14 day NIP rule

Ash2212

Hi guys,
I have a NIP issued to me.
Date of offence is 02/06/2018.
Date the letter was issued 22/08/2018
Obviously this is outside of the 14 day window.
Any ideas where to and how to reply rejecting the letter?
Thanks in advance.

AndyMc.....

Ash2212 wrote: »

Hi guys,
I have a NIP issued to me.
Date of offence is 02/06/2018.
Date the letter was issued 22/08/2018
Obviously this is outside of the 14 day window.
Any ideas where to and how to reply rejecting the letter?
Thanks in advance.

Are you the registered keeper?

How long have you had the car?

How long have you been at your address?

Mercdriver

You can't reject it, you still need to name the driver on the S172 section or you will get a Fail to furnish which gives you 6 points high fine and a conviction code insurance companies load heavily for.

It's rare for them to be late. Are you the registered keeper for the car and is the address correct on the V5c. Come to think of that, do you have the V5c in your possession and what is the DOCREF date on it.

Chances are it has been somewhere else first. Only the first NIP is subject to the 14 day rule.

Car_54

Mercdriver wrote: »

You can't reject it, you still need to name the driver on the S172 section or you will get a Fail to furnish which gives you 6 points high fine and a conviction code insurance companies load heavily for.

It's rare for them to be late. Are you the registered keeper for the car and is the address correct on the V5c. Come to think of that, do you have the V5c in your possession and what is the DOCREF date on it.

Chances are it has been somewhere else first. Only the first NIP is subject to the 14 day rule.

Exactly. And even if you establish that it was genuinely late you can't reject it: it's simply a notice. You may be able to persuade the issuers to take no further action, but it's possible you'll have to prove your case in court.

waamo

What is the DocRef on page 2 of the V5c? Strangely everyone that has a "late NIP" never answers that question.

AndyMc.....

Car_54 wrote: »

Exactly. And even if you establish that it was genuinely late you can't reject it: it's simply a notice. You may be able to persuade the issuers to take no further action, but it's possible you'll have to prove your case in court.

If it's the first and only NIP, he won't have to prove anything. It won't see a trial.

Mercdriver

AndyMc..... wrote: »

If it's the first and only NIP, he won't have to prove anything. It won't see a trial.

Someone on pepipoo was convicted and had to appeal to Crown Court even though he had the postman as witness. It's not always that simple.

AndyMc.....

Mercdriver wrote: »

Someone on pepipoo was convicted and had to appeal to Crown Court even though he had the postman as witness. It's not always that simple.

It very simple, how can an NIP dated two months after the offence be served within 14 days?

And I know the case you're referring to.

Mercdriver

AndyMc..... wrote: »

It very simple, how can an NIP dated two months after the offence be served within 14 days?

And I know the case you're referring to.

D'oh - I'm in Asia arrived earlier and I'm going to blame jetlag for my stupidity.

AndyMc.....

Mercdriver wrote: »

D'oh - I'm in Asia arrived earlier and I'm going to blame jetlag for my stupidity.

It's ok, I doubt it's happened given the MO of the new poster.

TooManyPoints

Someone on pepipoo was convicted and had to appeal to Crown Court even though he had the postman as witness. It's not always that simple.

Yes, it was the case of Peter Gidden vs The Chief Constable of Humberside and it went to the High Court by way of a "Case Stated"..

http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2009/2924.html

It was completely different to this example. Mr Gidden received a NIP which should, in the ordinary course of events, have arrived in time. But there was a postal strike and it took 16 days. This was not disputed by the prosecution and their argument was that the postal strike provided a relaxation of their obligation to serve the NIP within 14 days. Mr Gidden was convicted in the Magistrates' Court, appealed to the Crown Court and lost there as well. Finally the matter was referred to the High Court where the earlier verdicts were overturned.