Forum menu
Aren't you meant to use [sic] or something when you're being sarcastic - I can't read sarcasm well (in fact I don't hear it well either).
[i]Yes but they either got your details from the lease company, which means they would have sent the initial letter out within the correct time, or they have got your details from a data base, which means you may have a point about timings.[/i]
OMG is this not the trillionth time someone has said that.
Expects shouty 'HAVE YOU READ MY POSTS PROPERLY' post from OP.
Yes but the OP doesn't seem to get it.
If they got the details from the Lease Company, I believe they make an admin charge (which we haven't had). So either they didn't get the details via them or he's about to get a charge for that too....
I believe they make an admin charge (which we haven't had).
Does the lease co. have a time limit by which they have to contact you? 😉
If it's a leased car, the lease company is the owner, and will be on the V5, and that is all that the DVLA has to offer the police. Any other names and addresses cannot be magicked out of thin air.
If its a Lease Car then the Police WILL have sent the original NIP to them.
They are under no obligation to inform you of this primary fact as Greatape stated.
Once the lease company informed the Police of the fact that you/partner/company are the keeper of the vehicle then the 14 days clock starts all over again.
If you then send the NIP back informing them of who was driving 1. YOU/Company is off the hook. 2. the 14 days clock starts again on whoever you named as the driver.
Unles of course you can CATEGORICALLY state that you CAN'T name the driver beyond reasonable doubt then you/company are liable for up to 6 points and/or £1000 fine for failure to comply under the RTA1958 and its amendments if you don't respond.
I'm telling you this from personal experience where we had 3 identical vehicles on the same road, on the same day, at the same time, with all three drivers in the same tshirts, almost identical build and all with beards!
The only thing they could comment on was the lack of driver logs as to who was in each vehicle HOWEVER as it was under 5 vehicles there was no legal obligation for us to have one.
We couldn't definitively say which one of the guys were driving.
If you call them they will send you the photographic evidence they are relying on for prosecution via post or email and then you can easily state who was driving.
In our case we couldn't for the above reasons.
Doubt that will be an issue for you.
1. What is the 14 day rule?
The 14 day rule relates only to the period of time in which the Police/Process Unit must serve the original Notice. The Police do not have to prove that the Notice reached its intended recipient within 14 days, merely that in the normal course of events, it should have arrived. In many cases, the registered keeper will be a lease company not the actual driver with the result that even if the driver is unaware of the incident, service of the Notice is good if it was sent to arrive at the registered keeper's last known address within 14 days of the offence.2. I was driving a company vehicle and got the NIP months after the offence.
Can I reject it?
If you can establish that the original NIP, which would have been sent to the registered keeper, was not issued within 14 days, then it is out of time. However, if it was issued within 14 days, and then the keeper took some time to identify the driver, then the Police have longer in which to proceed. For example, the registered keeper may lease the car to another company who then in turn supply to the Company that you work for. As long as the Police serve on the registered keeper in time, the matter can proceed.3. What happens next?
Once the Police have identified the driver, they can either serve a Fixed Penalty Notice or if they feel that it is justified, issue a Summons. Once identification is established, a Fixed Penalty Notice or Summons must be issued within 6 months of the offence.I suggest you read the whole process at this site: http://www.motorlawyers.co.uk/proced...rosecution.htm
the nip goes to the registered keeper it must be posted so that in the ordinary course of post it will arrive within 14 days of the offence , the registered keeper in your case the lease company have I think 28 days to respond identifying your company a fresh notice goes to you you have the same time period to respond identifying the driver. SO YOU HAVE NO ARGUNMENT based on timing on the facts you posted unless your company is the registered keeper of the vehicle which would be odd.
the only bit in the above I am not 100% on is the 28 day time period if you want to pay me i'll look it up.
This thread keeps on giving.
My advice is ignore the letter. Since its arrived after 14 days it can be safely discarded. In addition, you can debate the semantics of words like owner, keeper and hired as this also will persuade the court the driver is innocent. Also, if the letter us not typed in 10pt Times New Roman it isn't legal either.
unless your company is the registered keeper of the vehicle which would be odd.
Well the letter has come addressed to [Company name] at the address which I do think is odd, I agree. But the lease invoice receipts are sent to the two named individuals....
Have you considered ringing the lease firm?
Apologies if I've missed something about that in all the to-ing and fro-ing above.
Is the OP an MP?
I think people have already covered most of it.
(1) If you don't have the V5c then someone who does hold it has responded with the company details. That will almost certainly have been to a NIP served on time.
