Notice of intended prosecution

[securespark]

Would I be asking you if I knew the answer?

 

[sxturbo]

.

 

[blup]

Maybe this is the scenario: other driver wasn't aware of physical contact between cars (or says he wasn't) but was intimidated by this driver who cut him up then followed him and tried to force him off the road. He left it until the other driver (sx) puts in an insurance claim, and that is when he reports incident to the police. SX is being investigated for due care and attention for the "road rage", hence the nip. In due course the fuller picture will emerge when sx gets his chance to tell his side of the story. In the meantime other driver has upped the ante with the insurers, having "noticed" damage to his car. Other driver morally wrong IMO, but is the law on his side.

Blup

 

[hllns]

A NIP is a "getting the ball rolling" part of the process and doesn't preclude dropping the prosecution, the problem is if they're not served almost immediately after the alleged offence they can't prosecute at all as it wouldn't be in-time, there's swathes of eye-popping dashcam footage that's fallen foul of this as some forces are too lax at getting them out.

 

[ReganAndCarter]

Is tommytanker cockney rhyming slang?

How did Himmy get back in so soon?

 

[Notch7]

Is tommytanker cockney rhyming slang?

Judging by the tone of its posts, I’d say the choice of username is self appraisal.

 

[jeds]

The police can only act when they received a complaint hence the 14 day period being missed, they would have to issue within 14 days of being told. Irrelevant that driver "knew" there was an accident.

Not correct! The OP made a claim on insurance, which means he was aware of the incident at the time and in that case a NIP within 14 days is not a requirement. I think it has been said somewhere above (?) that he would have been better off not making the claim.

 

[jeds]

A NIP is a "getting the ball rolling" part of the process and doesn't preclude dropping the prosecution, the problem is if they're not served almost immediately after the alleged offence they can't prosecute at all as it wouldn't be in-time, there's swathes of eye-popping dashcam footage that's fallen foul of this as some forces are too lax at getting them out.

See above.

 

[martygturner]

Normally a nip is issued to see if the police can score a quick win by getting the respondent to admit to a crime by reason of just give us your side of the story..... Only comment under legal advice.Without advice ... I was filtering into traffic... with advice.... cars were merging from two lanes into one ...the difference between driving without due care and being a victim.

 

[blup]

Not correct! The OP made a claim on insurance, which means he was aware of the incident at the time and in that case a NIP within 14 days is not a requirement. I think it has been said somewhere above (?) that he would have been better off not making the claim.

Not fair!, unless NIP also issued to other driver for failing to stop?

Blup

 

[gigz]

Haven’t read all the replies but surely if the driver of the other car was plod he would get done for leaving the scene of an accident so they’d be mental to push the matter further

 

[blup]

Its a good example of how a visit by police to take statements from all concerned would reach a fair and clear decision.

Blup

 

[motorbiking]

Doesn’t have to stop if he reported the accident. Within 24 hrs.

 

[blup]

Just a general observation but It's strange that if the OP had pulled out the other driver would be responsible for the shunt but by trying to avoid a collision with an apparently speeding driver, OP might well be held legally responsible. I completely understand now why crash for cash (rear end shunts) took off (not suggesting this was the case here).

Blup

 

[Brigadier]

It's strange that if the OP had pulled out the other driver would be responsible for the shunt but by trying to avoid a collision with an apparently speeding driver

OP could have far more easily avoided the collision by doing pretty much anything other than what he actually did (carrying on in the hope that the following driver would blink first, and back off).
IMHO