NIP Fight

[B1rdie]

I love a legal fight, I received a NIP earlier this month, I sent off for the pics taken with a mobile camera, showing the front of a bike similar to mine, with no number plate showing it is difficult to assertain if it is me or not!

Interestingly the speed has been cut out of the 1st pic, but has not been recorded in the 2nd pic, taken 1 second afterwards.

My quandry is, which if it goes to court is this:

1: If it is me and I admit it, I can defend it, as I believe I was not speeding.

2: I cannot be sure it is me, therefore I cannot identify the driver as there is no number plate shown. So open to prosecution for failing to provide details of the driver.

3:If although I am not sure, it was me, was overtaking on a duel carrigeway slip road with a 40 limit, I was passing a cage doing 25 mph, I accelerated past him and then checked my speed to be 35mph as i was in front of the mobile camera, this has 2 consequences:
A: Is it illegal to break the speed limit to overtake at anytime, when it is safer to complete the maneuver as fast as poss. or
B: The camera claims I was speeding, yet 1 second later no evidence of that.
if followed by a police officer, or flashed by a Gatso, you need 2 points of evidence or a measured distance.

Any comments welcome.

 

[B1rdie]

There can't be many gold plated V-Rods or Birds around so I think you is ad me ol' mucker.

Good luck with the fight. :beer:

Aprilia Tuono racing, there is 4 of them in Nottinghamshire, I checked.

 

[B1rdie]

Sorry my mistake I should have said CONSTRUCTIVE comments please.

 

[Fat Bert]

B1RDIE~~

I was nicked the same as you

Photo evidence showed bike from the front - dark visor - couldn't identify the rider's face [cue abuse]

Apparently the Safety Camera "operative" ran to the front of the van and manually wrote the reg number down

Solicitor told me "forget it - you wont' win"

 

[RHINO]

B1rdie

I was nicked the same as you

Photo evidence showed bike from the front - dark visor - couldn't identify the rider's face [cue abuse]

Apparently the Safety Camera "operative" ran to the front of the van and manually wrote the reg number down

Solicitor told me "forget it - you wont' win"

Quite right, he was copped. He was doing 8mph in the playground and the dinner lady gripped him.

 

[B1rdie]

I was nicked the same as you

Photo evidence showed bike from the front - dark visor - couldn't identify the rider's face [cue abuse]

Apparently the Safety Camera "operative" ran to the front of the van and manually wrote the reg number down

Solicitor told me "forget it - you wont' win"

Well I believe they can't be arsed, to bother to fight it, I am sure that the response you got, will be the same to me.

I want to fight it.

 

[ALonaBIRD]

get a different solicitor

m8 of mine got done last year doin 114mph
charged at roadside with speeding, summons came through charging him with "speeding or alternatively dangerous driving"

first solicitor said no point in fighting it just take the ban and retest etc.
went to different solicitor who agreed to fight it for him,

court date arrived and guilty plea entered for speeding and not guilty plea to dangerous driving. sheriff asked procurator fiscal if he acceped that, fiscal said no i want him done on dangerous too.

trial date set for a couple months later solicitor took pictures of the road ( no junctions for miles straight etc etc ) m8 had stopped exactly where coppers were with no skids or wobbles WELL within distances stated in highway code (no surprise there really) and a few other bits and pieces

m8 got 3 week ban and ?350 fine , no resit and licence only marked with SP30 instead of dangerous so insurance dont care and havent hiked his premium.

if he listened to the first money grabber he would have been done for dangerous and speeding , got bigger fine longer ban and a test resit likely

 

[B1rdie]

m8 of mine got done last year doin 114mph
charged at roadside with speeding, summons came through charging him with "speeding or alternatively dangerous driving"

first solicitor said no point in fighting it just take the ban and retest etc.
went to different solicitor who agreed to fight it for him,

court date arrived and guilty plea entered for speeding and not guilty plea to dangerous driving. sheriff asked procurator fiscal if he acceped that, fiscal said no i want him done on dangerous too.

trial date set for a couple months later solicitor took pictures of the road ( no junctions for miles straight etc etc ) m8 had stopped exactly where coppers were with no skids or wobbles WELL within distances stated in highway code (no surprise there really) and a few other bits and pieces

m8 got 3 week ban and ?350 fine , no resit and licence only marked with SP30 instead of dangerous so insurance dont care and havent hiked his premium.

if he listened to the first money grabber he would have been done for dangerous and speeding , got bigger fine longer ban and a test resit likely

Shopping around pays divdend's :lick:

 

[B1rdie]

Nick Freeman, is the superstar's solicitor, anyone know his firm?

 

[Patch]

This is a grey area that has yet to be tested in court and I know of at one case that has gone either way.

The first issue is was it a Police officer or a Safety Camera operator (civilian) who was operating the camera? If it was a police officer he should have recorded the speed in his pocket book, and this will be a key part of the evidence against you. If this is the case and his note book is correctly filled out you will struggle to get away with it.

