Notice of Intended Prosecution vs Fixed Penalty Notice

bod1467

Convictions ... nope, you haven't had one of those.

Endorsements ... nope, no points added to your licence.

Fixed Penalty Notices ... nope, you attended an SAC so you didn't receive an FPN.

If they are asking about the above, why are you asking about NIPs?

neilmcl

Hintza wrote: »

Tell them nothing, they have no right to ask about speed awareness courses

Of course they have a right to ask, they can ask for any information (within reason) that may effect your risk.

System

However unless you blurt it out to them then they will never find out. The records only exist to check whether a SAC can be awarded, nobody else has access to it.

ChumLee

!!!!!! wrote: »

However unless you blurt it out to them then they will never find out. The records only exist to check whether a SAC can be awarded, nobody else has access to it.

Give it time. It only takes one government minister who sits on an insurance companies board to decide there's even more money to be extracted from the customers.

Paradigm

ChumLee wrote: »

Give it time. It only takes one government minister who sits on an insurance companies board to decide there's even more money to be extracted from the customers.

Yep but look at it another way....
If SACs work in educating the driver about the wrongs/dangers of speeding & help to prevent further "incidents", as opposed to being money making schemes, then that driver is surely a lower risk... isn't he?

ChumLee

Paradigm wrote: »

Yep but look at it another way....
If SACs work in educating the driver about the wrongs/dangers of speeding & help to prevent further "incidents", as opposed to being money making schemes, then that driver is surely a lower risk... isn't he?

I was really referring to the insurance companies loading premiums because you've done the course.

Where's the education though? If you qualify for a course you know it's wrong to speed and potentially dangerous to do so.

agrinnall

!!!!!! wrote: »

However unless you blurt it out to them then they will never find out. The records only exist to check whether a SAC can be awarded, nobody else has access to it.

Yes, but if you decline to answer a question they will probably refuse to quote. Why would they want to do business with somebody who feels the need to hide information from them?

Paradigm

ChumLee wrote: »

I was really referring to the insurance companies loading premiums because you've done the course.

Where's the education though? If you qualify for a course you know it's wrong to speed and potentially dangerous to do so.

Yes I know what you meant that's why I posted.
If the course isn't to educate the driver about the evils of speeding & therefore turns out a safer driver (less insurance risk).... what is it for?

System

agrinnall wrote: »

Yes, but if you decline to answer a question they will probably refuse to quote. Why would they want to do business with somebody who feels the need to hide information from them?

Why would they want the info if not to load your insurance the same as if you received an FPN?

Which is exactly what they are doing thus defeating to a certain extent one of the raison d'etres of the SAC. The SAC is the education of the transgressor and therefore should be considered rehabilitated after completing the course.

ChumLee

Paradigm wrote: »

Yes I know what you meant that's why I posted.
If the course isn't to educate the driver about the evils of speeding & therefore turns out a safer driver (less insurance risk).... what is it for?

Call me cynical but Police Forces make money from it where as they don't from FPNs or Court fines.
Why do you think the TRO was introduced? To take the disposal method away from a Police Officer and to generate maximum income for the Police Force.
Do you not find it strange that you can now have three different courses within three years?