Author Topic: Hire Car 3 NIPs same day round trip - M1 (Northb.) J28-29, M1 (Northb.) J29a-30 & M1 (Southb.) J30-29a - 61 & 59 in a 50  (Read 2242 times)

0 Members and 0 Guests are viewing this topic.

Hustler6969

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 24
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Hi gents,

A relative seems to have got himself into a right mess.

Basically to his and his mrs.' shock and horror they received (delayed) notification from the hire car company a few days ago that they had gotten themselves three speeding tickets on the same day round trip journey. NIPs arrived in post yesterday.

Two are about 15 mins apart on the same stretch northbound in the morning, and the third is around about the same patch southbound in the afternoon.

It was a hire car and usually him and his mrs. share the driving. For the last few months, they've been doing this journey about twice a week (as part of a 4-hr drive each way) so their memories (especially given that these have arrived delayed about three-four weeks after the offence having changed hands via the hire company) are a bit hazy as to who actually was driving, but of course they'd be willing to take an educated/informed guess depending on how this is best approached. The pictures supplied are grainy/dark at best and pretty indistinguishable as to who exactly is at the wheel. 

They are very much disappointed of course, as in over 10-15 years of having their driving licenses they've only had one other infringement..

Following are the details of each one:

For the alleged offence of Exceeding 50 MPH The speed limit being 50 mph. At 22/09/2024 08:54:50 hrs
At (place) M 1 J29 Heath (North Bound) J28-J29 - Alleged speed 61mph

For the alleged offence of Exceeding 50 MPH The speed limit being 50 mph. At 22/09/2024 09:04:48 hrs
At (place) M 1 Near Barlborough (North Bound) J29a-J30 - Alleged speed 61mph

For the alleged offence of Exceeding 50 MPH The speed limit being 50 mph. At 22/09/2024 13:24:55 hrs
At (place) M 1 Duckmanton (South Bound) J30-J29a - - Alleged speed 61mph

Given their predicament (potential to rack up 9 points and be a whisker away from a ban), I would appreciate your advice on how best to tackle this, and I also had a few questions of my own to try to help them:
1) Is there anyway to determine for sure if these (or each of them) were 'normal' or 'variable speed cameras'? Trying to pin these down on google street view they appear to me 'normal' national speed limit cameras, however the NIP claims the speed limit was 50. I ask this as the relative has done a 'normal' speeding course within the last three years but ofc if this is a variable speed limit breach a motorway course should still be offered? His mrs. record is absolutely clean. I believe they are generally 'sat-nav followers' and say they couldn't say for sure what type of camera/limit it may have been, but say they do have general memories of there often being all of roadworks, average cameras, variable limits etc., but also that they can't be certain if it'd be the M1 they are talking about, as parts of the M6 and M42 are also usually on this route of theirs.
2) There seems to be several recent posts here regarding the same patch/offence and also writing to CREST/Derbyshire Constabulary for very close together offences. Is it worth writing to CREST to consider the first two (about 15 mins apart) a continuous offence, before nominating/naming drivers? If so, if someone could provide me what wording to write to them that'd be very much appreciated.

Any help as always much appreciated.

Share on Facebook Share on Twitter


BertB

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 98
  • Karma: +2/-0
    • View Profile
Combining the first two offences at that location into a single offence has been done recently by a poster on here.

https://www.ftla.uk/speeding-and-other-criminal-offences/received-2-nips-on-same-journey-17-minutes-apart/msg35421/#msg35421

The general advice is to fill in the S172 response, write a letter regarding the first two offences to politely enquire as to considering them a continuous offence and send back together in a single envelope, obtaining free proof of posting from the post office. 

Hustler6969

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 24
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Hi, yes, I am aware of that post which I was referring to in my original post.

However, would you not think better that they try asking CREST in good time BEFORE naming drivers to consider the first two a continuous offence, such that hopefully before naming they can know if they’re ultimately dealing with 2 or 3 tickets? And if it dosen't work, then ask again when naming?

It almost feels like the other poster did so before naming the driver hence the question.

NewJudge

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 493
  • Karma: +19/-0
    • View Profile
Quote
However, would you not think better that they try asking CREST in good time BEFORE naming drivers

No.

Whoever the requests are addressed to has an obligation to name the driver on each occasion regardless of any issues with the offences themselves.

The first two certainly have a possibility of being treated as a single continuous offence but there is no reason to delay naming the driver in order to make that argument with the police. Of course to argue that it was a single offence the same person must have been driving throughout, so that person needs to be nominated anyway.

If the police decline that request, securing success becomes complicated because it will mean either accepting a fixed penalty for the first and asking for the second to be heard in court, or asking for both to be heard there. Then you can make the same argument (that the two were a single offence) or that although they were two separate offences, they were committed "on the same occasion" (and so warrant only one lot of points). I don't think you can do that if you accepted a course for the first offence. You should note that if these arguments fail, it is going to be very much more expensive than the fixed penalty.

Southpaw82

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 710
  • Karma: +11/-2
    • View Profile
The police would (one hopes) want to know that it was the same driver on both occasions, otherwise it cannot be a single offence.

Hustler6969

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 24
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Just a response to the above replies and a follow-up as well on my original questions.

1) Can anyone verify/confirm if these cameras were variable limits or fixed limits? Like I say I’d want to understand if the driver who’s already had a speed awareness course might still get offered a motorway awareness course. Find it confusing that on GSV they just look like national speed cameras.

