How long do police have?

[ClampingKing]

Hello all. Please don't be put off by the name. I am the king of removing clamps, not putting them on! I have been clamped 8 times in 2 years and have removed the clamp each time - they don't like it up 'em!

 

Anyway. Question please. How long do the police have/take between me sending back the NIP for speeding and telling me whether they are going to fine me / take me to court / do nothing?

 

Oh, and where is the spell checker on here? I have a spelling problem and would like to correct any mistakes befroe submitting my posts. Cheers.

[lamma]

six months from the date of the offence to lay the information, the summons can take longer.

[Rooster-UK]

Oh, and where is the spell checker on here? I have a spelling problem and would like to correct any mistakes before submitting my posts. Cheers.

 

On the top right-hand side of the text input box, you will see an ABC, underlined by a tick.

Click on that. You will then be asked if you want to download the spell-check dictionary. Click yes and install it.

Having done that, just click on the icon to access the spell-checker.

 

I've been using it since the beginning of 2006 and it works well.

You also have the option of adding words to it as you go along.

 

Regards, Rooster.

[crem]

On the top right-hand side of the text input box, you will see an ABC, underlined by a tick.

Click on that. You will then be asked if you want to download the spell-check dictionary. Click yes and install it.

Having done that, just click on the icon to access the spell-checker.

 

 

I don't see an ABC icon. either that or I'm just being thick.

 

*That 2nd bit of my sentence does not require an answer!

[HSBCrusher]

or just use firefox and enable the spellchecker on that

[ClampingKing]

Thanks for the replies. Great. So, I might have to wait 6 months to see if they will prosecute me for doing 37 in a 30.

 

Spell checker. Nope, doesn't show on my screen. I am using Firefox, so maybe that is why?

[patdavies]

However, unless you used signed for delivery, I would be tempted to call them to be sure that your completed s.172 has been received and not got lost in the post.

 

Otherwise, you may find a summons for failing to supply arriving...

[lamma]

agreed. an amazing number of replies get 'lost'. send them special delivery is best, recorded delivery is rubbish.

[ClampingKing]

Thanks again. Oh, I have been around long enough to know the old 'lost in the post' stunt. So, yes it was sent recorded delivery.

[lamma]

recorded delivery, did you check that it was actually recorded ? the recorded part of the delivery (which is the part you need) to large organisations is often ignored and its just sacks of mail and hence no proof. This includes letters delivered to court, councils, DVLA etc etc. the post office won't tell you that recorded delivery can mean the delivery is not recorded. And if it happens to you then you have in a strange way provided some evidence that your letter was not delivered (even though it probably was). Not nice !

[ClampingKing]

I know what you are saying, but my obligation is to reply within the timeframe. I have done that and sent it by a trackable method in theory, although you are quiet correct. It may not be signed for even though that is what I paid for.

 

And whilst you are technically correct that it could prove it wasn't delivered, it would prove that it was sent by royal Mail within the required timeframe and I cannot imagine any magistrate would accept that you didn't under those circumstances.

 

As luck would have it, they did sign for it the day after it was sent.

[lamma]

service is rebuttable. that works both ways. Just posting it is not enough. all they have to do is say that it was not received. As your recorded delivery was actually recorded not an issue in this case. For others it does not always work out and they end up facing expensive S.172 charges.

[patdavies]

service is rebuttable. that works both ways. Just posting it is not enough. all they have to do is say that it was not received. As your recorded delivery was actually recorded not an issue in this case. For others it does not always work out and they end up facing expensive S.172 charges.

 

Yes, service is rebuttable. However, such rebuttal must be in the form of proof rather than simple assertion - only the Magistrates can decide this matter.

 

Add to the argument that under the Postal Union, in this country mail become the property of the sender oncer committed to the postal system, then in the most part proof of posting is sufficient.

 

The recorded delivery tracking should show the letter as delivered and that will set a very high bar for any rebuttal.

[lamma]

becomes property of the sender ? you mean recipient ? ? They will rebut based on 'evidence' of their mail handling procedures. Recorded often isn't recorded in which case they will rebut, use Special.

[patdavies]

becomes property of the sender ? you mean recipient ? ?

 

Sorry yes. My bad.

 

They will rebut based on 'evidence' of their mail handling procedures. Recorded often isn't recorded in which case they will rebut, use Special.

 

The OP has evidence from the Royal Mail site that the item was tracked to delivery - even if not specifically signed for.

 

To provide evidence to support rebuttal is going to be awfully difficult given the statement of the OP and the Royal Mail tracking docket. To win any rebuttal, they are going to have to state that the Royal mail - with no interest whatsoever in the case - is lying.

 

To simply rely on their internal mail handling procedures risks making those procedures a laughing stock.