely incorrect. I knew the police van was there because I passed it in the opposite direction on my way to a meeting at mid-day and I was aware that it is a 30mph zone. On the way back from the meeting at 2:00pm I did 30 maximum and that's when I was caught by the mobile. The picture shows the front of my car, with no number plate visible, because it is at such a great distance. In the corner it says 39 mph, with some jargon that I don't understand. There are two other cars slightly in the frame of the first picture, one in front of me and another passing me in the opposite direction. Beneath the picture is another which I think is just for the purposes of identification. This picture is a close-up, showing the number plate but no speed indicated and again no driver visible. It's a mystery to me but I'm afraid of the legal costs and the stress too of course.
From: Brimstone on 20 Jul 2006 10:05
In news:AeGdnST-fLRhFiLZnZ2dnUVZ8s-dnZ2d(a)bt.com, Peter said: >> If you fill in any part of the 'I was the driver section', the >> authorities are likely to use that as an admission that you were the >> driver; if you filled in the 'this is the address of who I think was >> driving' section, they won't (AIUI, I've never seen a NIP). > > Yes, I suspect that's the case. I'm not sure if it affects my > options. > >> Do you think that it wasn't your car, or that you were not >> driving, or that your speed was not that fast, or the speed limit >> was not correct? > > It's my car but the speed's definitely incorrect. I knew the police > van was there because I passed it in the opposite direction on my way > to a meeting at mid-day and I was aware that it is a 30mph zone. On > the way back from the meeting at 2:00pm I did 30 maximum and that's > when I was caught by the mobile. > > The picture shows the front of my car, with no number plate visible, > because it is at such a great distance. In the corner it says 39 > mph, with some jargon that I don't understand. There are two other > cars slightly in the frame of the first picture, one in front of me > and another passing me in the opposite direction. > > Beneath the picture is another which I think is just for the purposes > of identification. This picture is a close-up, showing the number > plate but no speed indicated and again no driver visible. > > It's a mystery to me but I'm afraid of the legal costs and the stress > too of course. In the photo you've been sent, is the number plate clearly legible? If not, what leads you to believe that it's your vehicle? |