(2) Any error in serving the original NIP on time does not remove your obligation as a company to respond to the s172 request you have now received.
(3) If there is a claim that the original NIP was not properly served within time this can only be raised by THE DRIVER rejecting any offer of a course or fixed penalty and proceeding to court with consequential risk of increased fines (and costs in E&W). If there has been a genuine error they may spot it (or recognise it if highlighted) and avoid court all together - but if there has not any letter claiming there has is likely to be seen as a refusal of any FP on offer and proceed to prosecution.
[b](4) What people sometimes miss is s172(5) which clearly states that if officers in company contribute to not responding to the s172 request they too become liable personally (including for the points!).[/b]
Have you considered ringing the lease firm?
I will leave that to my partner – clearly there is no quick get out so he can do any digging he may want to do....
[url= http://www.motorlawyers.co.uk/procedure/notice_of_intended_prosecution.php ]What is the 14 day rule?[/url]
The 14 day rule relates only to the period of time in which the Police/Process Unit must serve the original Notice. The Police do not have to prove that the Notice reached its intended recipient within 14 days, merely that they believe that it arrived, but there may be a defence available if the intended recipient can convince a Court that the notice did not arrive in time or at all. In many cases, the registered keeper will be a lease company not the actual driver, with the result that even if the driver is unaware of the incident, service of the Notice is good if it was sent to arrive at the registered keeper's last known address within 14 days of the offence.
No get out according to the link above.
[i]
Well the letter has come addressed to [Company name] at the address which I do think is odd,[/i]
Not odd, just the address that the Lease Company wrote on the NOIP when they received it.
My wife recently got a NOIP for her car. I was driving so filled it in with my name. I then received a NOIP. No mention on the NOIP that the details had been given by my wife/me, looks just like the original, except for my details.
As Poly said - don't forget that BOTH of you as partners are JOINTLY liable for the S172 and BOTH can get 6 points and/or £1000 fine.
I think every opportunity should be taken to avoid having to pay these fines. They are often issued illegally, hence the number of cases that never get to court despite the driver requesting taking it court.
In my neck of the woods the Police and council installed and started fining people using cameras that were not legal to use in the UK. They decided that they would be approved later that year so would issue tickets and take no action if people did challenge them. Not many did because they didn't know the cameras were operating illegally.
As Poly said - don't forget that BOTH of you as partners are JOINTLY liable for the S172 and BOTH can get 6 points and/or £1000 fine.
As I said, I will leave this to him on his return as I don't know who was driving the car.
"As I said, I will leave this to him on his return as I don't know who was driving the car."
cool but you are leaving your legal responsibility to respond within the time limits in his hands if he fails to act you are liable.
I would suggest your fall back would be to check the time limit and make sure before it expires if he has not replied satisfactorily you respond naming him and his wife as the two possible drivers.
Cheers Crankboy _ I will bear this in mind but he's back soon and we have plenty of time (28 days from 11/09/2015).
But, as the notice says 'The person to whom the document is addressed' yet there is no person named, just the partnership name under which we trade...
Aren't you meant to use [sic] or something when you're being sarcastic - I can't read sarcasm well (in fact I don't hear it well either).
Yeah, that'd work [b][i][u]really well[/b][/i][/u], what an awesome idea. 🙄 😉
johndoh - Member
Cheers Crankboy _ I will bear this in mind but he's back soon and we have plenty of time (28 days from 11/09/2015).But, as the notice says 'The person to whom the document is addressed' yet there is no person named, just the partnership name under which we trade...
As one of the partners of that partnership it doesn't matter WHO - you are legally obliged to name the driver.
You can't get round it just because it isn't a persons name.
read s172(5) of the Road Traffic Act if you think that is going to mean YOU don't get 6 pts and a whopping fine if your business partner ignores it or tries to get clever - make sure there is a trail where YOU can show you discharged YOUR obligations at Crankboy suggests.But, as the notice says 'The person to whom the document is addressed' yet there is no person named, just the partnership name under which we trade...
We aren't going to ignore anything, I was simply throwing this open to discussion...
Well the letter has come addressed to [Company name] at the address which I do think is odd, I agree. But the lease invoice receipts are sent to the two named individuals....
But, as the notice says 'The person to whom the document is addressed' yet there is no person named, just the partnership name under which we trade...
The police have to send the NIP (it's a NIP, not a NOIP) to the registered keeper within 14 days. In this case, it's the lease company. Presumably they have complied with this, it's highly unlikely that they haven't.
The lease company reply saying "we're a lease company, the car is leased to Johndoh Inc." They may know who arranged the lease but cannot name the driver, how could they know who was driving?
