Speeding

[vengeancedemon]

A friend ( no-not me) was stopped in early October 2010 for doing around 100 on a M Way, fair enough

 

Was told verbally that he would be reported, but nothing in wriing received u8ntil today a Summons.

 

 

Now the hand written part of the summons is probably correct with the exception of the following

 

The first part of the reg no is WG this in the handwritten looks like an a or a u or a g. on th pritten part of the summons the reg is quoted as WA

 

Questions are, is there a time limit from the date of the offence to issue of a summons, there no seeming to have been a NIP, and is the discrepancy on the Reg number of any significance

 

Thanks for any advice and clarification

[crem]

I think (but wait for confirmation) the fact that he was stopped by the police and verbally told he would be prosecuted does constitute a verbal NIP. NIP means Notice of Intended Prosecution. Well he has been "notified" because he was told at the time.

 

After that I believe they have 6 months to lay it before a court. This 6 months only means giving the info to the court and, again, doesn't mean the court date would be within 6 months as this is beyond the control of the police.

 

I dont think the typo on the summons will be enough either to avoid the prosecution because the police stopped "the driver" at the time and are therefore satisfied that that person was speeding.

[Rob S]

I concur with Crem. It is usual for traffic officers to give a verbal notice of intended prosecution at the time they report a person they have stopped. It goes something along the lines of "You will be reported for the question to be considered of prosecuting you for the offence of..........." . As long as information has been laid with the court within 6 months of the date of the offence and a summons issued then they are compliant with the time constraints they have.

[Aretnap]

As the others have said, no written NIP is required if he was told at the time that he was told that he would be prosecuted. The only deadline of note is that information must be laid with the court within 6 months of the offence. There's no specific deadline for the summons to arrive - it can take a few weeks after information is laid depending on how busy the court is. So they're well inside the 6 months.

 

Minor errors on the summons such as getting the registration number slightly wrong can be corrected under the "slip rule". They're not a bar to prosecution unless they genuinely confuse the defendant to the point where they cause him problems preparing his defence. It's difficult to see how that could apply - he knows he was stopped for speeding and he knows what the registration number should say.

[vengeancedemon]

Much obliged, its more or less what I thought

[Lawrence McGinty]

I concur with Crem. It is usual for traffic officers to give a verbal notice of intended prosecution at the time they report a person they have stopped. It goes something along the lines of "You will be reported for the question to be considered of prosecuting you for the offence of..........." . As long as information has been laid with the court within 6 months of the date of the offence and a summons issued then they are compliant with the time constraints they have.

 

Quite inaccurate.

 

The offence and the circumstances of the offence are what determines correct procedure and to just state "...as long as 6 months blah blah blah..." as advise in what has been posted by you is irresponsible.

[dx100uk]

Quite inaccurate.

 

The offence and the circumstances of the offence are what determines correct procedure and to just state "...as long as 6 months blah blah blah..." as advise in what has been posted by you is irresponsible.

 

the thread is over three years old!!

 

closed.

 

dx