Jump to content

Alleged RTC Letter


wazzap24
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • VT Supporter

Bit of a weird one, wondering if this has happened to anyone else? 

My son has received a letter from Warwickshire police regarding an alleged Road Traffic Collision. 

It's not a notice of intended prosecution, that has been crossed out. It simply says 'the above vehicle is alleged to have been involved in a RTC at the time and date stated. 

It then goes in to say 'as the person registered as the keeper of the vehicle specified...blah blah....consideration is being taken to taking proceedings against the driver in charge of the vehicle. 

The alleged offence is careless or inconsiderate driving. 

My son has no knowledge of any incident and although as a typical teenage lad, he struggles to lie straight in bed, he seems genuinely baffled by it. I've checked his car over and there are no signs of anything (it's a 12 year old banger, so there are dinks and dents all over the show, but nothing new)

He thinks he may have been driving at the time as the location is local, but that's it. 

At this stage they just want driver details, but it does say you can attach a letter if you feel it's incorrect. 

I'm a bit worried that it's some kind of scam claim. He's only just come out of 'black box' insurance and doesn't  have a dash cam. 

Anyone else ever received one of these without having been in an incident they were aware of? 

 

 

Edited by wazzap24
Spelling
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderator

Why not just go to the local cop shop and ask?  They might be aware of scams doing the rounds.  They'd surely be able to tell you if it was legit and/or check their database.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • VT Supporter

There's a number we are going to call as the office dealing with it is leamington, which is a trek. 

I've read in a couple of motoring forums that they won't discuss it with you unless you return the forms, then you might be invited for an interview. 

I'm not massively worries as the RTC office only deal with 'minor' incidents, but I've heard enough about 'cash for claim' scams and I don't really trust the old bill either, so I'm just trying to find out as much as I can before we do anything else! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If it's an obvious rozzer address then you're fairly safe sending back the 'yes, I own this vehicle' details while awaiting your fate.

It could be anything really but until you know what they're actually doing, you can't do anything about it.

Hate these NIPs and discovery letters. I wish they'd just lay the whole thing out at first contact.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd echo what @darrenm has written, just make sure where you're sending it is a registered address etc and they shouldn't ask for any bank details or anything like that. There's nothing wrong with you wanting to feel confident that you're talking to the right people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • VT Supporter
31 minutes ago, Ingram85 said:

I'd bin it. If they want your details that badly they'd come round to see you anyway.

I'm all for that and have done it myself with those private company parking fines, but not replying this carries a penalty of 6 points and a £2k fine! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In my part of the Civil Service at least, an issuing of a letter to x address deems that is has been delivered, unless it is returned as undelivered/undeliverable by courier/RM, or the recipient can prove they no longer reside at that address.

It's pretty much the worst possible excuse you can use - and I've seen requests for Social Fund loans from people for as bizarre reasons as one who suggested that their child used their giro as a colouring book, and then decided to flush it down the toilet. Or the unfortunate soul whose freezer broke 2 weeks before Christmas and all the food defrosted. Then it did it again a week before Christmas. And for good measure it went one more time a week after :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, hogso said:

In my part of the Civil Service at least, an issuing of a letter to x address deems that is has been delivered, unless it is returned as undelivered/undeliverable by courier/RM, or the recipient can prove they no longer reside at that address.

It's pretty much the worst possible excuse you can use - and I've seen requests for Social Fund loans from people for as bizarre reasons as one who suggested that their child used their giro as a colouring book, and then decided to flush it down the toilet. Or the unfortunate soul whose freezer broke 2 weeks before Christmas and all the food defrosted. Then it did it again a week before Christmas. And for good measure it went one more time a week after :D

Yeah stuff from the council and such is obvious, but I don't think I've ever received or known anyone to receive a letter from the police, especially to do with minor stuff like this. I'd go down personally as a telephone number on a potential scam isn't going to be genuine. I'd go to my local plod and verify it face to face. Or like I said, bin it, if it's important enough they will come round in person.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderator
4 hours ago, wazzap24 said:

Bit of a weird one, wondering if this has happened to anyone else? ...

Anyone else ever received one of these without having been in an incident they were aware of? 

http://www.nopenaltypoints.co.uk/notice-intended-prosecution.html

Quote

One of the main rules of an NIP is that it must be served to either the driver or the register keeper of the vehicle within 14 days of the alleged offence. The police do not have to prove that the NIP has reached the driver within this time; simply that it was sent in enough time to have reached the driver. 

much more on link

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • VT Supporter

Thanks to everyone who's replied ( serious or otherwise!)

I'm gonna get my lad to call the old bill tomorrow and see if they will tell him anything over the phone regarding the allegation. 

I'm assuming, as this is not a notice of intended prosecution, they can't have any evidence of anything other than someone making something up, otherwise they would have proceeded straight to prosecution surely? 

As Darren M said, why can't they just tell you straight in the first place, it only deepens my mistrust in coppers. If he's being accused of something then tell us what it is! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm a Police officer in Australia and that's an absolutely garbage system. I'd be going into a Police station asap with the letter and asking them to detail exactly what they think you've done.

 

We have legislation over here which means we can go to the registered owner of the vehicle and ask them who was driving at the time, and if they don't tell us they are guilty of an offence, but a Police officer actually has to go there and do it, we can't just send out a non-descript letter and wait for the reply. That's ridiculous.

 

We also have certain licence suspensions that are mailed out to people, but we have a bugger of a time in court proving that someone received a letter. You can't possibly prove that beyond reasonable doubt. We'll stop people in that case, tell them of their suspension, and then put a note on the system saying they've been told.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/11/2016 at 02:00, ThunderPower_14 said:

I'm a Police officer in Australia and that's an absolutely garbage system. I'd be going into a Police station asap with the letter and asking them to detail exactly what they think you've done.

 

We have legislation over here which means we can go to the registered owner of the vehicle and ask them who was driving at the time, and if they don't tell us they are guilty of an offence, but a Police officer actually has to go there and do it, we can't just send out a non-descript letter and wait for the reply. That's ridiculous.

 

We also have certain licence suspensions that are mailed out to people, but we have a bugger of a time in court proving that someone received a letter. You can't possibly prove that beyond reasonable doubt. We'll stop people in that case, tell them of their suspension, and then put a note on the system saying they've been told.

Beyond reasonable doubt means different things to different people/places/governments/departments

When I did jury service we were being asked to send someone down on intention to supply. I had a real hard time being convinced that he was guilty of something he hadn't actually done yet, even if he probably was going to do it.

The bloke hadn't committed a crime apart from intending to commit a crime. How can you prove that beyond reasonable doubt? Turns out, reasonable doubt is a yardstick that's moved depending on where the controlling party wants it to be.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I got something like this once where an old person decided I was driving too fast down their road and complained to the Rozzers

hence it wasn't a notice of intended prosecution just a warning that if I was reported again they "might" prosecute ( I make a point of speeding up when I go down that road now , in your face old person :P )

Could well be that although your son isn't aware of anything he's done wrong or any incident  , some busy body has reported him  for living in the 21st century and not having a man walk in front of his car waving a flag and they might just want to talk to him to establish some facts

Edited by tonyh29
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • VT Supporter
4 hours ago, hogso said:

@wazzap24 thread needs an update tbh

Not phoned 'em yet Hogso. Got 28 days to sort, gonna give em a call Monday and see what they say, then send he form back. 

Hopefully, it's as Tony describes above. As I said, if they had hard evidence of anything I am fairly certain it would have been straight to NIP (mmmmmmm nips), so I suspect it's bollocks or someone trying it on for a claim. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...
Â