Wrong name on NIP

TooManyPoints

Since you are not the Registered Keeper there is no requirement to send a Notice of Intended Prosecution (NIP) to you at all. Only one (the first, usually sent to the Registered Keeper) is required by law. Any subsequent NIPs are provided as a courtesy only. 

As well as being a courtesy only, they are provided because they are usually printed on the same piece of paper as the "Section 172" Request for Driver's Details. If your paperwork includes such a request and you choose to  ignore that it on the basis that you do not believe, or cannot be sure that it is meant for you, you will find yourself on the wrong end of a prosecution for "Failing to Provide Driver's Details". On conviction, this carries six points, a hefty fine and an endorsement code (MS90) which insurers hate. Some fleet insurers will not actually insure a driver with such an endorsement. 

You can, of course, defend the matter on the basis that the request was not properly served on you. There are many factors to consider when assessing the likelihood of success with that defence, not least would be the accuracy of the details provided to the police by your employer.

I would have thought it would be written by a computer, from my driving license?

Why would you think that? It's unlikely that the police have your driving licence details. That's one of the things you provide if and when you respond to their s172 request.

user1977

sevenhills said:

ontheroad1970 said:

That would not be a wise move.  It would be an expensive one.  You know it refers to you, and you aren't disadvantaged by it.  It's simply rectified and you could multiply the fine  by many times.  The name is correct but spaced incorrectly.  It will have nothing to do with your driving licence whatsoever.

If they sent the same person to court, the person addressed in the letter, no one would show up!

And what do you think would happen next? Everyone would shrug and forget all about it?

sevenhills

Car_54 said:

If the uncertainty is due to a lack of record-keeping, then the responsible person(s) may also  be charged, and face six points and a fine, costs etc.

No uncertainty, just trying to work out why the letter is not addressed to me.

Who could make such a simple mistake?

I have just looked at the time of the offense, 5.39, I have just looked at my timesheet and I finished work at 5.25

The vehicle, I assume, was parked near my home at that time, ready for the next days work.

TooManyPoints

If you believe it may not have been you, ask the police for "photographs to help identify the driver". They don't have to supply them but usually will (normally with a link). Any photographs they do have rarely help with that (because they are designed to identify the vehicle, not the driver) but it may confirm whether or not it was your car and help you identify the location more precisely. They may also be time stamped. The reason for asking in that way is that it avoids asking for "evidence", which you are not entitled to at this stage. Note that his request does not stop the 28 day clock measuring the time you have to respond.

The mistake you mention may have been made by your employer when they responded to their s172 request asking for the driver's details. However, you shouldn't worry about that. You have a s172 request which (arguably) is addressed to you at your address, mentioning your vehicle. You must decide how to respond to this rather than worry about how any errors may have come about. 

Car_54

sevenhills said:

Car_54 said:

If the uncertainty is due to a lack of record-keeping, then the responsible person(s) may also  be charged, and face six points and a fine, costs etc.

No uncertainty, just trying to work out why the letter is not addressed to me.

Who could make such a simple mistake?

I have just looked at the time of the offense, 5.39, I have just looked at my timesheet and I finished work at 5.25

The vehicle, I assume, was parked near my home at that time, ready for the next days work.

FWIW the mistake is probably down to thick-fingered typing, and absence of checking, either by your employer or the police.

But it really doesn’t matter why. The fact is that you’ve got it, and you must reply. The law provides for an s172 request to be sent to “any other person”, which clearly you are.

sevenhills

Car_54 said
FWIW the mistake is probably down to thick-fingered typing, and absence of checking, either by your employer or the police.

But it really doesn’t matter why. The fact is that you’ve got it, and you must reply. The law provides for an s172 request to be sent to “any other person”, which clearly you are.

I guess if it asks if ** ***** was driving the vehicle at 5.39 I will answer no.
My name is * ****** and my vehicle was parked at the side of the road, according to my paperwork.
My employer also has a tracking app that will confirm this.
Filling out a form that is not addressed to me does not seem right.
I still haven't worked out where the offence was committed and what it was.
I drove passed a filter traffic lights on that road today, but cannot work out what the offence is.
It is possible that I made a mistake, but unsure.

ontheroad1970

You know full well that it is intended for you.  Your employer told you it was coming, and he will tell the police that is the case if you don't respond to the S172. The offence would be a red light offence, so fixed penalty 3 points £100 if below a certain time after red.  

Car_54

Forget who it was addressed to, it’s not an issue - you’ve got it now!

If you are the “person keeping the vehicle” - and it sounds as if you were - then you’re essentially required to name the driver. Otherwise, as “any other person”, you only need to give any information you have.

if no-one was driving at the precise time alleged, then explain that. Messing around over a few minutes either way is unlikely to end well.

sevenhills

Car_54 said:

if no-one was driving at the precise time alleged, then explain that. Messing around over a few minutes either way is unlikely to end well.

The letter asks if I was the driver at the time of the alleged offense - NO

The letter asks if I can provide the details of the driver at the time of the alleged offense - NO

The form is not one where you can explain what happened, you tick a box, YES or NO!

sevenhills

There is a "slip rule" that allows the court to modify small errors (such as name/address of the keeper) due to typographical mistakes. Serious errors can't be modified, and invalidate the NIP.

I would say that the lack of a first name/initial and misspelling of the last name is a serious error?

http://www.pepipoo.com/FAQ.htm

I get that the right thing to do, is send the form off with a covering letter, after around 25 days.