Section 99 TA 1968 empowers police and Department for Transport officials to require the production of records and documents, whether or not offences are revealed on the face of them. The burden of establishing an exemption under the Community Drivers' Hours and Recording Equipment (Exemptions and Supplementary Provisions) Regulations 1986 rests on the defendant on a balance of probabilities - Gaunt and Another vNelson [1987] RTR 1. In cases where there are no charts available, consideration should be given to prosecuting defendants for this offence where devices have been fitted or wiring/electronics have been tampered with to prevent the tachograph from functioning correctly. (b) the condition of the vehicle, 1 of 2000 sub nom R v J T, Times LR 28 November 2000, [2001] 1 WLR 331, [2001] Crim LR 127), against a decision to acquit on the basis that the provision of a false tachograph record did not constitute forgery contrary to the Forgery and Counterfeiting Act 1981, section 1 and section 9. The registered keeper of a vehicle has a legal obligation to provide details of who was driving at the time of an alleged motoring offence. But usually charges under RTA 1988 and VERA 1994 should be preferred unless a defendant has committed a series of offences on a substantial scale for personal gain. Further a motorist who fails to produce the documents may commit an offence by their non- production. The exceptions include: Section 24 RTOA 1988 (as amended by the Road Safety Act 2006) allows a court which has returned a verdict of 'not guilty' to certain either way and summary offences, to convict for a specified alternative offence, provided that the content of the information or indictment amounts to an allegation of such an offence. It is a mitigating or extenuating circumstance which is directly connected with the commission of the offence and which can properly be taken into consideration by the sentencing court. Further guidance can be found in Wilkinsons Road Offences (29th Edition Chapter 10). Any such notice should also warn defendants of the seriousness of producing or attempting to produce any forged or unlawful documentation with attempt to deceive. an admission under s.10 Criminal Justice Act 1967; fingerprint evidence pursuant to s.39 Criminal Justice Act 1948; and. On appeal, the court did not accept that a prosecution could not proceed because of a lack of warning of prosecution where police become aware of the offence after 14 days had passed. It is no defence that the driver failed to see the sign. Failure to provide the information will result in court proceedings for that failure. This is a summary offence; Section 115(1) Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 - the misuse of parking documents by, for example, lending a ticket issued by a parking meter to another person. A Notice of Intended Prosecution (also known as a section 1 warning) is a warning issued under section 1 of the Road Traffic (Offenders) Act 1988. The term "mechanically propelled vehicle" is not defined in the Road Traffic Acts. The duty to determine whether any documents produced are valid does not pass to any other agency where a motorist fails to produce the required driving documents to a police officer on demand or at a nominated police station. A sample notice is attached at Annex A below. by Graham Walker | Jan 29, 2013 | Careless Driving, Dangerous Driving | Scotland, Road Traffic Law Scotland, Speed Cameras Latest Advice, Speeding. A copy should be provided to all parties and to the court. Under s.145 RTA 1988 the policy must be issued by an authorised insurer and must insure for death or bodily injury to any person, or damage to property, caused by, or arising out of, the use of a vehicle on a road in Great Britain, i.e. Although a NIP must be received within 14 days of the alleged offence, this statutory time limit does not apply to a section 172 demand. The use of traffic signs is regulated by Part V of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984. Should a defendant attempt to produce documents at court for the first time following a previous request for their production at a police station and it can be shown that the defendant was notified that production should initially have been made at the nominated police station, local arrangements should be agreed for the most effective method for the documents' validation by the police before the court proceeds to deal with any outstanding summonses. The police must serve the notice on either the driver or the registered keeper. It can include both electrically and steam powered vehicles. They must provide the details of the driver at the time of the alleged offence. received in proceedings held in the absence of the accused - s.11(1) MCA 1980 proof in absence; read out before the court under s.12(7) MCA 1980 (non-appearance of accused: plea of guilty); or. Prosecutors who are