Speeding Summons?

Marktheshark

Was the NIP posted within 14 days of the offence ?

dacouch

Happychappy wrote: »

True, but this idiot forgot he had CCTV in the works car park, what a pillock.

It would be nice if money no object the authorities could uncover all situations along these lines as it would soon send out a message that you will get caught.

Having said that, this is definitely not as common as it used to be as a few high profile cases have reminded people the very serious consequences of perverting the course of justice

facade

Dr._Shoe wrote: »

Well it's the same make, model and colour, it looks like my car but I'm going to go out with the picture tomorrow and have a good look. That is a good point. It isn't exactly a common make but there are a few around with the same colour.

If you wanted to go down the "it can't possibly be my car" route this should have been done before requesting pictures "to assist in identifying the driver" as doing so is an admission that it is your car. (why would you need a picture of someone else's car? You can't possibly identify the driver)

When you claim "it can't possibly be my car", first they will check for a typo on the registration, and if correct they ask you for pictures of your car to compare with what they have. They then ignore all the furry dice/baby on board stickers/camouflage wrap/nodding churchill in the back window that have appeared in the last week and check a few other key things.

robatwork

Iceweasel wrote: »

We need Hercule Poirot here.

Sadly the answer will end up being quite mundane.....

and I doubt we will ever hear the outcome.

"Oh I did go for a cheeky McD drivethru that day....."

RS2000.

facade wrote: »

If you wanted to go down the "it can't possibly be my car" route this should have been done before requesting pictures "to assist in identifying the driver" as doing so is an admission that it is your car. (why would you need a picture of someone else's car? You can't possibly identify the driver)

When you claim "it can't possibly be my car", first they will check for a typo on the registration, and if correct they ask you for pictures of your car to compare with what they have. They then ignore all the furry dice/baby on board stickers/camouflage wrap/nodding churchill in the back window that have appeared in the last week and check a few other key things.

Not sure you're correct.

What if it clearly isn't your car when you get the photos?

They won't ask for photos of your car and you are under no obligation to provide them.

Try sticking to facts, this isn't helping.

facade

RS2000. wrote: »

What if it clearly isn't your car when you get the photos?

If you knew that it couldn't possibly be your car you would have said so before.

Agreed, it is possible that the time was about right, and you could think it was you as you could have been speeding, then a photo of a pink cadillac appears bearing a different reg and you breathe a sigh of relief when you tell them they are wrong.

But this is the right make, colour and reg number, and the OP knows that it cannot possibly, no way, never ever be his car , and knew that all along. (unless it drove itself, or the unknown Other Person done it, which is a completely different story)

Take this one to the Pepipoo forums for better advice

RS2000.

facade wrote: »

If you knew that it couldn't possibly be your car you would have said so before.

Agreed, it is possible that the time was about right, and you could think it was you as you could have been speeding, then a photo of a pink cadillac appears bearing a different reg and you breathe a sigh of relief when you tell them they are wrong.

But this is the right make, colour and reg number, and the OP knows that it cannot possibly, no way, never ever be his car , and knew that all along. (unless it drove itself, or the unknown Other Person done it, which is a completely different story)

Take this one to the Pepipoo forums for better advice

Maybe but asking for the photo can be argued was part of the due diligence.

As for pepipoo, why not wait until they know what happening. Can't really give advice on something that's not happened yet.

facade

RS2000. wrote: »

They won't ask for photos of your car and you are under no obligation to provide them.

.

They will if you claim it is a cloned plate. They won't need to if you claim it must be an error so they spot the pink Cadillac straight away. You may not be under any obligation to provide photos I don't know, but when it ends up in court, and you then produce the photos in some sort of Perry Mason style defence with a "Tadaa! told you it wasn't mine!" you would be very lucky if the court award you costs when you could simply have sent the pictures in and not had to go there and waste everyone's time.

RS2000.

facade wrote: »

They will if you claim it is a cloned plate. They won't need to if you claim it must be an error so they spot the pink Cadillac straight away. You may not be under any obligation to provide photos I don't know, but when it ends up in court, and you then produce the photos in some sort of Perry Mason style defence with a "Tadaa! told you it wasn't mine!" you would be very lucky if the court award you costs when you could simply have sent the pictures in and not had to go there and waste everyone's time.

You are not obliged to send photos. The one thing you are correct on is you do not know. In order to assist the OP why not stick to facts instead of making it up and playing Perry Mason?

facade

RS2000. wrote: »

In order to assist the OP why not stick to facts instead of making it up and playing Perry Mason?

Did that in post #3

The op hasn't complied with s172, and has it in writing that it has been passed to the summons team.
A summons for the s172 offence is in process, he should seek advice at Pepippo.