If it was a civillian you have a good case and a reasonable chance of winning, although I must advise that you will most likely have to take it to a higher court as the Magistrates courts are as bent as Michael Barrimore.

My best advise would be to get the file looked at by John Josephs, of Turner Coulston solicitors. He offers an " initial revue service" for ?100 and will tell you if you have a case and if you do how to fight it. You can then use that advise to either fight on your own or employ him or another brief to fight on your behalf.

I used John earlier this year and I won, I was awarded full costs.

You should also register on the www.pepipoo.com fight back forum and ask for help there, they know what they are talking about
John Josephs

Turner Coulston
Solicitors
15, Station Road,
Kettering
Northants
NN15 7HH

Tel (+44) (0)1536-523434

Fax: (+44) (0)1536-310138

Website: www.tclaw.co.uk

 

[B1rdie]

This is a grey area that has yet to be tested in court and I know of at one case that has gone either way.

The first issue is was it a Police officer or a Safety Camera operator (civilian) who was operating the camera? If it was a police officer he should have recorded the speed in his pocket book, and this will be a key part of the evidence against you. If this is the case and his note book is correctly filled out you will struggle to get away with it.

If it was a civillian you have a good case and a reasonable chance of winning, although I must advise that you will most likely have to take it to a higher court as the Magistrates courts are as bent as Michael Barrimore.

My best advise would be to get the file looked at by John Josephs, of Turner Coulston solicitors. He offers an " initial revue service" for ?100 and will tell you if you have a case and if you do how to fight it. You can then use that advise to either fight on your own or employ him or another brief to fight on your behalf.

I used John earlier this year and I won, I was awarded full costs.

You should also register on the www.pepipoo.com fight back forum and ask for help there, they know what they are talking about
John Josephs

Turner Coulston
Solicitors
15, Station Road,
Kettering
Northants
NN15 7HH

Tel (+44) (0)1536-523434

Fax: (+44) (0)1536-310138

Website: www.tclaw.co.uk

Excellent reply, Thankyou. :bow:

 

[B1rdie]

Mobile sites

If I had this before I would have had a clean licence. :cry:

http://www.nottinghamshire.gov.uk/home/traffic_and_travel/roads/mobilespeedcameras.htm

 

[B1rdie]

Pepipoo Fights with you against NIP's (Serious)

Thanks to Patch for the following information, I believe it is in all our interests to join and support this site, YOU may need help one day.
So please join and don't be faceless peeps, we all have something to contribute.

This is a grey area that has yet to be tested in court and I know of at one case that has gone either way.

The first issue is was it a Police officer or a Safety Camera operator (civilian) who was operating the camera? If it was a police officer he should have recorded the speed in his pocket book, and this will be a key part of the evidence against you. If this is the case and his note book is correctly filled out you will struggle to get away with it.

If it was a civillian you have a good case and a reasonable chance of winning, although I must advise that you will most likely have to take it to a higher court as the Magistrates courts are as bent as Michael Barrimore.

My best advise would be to get the file looked at by John Josephs, of Turner Coulston solicitors. He offers an " initial revue service" for ?100 and will tell you if you have a case and if you do how to fight it. You can then use that advise to either fight on your own or employ him or another brief to fight on your behalf.

I used John earlier this year and I won, I was awarded full costs.

You should also register on the www.pepipoo.com fight back forum and ask for help there, they know what they are talking about
John Josephs

Turner Coulston
Solicitors
15, Station Road,
Kettering
Northants
NN15 7HH

Tel (+44) (0)1536-523434

Fax: (+44) (0)1536-310138

Website: www.tclaw.co.uk

 

[XXLarge]

Birdie,

My mate had exactly this case earlier in the year in his cage. In the front photo his speed was recorded but his reg plate was obscured by roadside furniture. In the second photo the speed wasn't recorded but you could read his plate.
In the confusion of fighting the case he didn't follow the NIP procedures so they DROPPED the speeding charge and gave him a fine and three points for failing to respond to the NIP correctly.
It seems ludicrous that he should be prosecuted for failing to admit to driving a vehicle that was no longer the subject of a speeding offence but hey, why let common sense stand in the way of a bit of revenue collection?
The moral is that, whatever you do, respond to the NIP correctly. His case proves that this kind of evidence is unsafe so challenge it. You don't need a solicitor to do this, just turn up in court and pretend you're Petrocelli.

HTH

 

[Patch]

Study the "PACE witness statement" threads very carefully on Pepipoo.

Basically the gist of it is that you must furbish the details of the rider in writing but you do not have to use the form they provide.

Fightback members have been putting the information on a CJA witness statement and including the fact that they have not been cautioned in accordance with PACE and therefore do not agree to the information being used in evidence.