2) In response to the response before last, are you suggesting if (for the first two offences) the driver was named and it was politely requested for them to be considered a continuous offence, and that request was rejected, that it would automatically result in the second of two offences having to be defended in court, or would it just be that in the worst case (of continuous claim rejected) that the named driver is offered two sets of points/fines (or one course if applicable for the first and points for the second)? Appreciate if you could clarify, wouldn’t want to ask for them to be a continuous offence if if rejected it could lead to a bigger/worse problem.

sparxy

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 125
  • Karma: +1/-0
  • [ib90xi8p]
    • View Profile
Likely variable, look here for at least one set of cameras between M1 28-29 Northbound: https://www.google.co.uk/maps/place/4M69%2BQ3F,+Alfreton complete with the variable signs.

What are "national speed cameras"? Are you getting confused with "average" speed cameras used mainly in roadworks on mways?

andy_foster

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 823
  • Karma: +13/-17
  • Location: Reading
    • View Profile
Just a response to the above replies and a follow-up as well on my original questions.

1) Can anyone verify/confirm if these cameras were variable limits or fixed limits? Like I say I’d want to understand if the driver who’s already had a speed awareness course might still get offered a motorway awareness course. Find it confusing that on GSV they just look like national speed cameras.

2) In response to the response before last, are you suggesting if (for the first two offences) the driver was named and it was politely requested for them to be considered a continuous offence, and that request was rejected, that it would automatically result in the second of two offences having to be defended in court, or would it just be that in the worst case (of continuous claim rejected) that the named driver is offered two sets of points/fines (or one course if applicable for the first and points for the second)? Appreciate if you could clarify, wouldn’t want to ask for them to be a continuous offence if if rejected it could lead to a bigger/worse problem.

1. Do NOT bump your thread.

2. Posters usually say what they mean. Rather than asking them to repeat what they have already told you, try re-reading what they have already told you. In this case, you might want to focus on the word "success".
I am responsible for the accuracy of the information I post, not your ability to comprehend it.

Hustler6969

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 24
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
I'm sorry I don't understand

My question is were a request to be made when naming that two be considered a single offence could the response be directly a rejection and referral for the second to court, or is practice that the request is declined and the offer for course/points be made again to the offender for both offences?

NewJudge

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 493
  • Karma: +19/-0
    • View Profile
Quote
...are you suggesting if (for the first two offences) the driver was named and it was politely requested for them to be considered a continuous offence, and that request was rejected, that it would automatically result in the second of two offences having to be defended in court,

No.

What I'm saying is that if the police reject that argument and the driver disagrees with that decision, the only place to make it again is in court. And to do that he would have to reject any offer (of a course or fixed penalty) the police might make.

If these allegations are left to take their course these are the likelihoods:

If the driver is the same for all three allegations he is likely to be offered either three fixed penalties or two fixed penalties and a course (if eligible)

If the driver is different for offence #3, the driver on the first two occasions is likely to be offered either two fixed penalties or a fixed penalty and a course (if eligible). The driver on occasion #3 is likely to be offered either a fixed penalty or a course (if eligible).

Your relative's line of approach should be firstly ask the police if they would consider the first two as a single continuous offence. If that is unsuccessful, they will then have to decide whether to let "nature take its course" as I outlined above, or whether to make that argument before a court.

It might be best to wait for the outcome of that request (and also until it is determined whether or not the driver was the same person on all three occasions) and then come back for more advice.

At the moment there are too many variables to explain the possible outcomes without confusion,

baroudeur

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 55
  • Karma: +0/-2
    • View Profile
Likely variable, look here for at least one set of cameras between M1 28-29 Northbound: https://www.google.co.uk/maps/place/4M69%2BQ3F,+Alfreton complete with the variable signs.

What are "national speed cameras"? Are you getting confused with "average" speed cameras used mainly in roadworks on mways?

According to PGPSW there is a 50 mph limit and a mixture of specs (average speed cameras) and Gatso fixed cameras on M1 between 28 and 30.

Hustler6969

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 24
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
All,

An update on the 3 tickets from the same day situation.

The two received in quick succession (outbound) on the day was named by my relative to be himself. Although he never requested directly for them to consider them a single offence it feels like that's what's happened, for the first one he has been offered a speed awareness course which he will do (he had done a motorway awareness course couple of months prior), and the details for the second one don't show up anymore on the portal when entered so I assume has been struck.

For the 3rd ticket (inbound that evening on same-ish stretch of road) they'd named his partner as driving. Interestingly/disappointingly although she has a spanking clean record of never having had a speeding ticket or offer of a course, the letter has come back asking her to accept points and a fine rather than a course offer which is perplexing. Could this be an honest mistake, and/or how far can we go pushing asking for consideration of a course (i.e. is there guidelines for this or is it just discretion of the force?).

Any advise would be appreciated.

NewJudge

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 493
  • Karma: +19/-0
    • View Profile
Quote
i.e. is there guidelines for this or is it just discretion of the force?).

Both. The offer of a course is entirely at the discretion of the police. However, they have guidelines which suggest they can normally be offered up to (Limit+10%+9mph) - so up to 64mph in a 50mph limit.

May be worth a phone call asking why no course was offered.

Hustler6969

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 24
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Phone call or something in writing such that there is 'time for consideration'?

Also are you able to share a link to these 'guidelines'?

FuzzyDuck

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 54
  • Karma: +1/-0
    • View Profile
Phone call or something in writing such that there is 'time for consideration'?

Also are you able to share a link to these 'guidelines'?

Section 3.2.1 of the NPCC document:

https://npcc.police.uk/Publication/NPCC%20FOI/Operations/069%2015%20NPCC%20Response%20att%2001%20of%2002.pdf