POSTAL REQUISITION: causing unnecessary obstruction

[PHANTOM]

Hi Everyone,


Received a court summons charged with offence of being in charge of a motor vehicle and causing it to stand on a road so as to cause an unnecessary obstruction contrary to :-


. regulation 103 of the Road vehicles(Construction and Use) regulations 1986
. section 42 of the Road Traffic Act 1988
. Schedule 2 to the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988


The question for the moment is with trial date some 6 weeks away, does the pc/police station who originally instigated the charges have the authority now if I could liaise with them to reduce this and deal with it by means of a FPN??

I would be grateful if u guys could shed some light on this issue.

Thanks

[des8]

Re: POSTAL REQUISITION: causing unnecessary obstruction

In principle there is no reason why they cannot discontinue the summons and issue a FPN.
HOWEVER why was no FPN issued originally?
Do you already have points on your licence which will cause a "totting up" ban of 6 months?
When did the offence take place as FPN have to be issued within 6 months of the offence?

But if you don't ask you'll never know

[PHANTOM]

Re: POSTAL REQUISITION: causing unnecessary obstruction

In principle there is no reason why they cannot discontinue the summons and issue a FPN.
HOWEVER why was no FPN issued originally?
Do you already have points on your licence which will cause a "totting up" ban of 6 months?
When did the offence take place as FPN have to be issued within 6 months of the offence?

But if you don't ask you'll never know

Hi des8,

Thanks for that mate.
I don't know why an FPN was not issued originally as it was a simple parked up on double yellow lines, and I have a clean license.

The original offence is dated in March well within the six month period yet.

Are these charges enodorseable I believe the offence code is RC86405??

Any body else, I would grateful for as much information as possible.

In particular at this stage I want to know how best to go about trying to persuade the PC dealing with the matter to discontinue with the summons and issue a fixed PCN. Is the PC able to do this from a legal point of view now that the summons have been issued??

Thanks

[des8]

Re: POSTAL REQUISITION: causing unnecessary obstruction

The offence code you quote is a non endorseable FPN.
Best way to find if they will discontinue is to go and ask sweetly.

[PHANTOM]

Re: POSTAL REQUISITION: causing unnecessary obstruction

The offence code you quote is a non endorseable FPN.
Best way to find if they will discontinue is to go and ask sweetly.

Hi everyone,

Thanks for that des8.
There is a lot of confusion here and I am still piecing everything together and will post more including the court summons when I get everything together, for more advise and clarification.

But now after doing some more research I have realised that because I was not stopped at the scene the police should have sent me Notice of Intended Prosecution within 14 days. I have no record of receiving one. How does this effect everything now??

Thanks

[des8]

Re: POSTAL REQUISITION: causing unnecessary obstruction

It is for the police to prove they sent a NIP to the registered keeper within 14 days of the event.
They don't have to check that it was received.
I don't suppose you have moved house recently and so missed delivery?

You should also have received a reminder notice.

Are you now being prosecuted for not identifying the driver?

[PHANTOM]

Re: POSTAL REQUISITION: causing unnecessary obstruction

It is for the police to prove they sent a NIP to the registered keeper within 14 days of the event.
They don't have to check that it was received.
I don't suppose you have moved house recently and so missed delivery?

You should also have received a reminder notice.

Are you now being prosecuted for not identifying the driver?

Hi everyone,

I need some advice here about whether it's possible for me to write to the court to consider settling without going to court. Can I do that, is that legally possible??

thanks

[des8]

Re: POSTAL REQUISITION: causing unnecessary obstruction

I understand you can plead guilty by post, thus avoiding the need to go to court.
Have you asked the police if they deal with this type of infringement by means of an FPN? Apparently some forces only prosecute
you might find this link frightening: http://forums.pepipoo.com/lofiversio...hp/t67745.html

[PHANTOM]

Re: POSTAL REQUISITION: causing unnecessary obstruction

Hi everyone,

Unfortunately the police won't back down and deal with this by means of FPN.

This is where I am at the moment, I may have a technical defence as I have now confirmed that no Notice Of Intended Prosecution was issued.

However I am a bit confused on this issue as I seem to be getting conflicting information.

The key question which I need clarifying here is this. Does section 1 RTOA which states that a NIP must be sent before a summons apply in my case or not??

i would be really grateful if somebody would clear this point for me.

Thanks

PHANTOM

[des8]

Re: POSTAL REQUISITION: causing unnecessary obstruction

It seems to apply to section 42 of the Road Traffic Act 1988, but not as far as I can see to the other parts.
Section 42 is included in Schedule 1 of the act, which lists the offences for which a NIP is required

[PHANTOM]

Re: POSTAL REQUISITION: causing unnecessary obstruction

It seems to apply to section 42 of the Road Traffic Act 1988, but not as far as I can see to the other parts.
Section 42 is included in Schedule 1 of the act, which lists the offences for which a NIP is required

Hi everyone,

Thanks for that des8, mate. But the Schedule 1 of the act that I've been looking at shows that section 1 of the RTOA doesn't apply to the Section 42.

Am I looking at the wrong act or just not interpreting it correctly....???

Thanks

PHANTOM

[des8]

Re: POSTAL REQUISITION: causing unnecessary obstruction

Nope............ I misstated............ thank goodness you checked! Apologies.

[judgemental24]

Re: POSTAL REQUISITION: causing unnecessary obstruction

Why have the police issued you with a fixed penalty notice for parking on double yellow lines, were you towed the obstruction was that bad?

Why not a normal parking ticket by the copper as parking restrictions have been decriminalised and normally handled by the Local Authority??

Or have i the wrong end of the stick and reading this different

These tickets are used if you deliberately obstruct the flow of traffic, normally given to "Boy- Racers"s or an immediate danger to other highway users

[mogundel]

Hello all,
I also have exactly a similar situation where I received a NIP dated 22/02/18 for the offence dated 22/12/17 (causing obstruction by motor vehicle).
In my case my vehicle was towed away and I received a notice from the towing company to come and retrieve my car 12 days after the incidence (I paid almost £300 to recover the car).
In my case, the police have offered me the option of fixed penalty fine of £30.
I parked the car in front of my rented second flat where I was working, but unfortunately another flat occupant didn't realise it was mine and I was away on holiday, so they called the police.
I will like to know whether the 14 day rule is applicable in this case?
Thanks in advance for your help.

[des8]

Hi and welcome

There is a time limit of 14 days from date of offence to the issuing a "Notice of Intended Prosecution"

Are you sure it is a NIP you have received, and not a FPN (Fixed Penalty Notice) ?
If you want feel free to post up a suitably redacted copy