dealing with a prosecution for no insurance where the case is based on the driver not meeting some condition of the insurance must be vigilant to check that the exclusion relied upon to make out the offence is not one of those avoided by s.148(2). The statutory time limit for commencing proceedings is 6 months after the date of the alleged offence. If you have been served a Notice of Intended Prosecution then you should contact our road traffic lawyers immediately. For further commentary see (Wilkinson's 6.01). The issue can be raised at any relevant stage of the proceedings or be decided as a preliminary point. The failure to stop is usually viewed as the more serious of the two. If your defence is that you did not receive it within this timescale, the onus is on you to prove it on the balance of probabilities. Using a mobile phone whilst driving. Case Study: Speeding . The offences under section 12(3) and 14(3) of the Drugs Act 2005. The duty to report means 'as soon as reasonably practicable': (Bulman v Bennett [1974] RTR 1). Notice in writing to that effect must be given to the driver of the vehicle. Additionally it may not be in the best interest of the court to prosecute Directors (solely to get points put on a licence). Very exceptionally, a prosecutor may feel it appropriate to verify documents, but: Sections 173 and 174 RTA 1988 and sections 44 and 45 Vehicle Excise and Registration Act 1994 (VERA 1994) create a number of offences concerning forgery, fraudulent actions and false statements in connection with various road traffic documents. They are normally sent out when there is about 7 days of the original time limit remaining. Where there is a conviction for careless driving the lesser offence of failing to conform should be preserved at least until the chance of a reversal of the careless driving conviction has passed. We frequently get asked about going to court for speeding offence, this depends on each individual case. DPP v Hay [2005] EWHC Admin 1395 - Where a defendant is charged with driving otherwise than in accordance with a licence and driving without insurance, and the Crown have proved that the defendant was driving a vehicle on the road, the non-issue by the police of form HO/RT/1 (requesting production of the documents) is not fatal to the prosecution case. Although this is the legal definition, ultimately it is a matter of fact and degree for a court to interpret as to whether or not a vehicle is a motor vehicle at the time of the incident. The police should give consideration to training CPS and court staff in the methods used to produce fraudulent documents and have an agreed method of responding to any such documents that are produced in legal proceedings. No notice of intended prosecution was served on the respondent within 14 days of the offence that had been committed over a year before police recovered the DVD footage. But if an intent to deceive can be proved an either way offence under s.97AA TA1968 or s.99(5) TA 1988 should be preferred instead. The time limit for service of the NIP is a very important aspect of a succesful prosecution therefore if there has been a delay you should get in touch with a solicitor and obtain case specific advice. In. Time which he necessarily spends travelling (from a point to take over a vehicle subject to that Regulation) which is not the driver's home or the employer's operational centre; and. It is important to remember, however, that the alternative verdict can only be returned where the jury or magistrates have found the defendant 'not guilty' of the substantive charge. These offences are directed at either the driver or the employer. Other ways to contact the Speed Enforcement Unit. There has, however, been extensive case law on the subject and the main point that emerges is what is known as the reasonable man test as per the following cases: Personal transporters, such as the Segway Personal Transporter are powered by electricity and transport a passenger standing on a platform propelled on two or more wheels. The duty to determine whether any documents produced are valid does not pass to any other agency where a motorist fails to produce the required documents, therefore local arrangements should be agreed for the most effective method for the documents' validation by the police before the court proceeds. Most motorists are aware that the police have statutory power to require the registered keeper of a vehicle to say who the driver of it was on any specified occasion. evidence of a person who was present in court when the defendant was convicted on an earlier occasion and able to identify him as present in court. I've received a Notice of Intended Prosecution Section 172 Notice. Making enquiries does not extend the 28 day time limit as stated on the NIP. Motorists, who have been unable to produce their driving documents on demand, following a lawful request by a police