Author Topic: NIP for driving without due care and attention but just says 0mph and no reason  (Read 325 times)

0 Members and 0 Guests are viewing this topic.

fuzzy232

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 3
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
I have had a NIP saying I have drove a mechanically propelled vehicle in a public place without due care and an attention at a speed of 0mph, I have no idea what this is for, someone in my area had the same for filtering traffic on a motor bike and someone sent there dash cam footage in. Only thing I can think is maby I got too close to someone that was speeding up and slowing down on the lane. But not sure.

Share on Facebook Share on Twitter


Southpaw82

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 188
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
There wonít (necessarily) be a speed mentioned if the offence isnít speeding. They donít have to give you details at this point. You just have to name the driver (assuming there is also a notice requiring you to do so).

andy_foster

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 206
  • Karma: +3/-1
  • Location: Reading
    • View Profile
It explicitly states that the "speed" is for speeding offences only.

As a matter of law, I would say that how much information they are required to provide in order to satisfy the requirements of s. 1 RTOA 1988 is open to interpretation. The test is whether the details provided satisfied the purpose of the requirement, to enable the accused to recall or identify the incident which gave rise to the allegation while it was still relatively fresh in his mind.

In Young v Day the court found that a notice alleging dangerous driving on a particular road which was 4 miles long was insufficient as the police could readily have provided more information, and that that nullified the warning. The Divisional Court held that the lower court were perfectly entitled to reach that decision, relying on their local knowledge of the road in question.

The police often seem to take the view that they are only required to tick certain boxes, and that that is all they do.

If the incident in question is the one you presume that the notice refers to, it would seem that the notice has through zero effort on behalf of the police served its purpose. If it was some other incident that you had no knowledge whatsoever of, then unless further detail would somehow enable you to do something that is time critical and would potentially assist any potential defence then further detail that the police could potentially have included would not help and failure to include it would not invalidate the warning.

However, if it was something which you did not consider to be an incident, but which would have been likely to have been brought to mind if the police had included information that they could have readily provided if they were so minded, then I would suggest that the notice is defective as regards the warning.

As has been said, the requirement to name the driver applies regardless.

I am responsible for the accuracy of the information I post, not your ability to comprehend it.

fuzzy232

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 3
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
I can't recall anything I could of been reported for on a long stretch of this road, maby getting to close to someone?

fuzzy232

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 3
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
I had a flash back after Google mapping yhe road. There was some guy on an e bike riding far out in the road, and someone was flying in the opposite side of the road and I mis judged the distance and had to cut through a small gap cutting up the cyclist too. ( new van and new to its size) it was either the car opposite. .. or the cyclist I'd say

The Rookie

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 66
  • Karma: +2/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • Location: Warwickshire
    • View Profile
I mis judged the distance and had to cut through a small gap cutting up the cyclist too.
Sounds like you admit the offence alleged then.
There are motorists who have been scammed and those who are yet to be scammed!