NIP

[Carl]

Genrally the Saftery Partnership will drop casses that become "hard work" as I believe they get paid a small % of the £60 for each case.

Therefore check all details are correct on the NIP, engage them in communication by recorded letter, etc.

You may find it goes away

[jerryhzx12]

Thanks for all the input - I had already responded to the NIP acknowledging I was the vehicle owner and driver, which is true, but denying I was speeding, according to my speedometer - which I have since "checked" at 2 points against one of those roadsiede speed inidcators in a local village - although could only do at 20 and 30mph, as trhe speed limit ther is 30. Have writted back to the fuzz suggesting I will accept they are right and I am wrong if they can furnish me with the follwoing documented evidence:

1. Calibration records for speed measuring device traceable to a recognised national standard, carried out according to thier documented procedures and freqiuency by a fully trained person (with training records), the calibration being carried out at 2 or more seperate speeds, spanning the 50-60mph range in contention.

2. Confirmation that the officer operating the equipment was authorised to do so at that time and place, and has documented up to date training  records on that specific make and model of equipment, including any updates and modifications.

Seems  a resonable request to me !

I'll let you know how it goes. I'm now doing this on principle - not that bothered about £60 - money I'd rather not give away, but not exactly riches, and not over worried about 3 points - license currently clean, so unless unlucky that won't be any great issue. It is the principle that I, and no doubt many other innocents, can be deemed gulity until proven innocent, entirely against the principles of  our legal system as I understand it.

[Man On The Clapham Omnibus]

There was a very long thread on Pistonheads about a member who was in a similar position. Photographic evidence is your right, I believe, but he couldn't buck the system in the end I seem to remember. A chap of my acquaintance claims to have ignored several NIPs and heard no more. He told me this a year ago and referred to events earlier than that, so the law change has happened since. He does have the magic letters QC after his name.

[housebeautician]

Jerry

I'm sure if they need to they can produce any bit of paper you like with any info/name or date that you request.

Like i said its all bent. (Unless your a QC)

Will see how you get on and wish you luck.

[jerryhzx12]

Be assured any paperwork they produce will be challenged. I believe anything I can prove to have been quickly "generated" purely for this purpose will classify as perjury / attempting to pervert the course of justice, for which someone (chief constable ?) wll be repsonsible.

Photo evidence will be irrelevant - I am not denying being there, and am not suggesting that their speed reading did not suggest I was over the limit, I am just claiimg (for I believe it to be the truth), that I was not travelling at that speed.

[Man On The Clapham Omnibus]

Photo evidence might prove you were NOT over the speed limit. It's worth having.

[jerryhzx12]

Good point, I'll see what they send me andmaybe use that as the next ploy - At the end of the day if I can take so much mamanegement time up it becomes futile for them to continue, I'll get the right result, if not for the right reasons!

[bhouse]

On the subject of photo evidence, I wondered if anyone had installed one of these video recording/GPS overlay devices. If so, I wonder how a court would view its evidence...

It could be a great way of proving that one actually was driving within the speed limit.

[peterg]

Only problem is if they review the entire recording on the Roadhawk they may find somewhere else where you went over the limit    

[pistonbroke]

wish you luck mate , if I was in your position , convinced of innocence , I would be tempted to do the same  

[cast iron]

its not a fine its a FEE, no points but it is recorded so dont withhold it from the insurance co.

I know that from experience.

your wrong on that one, on my invite to take the course it stated quite clearly that in taking the course option there was no need to inform the insurance company, and I've kept said letter

[lippydave]

Thanks for all the input - .....

if they can furnish me with the follwoing documented evidence:

1. Calibration records for speed measuring device traceable to a recognised national standard, carried out according to thier documented procedures and freqiuency by a fully trained person (with training records), the calibration being carried out at 2 or more seperate speeds, spanning the 50-60mph range in contention.

2. Confirmation that the officer operating the equipment was authorised to do so at that time and place, and has documented up to date training  records on that specific make and model of equipment, including any updates and modifications.

Seems  a resonable request to me !

Seems more than reasonable to me too.

...and given the much trumpeted "Freedom of information act" surely they are duty bound to provide you with the above or are otherwise negligent in attempting to bring about a prosecution?

...and I'm guessing that hypothetically if they fail to deliver proof of the above and can't prosecute, you should be able to bill them at your going hourly rate fotr the time spent persuing, and researching their inadequately trumped up charges, and that the personnel responsible for attempting to pervert the course of justice by bringing an unfounded case should be subject to both legal and departmental disciplinary action?

Of course I'm dreaming and the tw*ts will brush it all under the carpet.......    

Good luck in fighting it, even if it only helps them to realise that not everyone will roll over and play dead to their Nazi-style state-sponsored bully-boy enforcement tactics....    

[jerryhzx12]

Latsest update - have spoken with the "safety" camera partnership, and am awaiting the requested calibrationn and training records. Have als been invited there to view the video evidence, AND the fuzz have offered an extension on the 28 day period for the "conditional offer"....which rather suggest they may be beginning to squirm a bit.. will keep you all informed on developments !

[housebeautician]

its not a fine its a FEE, no points but it is recorded so dont withhold it from the insurance co.

I know that from experience.

your wrong on that one, on my invite to take the course it stated quite clearly that in taking the course option there was no need to inform the insurance company, and I've kept said letter

I was being sarky on the not a fine but a fee bit    

But as i said my insurance co knew of the nip and the fact i went on the course and asked me if i wanted to declare anything else whilst on the phone to them. i said no,they then said about the course and that i had been on one.

Had i not had this happen to me ,i would agree with you.

And if i had that letter i would keep it in a safe, as back up for if and when any s**t it the fan.

Sorry to be cynical but i dont trust the insurance companies.

Jerry hope you win.

[Norman Verona]

The letter mans nothing. let's put it this way. If the Police tell you you don't need to inform you're insurers of 3 points and you don't but keep the letter when the insurer rejects a claim they are not going to change their mind because a third party told you you didn't have to tell them.

Tell them, it's their decision if it's a material fact.