Help - Ive made a stupid mistake NIP

[myster]

Hi Guys,

 

Cant believe I made such a stupid mistake, now im paying for it.

 

I recently sold my car, the buyer attended my house and whilst looking at all paperwork I took all the money from him and then started to handwrite 2 reciepts (printer is broken). On the reciept I stated the time and date of sale, type of vehicle, colour, reg mark and the fact the one and only key along with papers and service history were handed over. After he drove off I realised I didnt even sign and date the V5, I know its stupid.

 

I called the buyer half an hour later (still have call log on my phone) to tell him that Id left it. He told me hed drop it back off to me the next day and seemed genuine.

 

He didnt turn up, I went to his address and there was no answer and no car on 2 occasions.

 

I decided to call DVLA today tell them this and to see if they have recieved any V5 after work but the office was closed by the time I got back.

 

10 minutes later my wife tells me there is a letter for me, it was a NIP, Gatso activated at 20:14 on the same day. My hand written reciept says time of sale is 19:50 hrs.

 

Im worried hes signed and dated it and put the next day on in which case i'll be stuck with points and a fine. Im going to be honest and call DVLA tomorrow and tell them what mistake I made and I even have neighbours who saw the couple arrive and her husband buy it from me who can vouch for time.

 

Any advice guys?

Edited April 24, 2012 by myster

[honeybee13]

Hello there. Sorry you haven't had any replies yet.

 

I'll try to get you some help.

 

My best, HB

[rebel11]

Hi my

 

I'm not sure it's a police matter, but wouldn't this be fraud 'Im worried hes signed and dated it and put the next day on in which case i'll be stuck with points and a fine.', maybe contact them if he does do that.

[cerberusalert]

I may be wrong but I was under the impression that the vehicle owner was only responsible if they failed to notify who the driver was.

 

Remember the case of the MP who got his wife to admit to his speeding offence?

[freakyleaky]

I was thinking the same.

If you are issued with a ticket it asks you to state the drivers name if it was not you.

You just need to send the details of the new owner who would have been driving.

[dw190]

No doubt you have the details of the person you sold the vehicle so just put those details on the NiP and state I was not the driver or the vehicle was sold on ??/??/?? at ??.??hrs.

 

You also have a hand written copy of the receipt given to the purchaser.

 

If, which I doubt there is any problem and the purchaser tries it on, he would not produce the receipt as it is dated and timed. Remember the receipt is the purchasers proof of ownership.

[assisted blonde]

just send it back naming the driver

[freakyleaky]

You just need to send the details of the new owner who would have been driving.

 

No doubt you have the details of the person you sold the vehicle so just put those details on the NiP

 

.

 

just send it back naming the driver

 

So in summary, just name the guy who bought it and keep that receipt safe just in case!

[Aretnap]

Simply being recorded as the registered keeper by the DVLA doesn't make you liable for a speeding offence. In fact, failing to provide the name of the driver doesn't make you liable for a speeding offence - though failing to name the driver is a separate offence in its own right. Name the buyer and provide the date on which you sold it to him. If he does decide to play silly buggers and claims that he didn't buy until the next day, you'll be in a strong position if you have independent witnesses who can confirm that he took it when you say he did.

[green_and_mean]

Simply being recorded as the registered keeper by the DVLA doesn't make you liable for a speeding offence. In fact, failing to provide the name of the driver doesn't make you liable for a speeding offence - though failing to name the driver is a separate offence in its own right. Name the buyer and provide the date on which you sold it to him. If he does decide to play silly buggers and claims that he didn't buy until the next day, you'll be in a strong position if you have independent witnesses who can confirm that he took it when you say he did.

 

Totally agree it doesn't matter if you still owned the car you were not driving so are not guilty, just name the driver and see what happens.

[Tony P]

How can the OP name the Driver?

 

He was not there to know who was driving.

 

All he can do is state he does not know the identity of the Driver at the time/place within the NIP.

 

To support that statement, he should provide copies of the Sale Receipt. That should be the end of his liability under the NIP - he cannot provide more to identify the actual Driver.

 

I would expect the Police to look further into the Sale to satisfy themselves of the OP's claim. That is where the neighbour's evidence may assist.

 

Can the Sale be further verified by the deletion of the car from his Insurance Policy? Insurers would note the time/date they were taken off risk.

But the short space of time between the Sale and the Gatso may make that fairly worthless avenue to explore.

 

 

However, there could be a different sort of problem looming for the OP - failure to send to DVLA the V5C minus the part the Buyer should have been given.

 

Others here will be able to advise the consequences of this failure, and how to ameliorate it.

Edited April 26, 2012 by Tony P

[freakyleaky]

Good points Tony.

Oh and for anyone wondering as I was

 

a·mel·io·rate   [uh-meel-yuh-reyt, uh-mee-lee-uh-] Show IPA

verb (used with object), verb (used without object), a·mel·io·rat·ed, a·mel·io·rat·ing.

to make or become better, more bearable, or more satisfactory; improve; meliorate.

[honeybee13]

Derived from Latin if my memory serves, FL.

[Aretnap]

How can the OP name the Driver?

However, there could be a different sort of problem looming for the OP - failure to send to DVLA the V5C minus the part the Buyer should have been given.

 

Others here will be able to advise the consequences of this failure, and how to ameliorate it.

Possibly there's an offence there, I'm not 100% sure, but it's not the sort of thing the ticket office are likely to be very interested in provided they get the details of the buyer. I wouldn't have thought anyone would be interested in pursuing it provided he rectifies the situation promptly by informing the DVLA of the sale. If it was pursued a logbook offence is generally a small fine and no points.

[crem]

How can the OP name the Driver?

 

He was not there to know who was driving.

 

All he can do is state he does not know the identity of the Driver at the time/place within the NIP.

 

He doesn't have to know for certain who was driving, he only has to name the person he "believes" was driving at the time. This newly names person will receive his own s172 and can therefore accept or repudiate him being the driver at the time.

 

I think it will be better for the OP to name the buyer otherwise "the buck stops here" may well be the order of the day. The police need someone to pursue and if the OP cannot provide the next link in the chain, then I can see that it will be the OP who ends up in court.

 

Name the buyer and let the chain continue.

[Aretnap]

He was not the person keeping the vehicle at the time of the speeding offence, having just sold it (NB: the person keeping the vehicle is not necessarily the registered keeper). His obligation is therefore to provide all the information that is in his power to give which may lead to the identification of the driver. Obviously this includes the fact that he sold it and the name of the buyer. In practical terms there is usually an option on the form which says "I was not the driver because I sold/hired/lent/assigned the vehicle to..." or some similar wording. He should fill in that bit with the buyer's details and send it back. It's not rocket science.

 

There's no need to start sending receipts for the sale or statements from witnesses to the sale unless the police ask for them, which they won't unless the new owner plays silly buggers and refuses to cooperate. It seems that there's no particular reason at this stage to assume that he will.