officer, should produce them for inspection within the required statutory period at a police station of their choice. In the great majority of cases the offence will fall within the second of these provisions. It is not possible for you to have your driving documents checked at court. Because self-balancing Personal Transporters do not meet the relevant requirements for use on UK roads, and because there is no separate legislation here for public road use by non-EC type-approved vehicles, they cannot be registered and licensed for use on a public road. Current timestamp: 03/03/2023 00:55:41 . Section 103 RTA 1988 - see (Wilkinson's 11-71 to 11-79). Everyone knows that speeding is illegal but according to a recent study, a driver is caught speeding every 75 seconds in the UK, with the average driver going almost 10mph over the limit. A Notice of Intended Prosecution must be served on the vehicle's DVLA registered keeper within 14 days after the date of the alleged offence. The duty to stop means to stop sufficiently long enough to exchange the particulars above: (Lee v Knapp [1966] 3 All ER 961). The driver of the vehicle has failed to comply with a requirement made under s.99(1) TA 1968; or, The driver has obstructed an officer exercising his powers under s.99(2) TA 1968 or s.99(3) TA1968; or, It appears to an officer that in relation to the vehicle or its driver there has been (or will be, if the vehicle is driven on a road) a contravention of s.96 TA1968 to s.98 TA 1968 or of the applicable Community rules; or. Such a certificate is deemed under sub-section (4) to have been so signed unless the contrary is proved. The Notice of Intended Prosecution, although issued in terms of Section 1 of the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988, is often accompanied by a request to confirm the identity of the driver at the time it is alleged a road traffic offence has been committed. Additionally, the user would need a driving licence and motor insurance. Certain exceptions do apply however where it can be shown that the keeper did not know and could not with reasonable diligence have ascertained who the driver of the vehicle was (S172.4). I cannot prove this ( I do have a couple of texts I sent around the time stating . The minimum penalty for speeding or running a red-light is a 100 fine and three penalty points added to your licence. See also the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 1994 (SI 1994/1519). If the points will take you over the 12-point maximum, leading to a minimum six-month ban, you may wish to pursue a plead of 'exceptional hardship'. the nature of the special reason and the evidence (including expert evidence) required to rebut it; what evidence can be properly served under section 9 CJA 1967 and. The NIP must be served on the registered keeper of the vehicle within 14 days of the offence otherwise the offence can't proceed to court. (e) the time at which or the areas within which the vehicle is used, All offences under the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 other than those under sections 35A(2) , 43(5) and (12) , 47(3) , 52(1) , 108(3) , 115(1) and (2) , 116(1) and 129(3) or those mentioned in paragraph 1 above. Liability falls upon any person who 'uses or causes or permits to be used'. This should inform the recipient that not only should the relevant documents, if they exist, be sent or handed to the court as required in the summons, but that before that date, the documents must firstly be produced at a police station for inspection and validation and for the police to note relevant details. Once the vehicle is identified and the registered keeper (your lease company) confirmed, a penalty notice will head into the mail. Zholia Alemi forged N, The CPS Areas, CPS Direct, Central Casework Divisions and Proceeds of Crime, Information for prosecuting advocates including Advocate Panels, Annual reports, business plans and strategies, Code for Crown Prosecutors - Public Interest Considerations, Restoration of Summary Offences after Trial on Indictment, Self-balancing Personal Transporters - Segway etc, Driving/Obtaining a Driving Licence Whilst Disqualified, Charging Practice - Forgery and False Information, etc, Offences in Contravention of the Regulations - s.96, Falsification of Driver's Hours and Records - s.99(5), Power to Prohibit the Driving of UK Vehicles - Section 99A, Tachograph Cases and Public Interest Criteria, Annex A: National Protocol for the Production and Inspection of Driving Documents, Annex B: Specified Proceedings (Offences), Road Traffic - Drug and Drink Driving Offences, The prosecution of traffic offences is vital to the enforcement and promotion of road safety and the protection of the public, and. These include: Failing to comply with a traffic sign. Where no production is made at the nominated police station, the police may issue proceedings that allege either