How long does it take speeding tickets to come through?

TooManyPoints

...and I know the rules for it still being valid after 14 days if the intention was for me to receive it before..

The rules are generally that if it was not served within 14 days it does not meet the requirements. However, Mr Gidden, who was served with a "late NIP", was convicted in the Magistrates' Court, had his appeal turned down in the Crown Court and only had the matter resolved in his favour in the High Court:

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

Supersonos

Edwardian28 wrote: »

I believe I've recently been caught out on the M25 by a variable speed camera.

I really hope you're the guy in the black Mercedes who went belting past me two nights ago at about 80mph and got flashed because the limit was actually 50mph.

Seeing him then slam on his brakes and slow to about 40mph was hilarious. I love how people get flashed and then massively over-compensate like going way under the limit will somehow cancel out the fact they've just been caught.

trphil

lostelephant wrote: »

Don't get your hopes up at any point within the 14 days, but also try not to worry about it as the outcome will be the same regardless. Is there any chance the variable speed camera had just changed the speed limit before you passed it?

I had this a few weeks back, I went under a gantry showing a 50 limit just under 50mph and got flashed (it was definitely me as amazingly I was the only vehicle passing in any of the four lanes at that point), when I got to the next gantry it was on 40. I then went on holiday for two weeks and half expected a NIP when I got back but luckily not. I think it would be much more user friendly if they didn't flash immediately after a change.

Edwardian28

I drive a rubbish Toyota Yaris so I'm not sure I'm that capable of doing 80mph haha.


I was however distracted and believe I did 70mph through a 50mph variable. Entirely my fault and therefore expecting the worst!

DoaM

SHAFT wrote: »

How does the photo prove it was served late? The date stamp only proves when it was taken.

How did the date stamped on Mr. Beckham's NIP (when it was first received at the hire company) enable him to get off from his speeding charge? The equipment at the hirer that stamped the envelope/document could have been set incorrectly.

It's the same principle ... this would at least give the OP some form of evidence, and would be better than absolutely nothing.

How would you suggest the OP proves when a NIP was received?

SHAFT

DoaM wrote: »

How did the date stamped on Mr. Beckham's NIP (when it was first received at the hire company) enable him to get off from his speeding charge? The equipment at the hirer that stamped the envelope/document could have been set incorrectly.

It's the same principle ... this would at least give the OP some form of evidence, and would be better than absolutely nothing.

How would you suggest the OP proves when a NIP was received?

It's absolutely worthless. All it proves is you had possession of the NIP and took a photo of it on a given day. There is absolutely no evidence it was the day you received it.

Beckhams case involved:

A. Nick Freeman
B. From memory a proper documented system for the receipt of in coming mail a Bentley garage.

The only case I know of with joe public successfully defending a late NIP is documented on pepipoo and from memory that on appeal involved getting the postman to court.

Car_54

SHAFT wrote: »

It's absolutely worthless. All it proves is you had possession of the NIP and took a photo of it on a given day. There is absolutely no evidence it was the day you received it.

There is evidence in the form of the OP's testimony.

SHAFT

Car_54 wrote: »

There is evidence in the form of the OP's testimony.

As you well know just turning up and saying it won't disprove it didn't arrive on time.

TooManyPoints

As you well know just turning up and saying it won't disprove it didn't arrive on time.

I think you mean it won't prove it didn't arrive on time.

But it might.

There have been plenty of cases where a late NIP (proved by the recipient’s testimony) has provided a successful defence to a speeding charge.

In the case on Pepipoo (which I believe is the one I referred to, that of Gidden v The Chief Constable of Humberside) there was no dispute that the NIP had been served late (it actually arrived on day 16). The prosecution argued that the presumption of delivery (two working days after posting which meant it was presumed served on day 12) was irrebuttable. However the High Court held that that privilege only applied to items sent by Registered or Recorded delivery and not those sent by first class post, so the presumption of service did not save the prosecution.

Slightly different to this case but it confirms that the defendant is able to challenge the presumption of service if his NIP is sent by first class post (which they invariably are). In Mr Beckham’s case Bentley Motors persuaded the court that the NIP was not served in time. That proof was provided by the testimony of the employee who dealt with it. That same option is open to a driver who is in receipt of the first NIP (the only one subject to a time limit). It's not easy to convince a court, but it can and has been done. It all depends on how much weight the court gives to the defendant's evidence on the day.

SHAFT

TooManyPoints wrote: »

I think you mean it won't prove it didn't arrive on time.

But it might.

There have been plenty of cases where a late NIP (proved by the recipient’s testimony) has provided a successful defence to a speeding charge.

In the case on Pepipoo (which I believe is the one I referred to, that of Gidden v The Chief Constable of Humberside) there was no dispute that the NIP had been served late (it actually arrived on day 16). The prosecution argued that the presumption of delivery (two working days after posting which meant it was presumed served on day 12) was irrebuttable. However the High Court held that that privilege only applied to items sent by Registered or Recorded delivery and not those sent by first class post, so the presumption of service did not save the prosecution.

Slightly different to this case but it confirms that the defendant is able to challenge the presumption of service if his NIP is sent by first class post (which they invariably are). In Mr Beckham’s case Bentley Motors persuaded the court that the NIP was not served in time. That proof was provided by the testimony of the employee who dealt with it. That same option is open to a driver who is in receipt of the first NIP (the only one subject to a time limit). It's not easy to convince a court, but it can and has been done. It all depends on how much weight the court gives to the defendant's evidence on the day.

So let's have something the OP could work with if he gets a late NIP. It'll be interesting to see some examples when the defendants word carries more weight than the postal systems presumed delivery.