As of yet not one of these cases has been taken to court, although there is the threat of action against 2 members 1 for Failing to provide (will fail because they have) and the other for speeding (may succeed but is going to be challenged to a higher court.

The PACE statement is part of a bigger strategy to introduce existing ECHR rulings which it has been interperated, by a ECHR lawyer, make the current approach of self incrimination illegal under European Law.

 

[mikew]

If you recall, I was done earlier this year, not for the alleged speeding, but for failing to declare who was driving.

When the video was shown, no-one could see who was driving cos the sun was reflecting off of the windscreen. The reply from the police was that I was the registered user of the car (it's a company car and anyone can/could use it) therefore it's down to me to prove that I wasn't the driver.

Final outcome?

?60 + 3 points for failing to provide the driver details ON THE CORRECT FORM.

Oh yes, this was 8 months after the alleged offence, so who amongst us keeps records of who is driving your car for that length of time? I suspect it was my son driving, and of course he isn't going to put his hands up is he? The reason I think it was him, cos I was in Germany that weekend, can't remember the flight times, but since I fly either early in the morning, or late evening, and the offence took place mid morning ........ methinks I was already in Germany on the early flight, and he was out enjoying himself in the car.



Also,
the solicitor that is referred to in the previous part of this thread ...... ?100 to see if it's worth defending!!!! so let me get this right, he sticks you with a ?100 bill, then tells you it's not worth defending and then you cop another ?60 on top! mmmmm makes real good financial sense that does.

 

[B1rdie]

If you recall, I was done earlier this year, not for the alleged speeding, but for failing to declare who was driving.

When the video was shown, no-one could see who was driving cos the sun was reflecting off of the windscreen. The reply from the police was that I was the registered user of the car (it's a company car and anyone can/could use it) therefore it's down to me to prove that I wasn't the driver.

Final outcome?

?60 + 3 points for failing to provide the driver details ON THE CORRECT FORM.

Oh yes, this was 8 months after the alleged offence, so who amongst us keeps records of who is driving your car for that length of time? I suspect it was my son driving, and of course he isn't going to put his hands up is he? The reason I think it was him, cos I was in Germany that weekend, can't remember the flight times, but since I fly either early in the morning, or late evening, and the offence took place mid morning ........ methinks I was already in Germany on the early flight, and he was out enjoying himself in the car.



Also,
the solicitor that is referred to in the previous part of this thread ...... ?100 to see if it's worth defending!!!! so let me get this right, he sticks you with a ?100 bill, then tells you it's not worth defending and then you cop another ?60 on top! mmmmm makes real good financial sense that does.

I hear what you are saying Mike, the point is that you need to send a letter in clearly stating the info required, but stating that they cannot use the info in a case against you. see the web site.

I cannot state it enough, the rest of the forum needs to join PePiPoo and use this to fight the bullshit speeding offences, sadly if some moron gets off, I will blame the system for turning law abiding (if the law is fair) folks into people that have to find loopholes to avoid stupid C.C. etc.

If you thought that Solicitor is expensive, I have just spoken to the top firm in this matter and the cost for initial advice, by the guy that gets all the big names off is ?470 for a postal response.

 

[mikew]

If you thought that Solicitor is expensive, I have just spoken to the top firm in this matter and the cost for initial advice, by the guy that gets all the big names off is ?470 for a postal response.

On top of your fine.

Still seems daft to employ a solictor for this sort of thing (or anything else for that matter) unless it's on a no-win, shove yer bill basis!

I mean, i could offer to look at your case, for a lets say ?90 up front fee, then say, "Oh, dear, yer fooked matey, and smile all the way to the bank. :bang:

 

[Patch]

Mike I understand your perspective but you really need to get a life.

Did you have a brief at the trial? Was he an expert in rroad traffic law? If so he probably would have helped you win at appeal as there is a quite clear defence of "Due Dilligence" and your conviction is basically unsafe.

Magistrates will convict you despite there being no evidence, I know they did me and even said in open court that on the balence of probablities they considered be guilty. what happened to reasonable doubt? JJ apealed on my behalf andf I was awarded full costs when the appeal was won, I retained my clean license which was the important thing to me.

As for the ?100 charge; this is not just some tom dick and harry solicitor, JJ is the countries formost solicitor on Road traffic offences. He can spot a loophole that you have never heard of and he ?100 fee will give you all the information that you need, ie a brief, to either fight the case yourself or to instruct a barraster. Damn good value for money when you consider that compared to the loading that your insurance will take when they see a Section 172 offence on the licence, thats worse to them than speeding.

In your case a good brief would have given you instructions as to how to demonstrate reasonable dilligence where as at a guess you went in the court and said "Dunno Guv" thinking you'd walk.

FWIW there is no duty under Law for you to maintain a log of who is driving your vehicle you must simply make reasonable efforts to determine who was