or both allegations that the motorist drove/used a motor vehicle without the proper documentation or that he or she failed to produce them as required by law. Single Justice Procedure Notice. Hence time limits are of particular significance since for various reasons substantial delay may occur before it is decided to institute proceedings. There may, from time to time, be cases that call for exceptional treatment and departure from the normal procedures. speeding) The time & date of offence. A taxi driver who had a licence to ply for hire in Rossendale and whose insurance covered him for the carriage of passengers for hire or reward under a public hire licence was not guilty of having no insurance in spite of plying for hire in Oldham, to which his licence did not extend. The time limit for a written warning is 14 days from the date of the offence. Police across England and Wales will send out many . Current timestamp: 02/03/2023 01:38:55 . When you're given a speeding ticket, you receive a Notice of Intended Prosecution (NIP) and a Section 172 notice. This might, for example be a driving licence or certificate of insurance. I unexpectedly received a letter from the police who at the time intended to prosecute me for driving an electric scooter without insurance, and without a license. Notice of Intended Prosecution. Not only does the offence appear to cover a situation where the seals have been physically altered or tampered with, but also the use of a correctly manufactured and correctly placed seal where it can be proved that the mere use of the seal is accompanied by an intention to deceive. The Notice of Intended Prosecution is a notification, usually by the police, that a prosecution is being considered against a person. The offence under section 5 of the Public Order Act 1986. Where the police do not speak to you personally at the time, they can put this warning on paper and send it to you within 14 days. Section 1 RTOA 1988 provides that a defendant cannot be convicted of certain road traffic offences set out in schedule 1 RTOA 1988 unless he or she has been warned that the question of prosecution would be taken into consideration. It does not mean the driver has 24 hours within which to report the collision. . The owner of the car will be sent a Notice of Intended Prosecution (NIP), detailing the offence. 0. It is no defence that the defendant did not think he was driving on a public road. Failing to respond within the statutory time limit of 28 days can result in further prosecution, six penalty points and a fine of up to 1000, . So what exactly is a written NIP? There is no direct binding authority on the definition of a 'false chart', but it is suggested that the following elements should be present: See also the decision of the Court of Appeal in R v Bishirgian, Howeson and Hardy [1936] 1 All ER 586 at page 591 and R v Osman, Mills and Chalker 09/01/93 (unreported, but copy of judgement held at HQ Library). R. 16; and Olakunori v DPP [1998] C.O.D. They cannot be licensed for use on a road and they do not come within the categories of vehicle covered by a driving licence. Liverlad67 Forumite. The aim of this protocol is that motorists should be aware of and conform with an agreed national standard for the production of driving documents following a lawful request by a police officer. Driving or attempting to drive while unfit through drink or drugs (section 4(1) RTA), Driving or attempting to drive with excess alcohol in breath, blood or urine (section 5(1)(a) RTA), and, where the Crown Court has made specific reference to matters which it has taken into account when sentencing, the prosecution should not revive or continue with summary offences the substance of which has been reflected in such a sentence. You can find more information about replying to your Notice of Intended Prosecution (NIP) on our website. Under section 72 of the Highway Act 1835 (extends to England and Wales only) it is an offence to wilfully ride on the footway. It should, however, be remembered that the driver is the 'person at the wheel; Falsification of records usually takes place to enable more journeys to be undertaken than would be possible during lawful working hours, thereby jeopardising road safety. The National Protocol for Production and Inspection of Driving Documents 2002, see Annex A below, provides guidance on production of such documents. See also DPP v Vivier [1991] Crim LR 637, DPP v Neville [1996] 160 JP 758 and Cutter v Eagle Star Insurance Co. Ltd, Clarke v Kato and Others [1998] 4 All ER 417. If such a course is adopted, the reasons should be made clear to the Magistrates' Court. In R v Derwentside Justices ex parte Swift, R v Sunderland Justices ex parte Bate [1997] RTR 89 a section 9 statement was admitted in evidence from a constable who stated that he knew the defendant and had been present when he had been convicted and disqualified for two years on a previous occasion. If that has been served late it does not give the driver an excuse for not replying to the requirement to provide driver details. A circumstance peculiar to the offender, as distinguished from the offence, is not a special reason: see Whittall v Kirby [1946] 2 All ER 552. This penalty notice is called a Notice of Intended Prosecution (NIP). Uninsured drivers pose a substantial risk to other road users. Our own firm offers a free online consultation service and this may just save you from 3pp and a possible ban. Offences of causing or permitting the uninsured use of a vehicle should be regarded as being as serious as using a motor vehicle without insurance. In that event the case should not proceed unless the defence agrees to waive the point. what you think by taking our short survey, Reality TV star Stephen Bear has been sentenced to 21 months imprisonment today for voyeurism and two counts of, A Chelsea supporter has been banned from football for three years for a racially aggravated public order offence, The CPS has authorised the @metpoliceuk to charge Constance Marten and Mark Gordon with gross negligence manslau, Coming up in the next edition of our community newsletter: The Prosecution of Offences Act 1985 (Specified Proceedings) Order 1999 specifies proceedings for the offences set out in the Schedule (see Annex B) for the purposes of s.3 Prosecution of Offences Act 1985 if those proceedings are commenced by the prosecution so as to give an opportunity of pleading guilty by post under s.12 Magistrates' Courts Act 1980 (MCA 1980). As a consequence, any user of such a vehicle on a public road is likely at the very least to be committing the offences of using the vehicle without insurance and using the vehicle without an excise licence. If the document is not listed, proceedings under regulation 7 of the Road Vehicles (Registration and Licensing) Regulations 1971 for exhibiting on a vehicle anything which could be mistaken for a licence may be considered. Much will depend on the nature of the error and any explanation given by the defendant. Many road traffic offences are minor in nature. It is no defence for a person disqualified in their absence to claim that they did not know that they had been disqualified. In interview, the defendant conceded that he could be the rider. If you do not complete and return the NIP/S172 notice correctly within the 28 day time limit, you face a separate charge of failing to notify driver's details, which is a 6 penalty point offence with a fine of up to 1,000. July 19, 2019. A NIP can be issued verbally to the driver at the time of the offence or in written form 14 days from the date of the offence. When such a point is raised, the prosecution should take into account the reason for the defendant's belief, the distance driven and the degree of risk, if any, to the public when determining whether it is in the public interest to proceed. The offence under section 87(1) of the Environmental Protection Act 1990. You must respond to a Notice of Intended Prosecution within 28 days of receiving it. A Notice of Intended Prosecution is simply notice from the Police that an offence has been recorded and that they intend to prosecute the person responsible. . The onus is on the prosecution to establish that a particular location is a "road" or a "public place". NIPs can also be issued . The Police Sent Section 172 Notice and Notice of Intended Prosecution to the Wrong Address! The Notice of Intended Prosecution must specify the nature of the alleged offence and the time and place where it is alleged to have been committed. As far as management responsibility is concerned subsection (5) of the act says that where a director or senior manager of the company caused or connived with the failure to identify the driver, that person is also guilty. Such a warning is normally known as a "notice of intended prosecution", or NIP. However, a notice is still required if the defendant was unaware that there had been an accident: see Bentley v Dickinson [1983] RTR 356. It will normally be accompanied with a requirement to provide the details of the driver of the vehicle. According to section 1 of the Road Traffic OffendersAct 1998, the 14-day limit means the Notice of Intended Prosecution (NIP) needs to be served onthe registered keeper of the vehicle within 14 days. In Vehicle Inspectorate v Nuttall [1999] Crim LR 674, the House of Lords held that the Community rules placed a responsibility on employers to use tachograph records to prevent contraventions and to promote road safety. Customer: On page 1 of the Notice of Intended Prosecution it states Notice Issue Date: 23/02/2023. Definition, see Wilkinson's Road Traffic Offences (28th edition) 15.52. You must do this in writing. . Under s.143(1)(a) RTA 1988 "a person must not use a motor vehicle on a road or other public place unless