We'd like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum... Read More »
Speeding fine advice request
Comments
-
TooManyPoints said:You don't need to prove it. The onus is on the accusers.That is incorrect and badly misleading.
The police have only to prove that the document was correctly addressed and posted. If it is alleged not to have been received, the burden falls on the recipient to prove that.
They claim that, but it is unenforceable balderdash. Natural justice proves this to be false. Just remain unfalteringly adamant that no such document was ever received. They will back down. I have defeated them with this nonsense before.0 -
It isn't balderdash or nonsense and you should not mislead the OP into believing that it is..
The authority is Section 7 of the Interpretation Act, 1978:
========
7. References to service by post.Where an Act authorises or requires any document to be served by post (whether the expression “serve” or the expression “give” or “send” or any other expression is used) then, unless the contrary intention appears, the service is deemed to be effected by properly addressing, pre-paying and posting a letter containing the document and, unless the contrary is proved, to have been effected at the time at which the letter would be delivered in the ordinary course of post. [my emphasis]
=========
It is important that the OP establishes that no subsequent NIP and request for driver's details was sent to her husband after she had named him as the driver. It is equally important to establish that he has not been charged with "failing to provide driver's details".
To advise otherwise, regardless of your apparent successes, is irresponsible.
By your reasoning nobody should ever be convicted of speeding unless they were stopped at the time as all they have to do is to “….remain unfalteringly adamant that no such document was ever received.” The police will then apparently, simply back down.
With it being that easy, I can’t understand why everybody doesn’t do it.
0 -
TooManyPoints said:
The police have only to prove that the document was correctly addressed and posted. If it is alleged not to have been received, the burden falls on the recipient to prove that.I received 2 NIPs when I was accused of going through a red light, the first one I stated it wasn't me driving, they just sent it again, and I repeated it wasn't me.Nothing happened.
0 -
"... they just sent it again, and I repeated it wasn't me.
Nothing happened".Lucky old you.
You had, in fact, committed an offence of "failing to provide driver's details". On conviction this carries six points and an endorsement code which insurers hate.
Hopefully you would not advise anybody to do likewise based simply on that experience.0 -
Baldytyke88 said:TooManyPoints said:
The police have only to prove that the document was correctly addressed and posted. If it is alleged not to have been received, the burden falls on the recipient to prove that.I received 2 NIPs when I was accused of going through a red light, the first one I stated it wasn't me driving, they just sent it again, and I repeated it wasn't me.Nothing happened.
You are very lucky. Occasionally there will be admin errors where a document falls down the back of a filing cabinet. But more normally the police will be investigating a 'fail to furnish' - and if the recipient of the correpondence is shown to have so failed, it's 6 points and elevated insurance premiums for several years. Insurance companies are wary of people who don't respond as there's data showing they are higher risk. Worse, if you are proved to have lied about who was driving that generally involvesspending a few months as a guest of His Majesty.0 -
Risteard said:boots_babe said:TooManyPoints said:You can get good advice if you remain here (I contribute to both here and ftla)
After you replied naming your husband as the driver, did he received his own "request for driver's details" and did he respond to it?
What is this "letter" he has received? Is it a "Single Justice Procedure Notice"? If so, what charge(s) does it mention?
How on earth can I prove he didn't receive anything though?
The police will have evidence that a notice was sent out on such and such a date and statute law creates a legal presumption that the notice was served two days later. How do you propose that the OP's husband proves that the notice (or anything at all) was not delivered?
I'm reporting this post on the basis that you are giving advice on something you clearly do not understand.
I suspect that @TooManyPoints is much better acquainted with the relevant law and with how magistrates courts work than you are.
1 -
Risteard said:TooManyPoints said:You don't need to prove it. The onus is on the accusers.That is incorrect and badly misleading.
The police have only to prove that the document was correctly addressed and posted. If it is alleged not to have been received, the burden falls on the recipient to prove that.
They claim that, but it is unenforceable balderdash. Natural justice proves this to be false. Just remain unfalteringly adamant that no such document was ever received. They will back down. I have defeated them with this nonsense before.1 -
Whether or not he received the NIP is totally irrelevant. The question, rather, is whether he replied, naming himself as driver.
If he did, the police will be able to produce the document.
If he did not, they have no proof that he was driving, and the prosecution cannot succeed.
1 -
Sorry that my thread seems to have caused such upset. But in short the comments match what my own thoughts were, that I cannot see how we can possibly prove that nothing was received. Will respond as per advice on here and hope for the best. Many thanks.0
-
boots_babe said:Sorry that my thread seems to have caused such upset. But in short the comments match what my own thoughts were, that I cannot see how we can possibly prove that nothing was received. Will respond as per advice on here and hope for the best. Many thanks.
The onus of proof is on the prosecution. They have to prove that your husband was driving. Unless he has named himself, they cannot do that.
Whether or not he received a NIP is now of no consequence, what matters is whether he returned one, and it is up to the police to provide evidence of that.1
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply

Categories
- All Categories
- 350.9K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 453.5K Spending & Discounts
- 243.9K Work, Benefits & Business
- 598.7K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 176.9K Life & Family
- 257.1K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards