Failing to Provide Details

Quentin

Using mse to set up a poll asking us to vote on being honest or dishonest then being told the poll is considered fatuous is hardly an insult and wasn't intended to be one!

Gadfium

ChumLee wrote: »

Yeah, you asking for people to conspire with you to pervert the course of justice. You've already by your own admission committed one criminal offence. Don't make it two and jail time.

Melodramatic? Much?

Nowhere is the OP asking for or intending to pervert.

Stresshead:
It'd be worth asking a solicitor for advice. many do an initial free consultation. Or, as others have said, seek advice on peepipoo.
Its possible that the courts will see the Section 172 as being complete as you didn't respond to the 2nd speeding ticket. You'll need to take advice IMHO from a professional.

Retrogamer

Stresshead2014 wrote: »

I'm not sure what you mean? I haven't knowingly committed a criminal offence nor am I asking anyone to conspire with me. I am asking if anyone has advice with regards to defending myself when I go to court. I have been completely honest from the start of the process however I could have just said "I didn't receive anything" and maybe heard nothing more.

You don't appear to have a valid defence for this.

You admitted to not responding to the second NIP. That's a slam dunk guilty for failure to furnish details as far as the court will be concerned.

The correct thing to do at the time would be advise them (as you did with the first NIP) that you sold the detail, V5 keeper information was being updated by DVLA and pass on any details you have of the driver.

Ignoring the NIP is an offence, regardless of the circumstances.

If you were to state you never received the NIP, you would need to provide evidence, beyond reasonable doubt that this is likely to be true.

Stresshead2014

Quentin wrote: »

Assuming you really do want advice and didn't just come for your fatuous post you need to take this to pepipoo

As you can see you actually called it a "fatuous post" which IS insulting.
I accept that you meant the poll which is only meant to gauge opinion on how I should have handled this seeing as being honest appears to have landed me in deep water.

Stresshead2014

Retrogamer wrote: »

You don't appear to have a valid defence for this.

You admitted to not responding to the second NIP. That's a slam dunk guilty for failure to furnish details as far as the court will be concerned.

The correct thing to do at the time would be advise them (as you did with the first NIP) that you sold the detail, V5 keeper information was being updated by DVLA and pass on any details you have of the driver.

Ignoring the NIP is an offence, regardless of the circumstances.

If you were to state you never received the NIP, you would need to provide evidence, beyond reasonable doubt that this is likely to be true.

Thank you, this is also what I suspect will be the case.


I will plead my case though regardless. In the court pack there is a signed statement from a Police officer stating that a NIP was issued (copy attached) and also that a reminder was sent. I did not receive a reminder at any time and there is no copy of one within the papers. Clutching at straws but could this help my defence?


Also, technically the Police or whoever issues the NIP have (probably) prosecuted the new owner for the offences as they have not chased me for them, will this not go in my favour? Along with the proof I have that the DVLA changed the registered keeper at the same time that this was happening and I dealt fully with the first NIP I received?

Quentin

Stresshead2014 wrote: »

As you can see you actually called it a "fatuous post" which IS insulting.
I accept that you meant the poll which is only meant to gauge opinion on how I should have handled this seeing as being honest appears to have landed me in deep water.

Yes, the word "post" was typo, and I was referring to your poll.


(I have corrected the post now)


However, I did give you sound advice to take this to pepipoo which you have chosen to ignore!

Stresshead2014

Quentin wrote: »

Yes, the word "post" was typo, and I was referring to your poll.


(I have corrected the post now)


However, I did give you sound advice to take this to pepipoo which you have chosen to ignore!

I have not ignored this advice and I thank you for it. I am posting on there as we speak.


Cheers

Retrogamer

Stresshead2014 wrote: »

Also, technically the Police or whoever issues the NIP have (probably) prosecuted the new owner for the offences as they have not chased me for them, will this not go in my favour? Along with the proof I have that the DVLA changed the registered keeper at the same time that this was happening and I dealt fully with the first NIP I received?

As failing to respond to the NIP carries a bigger fine & points than the speeding offence itself, it's unlikely they tried to find out the driver actually was after failing to get a response from the NIP.

Even if they did however, i'm afraid it wouldn't be enough to help you. There is virtually no mitigating circumstances for not responding to a NIP. Even people who have been abroad long term when it was received have been prosecuted for it. They're very strict.

Aretnap

There is no requirement to send you a reminder so the fact that you didn't get the reminder isn't much help to you.

Basically all you can do is go along and explain (with evidence if possible) that you believed that as you'd already provided the police with information on the change of ownership you (reasonably) assumed that they wouldn't need you to provide the same information a second time. With hindsight it was a bit silly of you to assume that the left hand would know what the right hand was doing, but there you go. While not a defence if you're lucky you might get a sympathetic prosecutor who will consider dropping the charge as not being in the public interest. That's probably about the best you can hope for.

Car_54

Stresshead2014 wrote: »

As you can see you actually called it a "fatuous post" which IS insulting.
I accept that you meant the poll which is only meant to gauge opinion on how I should have handled this seeing as being honest appears to have landed me in deep water.

Sorry, it's not being honest that's landed you in it - it's your own failure (1) to keep the buyer's details, and (20 to respond to the s172.