there is in force in relation to the use of that vehicle by that person a policy of insurance ". If the Police do not comply with the rules and time limits, they cannot prosecute. government's services and In Vehicle Inspectorate v Blakes Chilled Distribution Ltd [2002] 166 JP Jo.118, the Administrative Court held that the intent necessary to prove vicarious liability was established where it could be proved that an employer had failed to take reasonable steps to prevent contraventions by drivers, provided that such failure was not due to honest mistake or accident. We are only a phone call away. In serious cases a conspiracy charge should be considered; Whether persons who might be guilty of the offence or offences such as office staff and drivers should be used as witnesses where they have been threatened with the sack unless they continue to act illegally. The onus is on the body issuing the Notice of Intended Prosecution (NIP) to ensure the Notice is served within 14 days. If you have received a Notice of Intended Prosecution and would like further information, please get in touch by sending me a message, contacting me on 07843 018747 or 0115 784 0382, or by email . The offences under sections 55 and 56 of the British Transport Commission Act 1949. Laying an information within the six months' time limit before deciding whether or not to prosecute may result in the proceedings being stayed as an abuse of process; see. Notice of intended prosecution. Then in the first paragraph it lists the incident date as 04/12/22. The offence under section 1(1) of the Criminal Damage Act 1971, but only if it is the prosecutor's case that (a) the offence was not committed by destroying or damaging property by fire; and (b) the value involved, within the meaning of Schedule 2 to the Magistrates Courts Act 1980, does not exceed 5,000. The certificate is, therefore, likely to be signed by the appropriate police officer. This means that where an insurance policy purports to impose a restriction based on any of the matters listed above, that restriction is of no effect and the policy should be read as if the words containing the restriction had been struck out. Note that the 6 month time limit in section 99(6) has no effect on the either way time limit and refers only to charts actually seized under this specific power, not to charts removed under the statutory powers. Mutual recognition of driving disqualifications between the United Kingdom and Republic of Ireland came into force on 28 January 2010. Offences are either way, punishable by way of fine in the Magistrates' Court or by imprisonment (maximum two years) in the Crown Court. Bail should be considered for the period of any adjournment and the defendant encouraged to produce the relevant documents in the meantime. This protocol recognises that motorists are required to produce driving documents to police officers following a lawful demand and that the documents may be produced at a nominated police station. A notice of intended prosecution can be served for a range of driving offences, ranging from speeding to careless driving. Under current legislation, the Department for Transport considers Segway Personal Transporters as motor vehicles, subject to road traffic laws. When deciding whether to restore a summary offence, the following points should be borne in mind: Nevertheless, there will be circumstances where the restoration of a summary offence, usually for excess alcohol, will be appropriate if, for example, each of the factors listed above are outweighed by factors which favour prosecution in a particular case. In DPP v Mansfield [1997] RTR 96 the constable who had arrested the defendant for the current offence, and who was present at court, had also arrested him for a previous offence for which the defendant had been disqualified in the constable's absence. Under s.96(11)(b) TA 1968 liability also falls upon "any other person (being that driver's employer or a person to whose order the driver was subject) who caused or permitted the contravention". Other cases on drivers' hours include Vehicle Inspectorate v Southern Coaches and Others [2000] RTR 165. Disobeying traffic signs. . The driver will then receive a notice of intended prosecution in his/her own name. note part 19 of the Criminal Procedure Rules (Expert Evidence) and secure expert evidence where the defence expert's statement is incorrect, inconclusive or misleading. Even if you believe the S172 Notice does not relate to yourself, you MUST reply, this fulfils your legal obligation and allows the Police to further . This guidance is provided to provide an overview on procedure and charging practice that is not dealt with in the existing road traffic guidance being. Ordinarily, the notice should indicate that production should be made to the police station originally nominated by the driver when the request for production was first made.