The police then send the NIP to Johndoh Inc. asking to identify the driver. Which is where we are now.
The OP's question seems to be, if the NIP is addressed to the company, no-one steps up to the plate with an admission and we can't reliably identify the driver, who is liable for the fine / points? To which the answer, I'm pretty sure, is both partners.
There is no loophole here. Send back the NIP and dob your partner in, he / she won't even know you've done it unless you tell them or they read a popular mountain biking forum.
As I said, I will leave this to him on his return as I don't know who was driving the car.
Send it back with the name/details of the main driver.
If it wasn't him, he can do the same, and send it back with his wife's name/details.
You've done your bit, and can't get done if he then forgets/ignores it.
It's really simple, (other than the STW factor) I can't see why there such a discussion about it to be honest 🙂
Send it back with the name/details of the main driver.If it wasn't him, he can do the same, and send it back with his wife's name/details.
True, but I do have a good relationship with him and wouldn't want him to think I was dobbing him and washing my hands of it...
(Which is probably why I am here doing a bit of research on his behalf now I think about it).
And utterly unrelated, I did spend the first 10 minutes or so internally screaming as the 3 points for speeding that I have are just about to expire and I automatically thought it was my vehicle (I didn't think to look at the registration number) 🙂
I'm enjoying this............2 mugs of tea and a packet of Tunnocks wafers.
Keep it going!!!
True, but I do have a good relationship with him and wouldn't want him to think I was dobbing him and washing my hands of it...
Well,
a) you are, but it's exactly what you should be doing,
b) it's not your fault someone else was speeding, and
c) how would he know anyway?
If you have any realistic (legal) alternative to "dobbing him in," I'm not seeing it.
True, but I do have a good relationship with him and wouldn't want him to think I was dobbing him and washing my hands of it...
Your hands don't need washing as it's not your car.
But either way, the conversation goes like this.
"I'm afraid a speeding ticket came for you while you were away, I sent it back with your details as I didn't want the time limit to expire while you were away and make matters worse, hope that's ok.?"
If he can find issue with that, your relationship may not be as good as you think.
From there he can deal with it, and decide between him and his wife what happens next.
You could of course go for a time out 🙂
"I think every opportunity should be taken to avoid having to pay these fines."
Quite possibly the most disgusting thing I have heard for some time. 👿
I envy you if that's true. I read far more disgusting things on the Internet on a regular basis. I can only assume that you've never read any YouTube comments.
As a random example, only this morning I was called a four letter word beginning with T and 'no better than a racist' because I asked someone on Facebook whether they were aware that typing in all caps was considered shouting.
3 pages in and no one has asked how far over the limit the driver (whoever they where) was?
Standards are slipping round here
My guess is given the shoutiness and anxiety of the OP it must have been a lot, and this could affect the operation of his business somehow
I want to know what happened to the three guys in the three vehicles in the same three t shirts with beards??
NIP = No Intention (to serve) Pudding?
As a random example, only this morning I was called a four letter word beginning with T and 'no better than a racist' because I asked someone on Facebook whether they were aware that typing in all caps was considered shouting.
I hear this sort of story and wonder if I'm doing facebook wrong. The only thing I get in my feed are updates of what friends (actual real world friends) are up to, a few updates from a couple of (real world) sport clubs I belong to, a handful of very civilised comments from (sport related) facebook groups and a compulsory collection of cats doing crrrrazy things videos. I've never seen an argument on facebook or a reason to disagree with someone. What am I doing wrong?
My guess is given the shoutiness and anxiety of the OP it must have been a lot, and this could affect the operation of his business somehow
Not a very good guess. Sorry.
op, you may get a letter from the lease company saying they have dobbed you in (or they may not bother) and there may be a small admin charge which they will add to your existing direct debit.
So why are you getting so worked up about it
Either return the NIP with your partners (or his wife's details) on or leave it for him to deal with
....Or fill in your own details and suck it up
Name the driver and give address, it's not your fault he/she is a non EU national no longer in the country! Tested in court!
The countries awash with illegal immigrants (blind eye turned bused in cheap labour) and absolute t$$ts so why not behave just like the two faced lying cake and eat it pretenders, oh their ok to wash my car and do building work!
There's no moral high ground anymore just liers and two faced liers ripping each other off. F""k-em all everything's fair game in this contradictory dog eat dog world we are forced to endure.
It's still OK to reply in wingdings, right ?Also, if the letter us not typed in 10pt Times New Roman it isn't legal either.