A Notice of Intended Prosecution (NIP) and a Section 172 notice often arrive together, but they perform different legal functions.

A Notice of Intended Prosecution warns the registered keeper of a vehicle that the police may prosecute an alleged road traffic offence. A Section 172 notice requires the recipient to provide information identifying who was driving the vehicle at the time that the alleged offence occurred.

Providing the driver details does not amount to admitting the alleged offence. However, failing to respond to a valid Section 172 request can lead to a separate prosecution carrying six penalty points, an unlimited fine and a possible driving disqualification.

Here, JMW’s motoring offence solicitors explain the difference between a Notice of Intended Prosecution and a Section 172 notice, the deadlines that apply and what you should do after receiving each document.

What Is a Notice of Intended Prosecution?

An NIP warns a driver that the police are considering prosecuting an alleged road traffic offence. It does not mean that the police will prosecute, but is a necessary step in case they later decide to do so.

The notice will identify the nature of the alleged offence and the time and place at which it is said to have happened. It may be issued following allegations related to speeding, failing to comply with a red light or careless driving.

For offences covered by section 1 of the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988, the first written NIP must be served on the driver or registered keeper within 14 days unless the driver was warned at the time of the incident. If the vehicle’s registered keeper does not receive a NIP, this may restrict the police from prosecuting an offence in some cases. However, statutory exceptions apply, so a notice served later is not automatically invalid. Our guide to the speeding ticket 14-day rule explains the deadline and the circumstances in which a late notice may still be valid, alongside guidance on the circumstances where a solicitor can challenge a NIP on the basis of the 14-day rule.

The purpose of the notice is to give an early warning of possible prosecution. It is not a conviction, a fixed penalty notice or proof that the alleged offence took place.

What Is a Section 172 Notice?

Section 172 of the Road Traffic Act 1988 gives the police the power to request information that will identify the driver of a vehicle involved in an alleged road traffic offence.

The vehicle’s registered owner or keeper must provide the information required to identify the driver. Anyone else who receives a valid request must provide any information within their power that may help establish the driver’s identity.

A written Section 172 notice requires a response within 28 days beginning with the day on which it is served. Failing to comply without a valid defence is a separate criminal offence of failure to provide driver details, and can result in six penalty points and an unlimited fine.

The registered keeper and the person keeping the vehicle will often be the same person, but not always. For example, a leasing company may be the registered keeper while an individual or employer has day-to-day possession of the vehicle.

Our failure to provide driver details solicitors advise people who did not receive the notice, could not identify the driver or responded but were later accused of failing to provide the required information.

Why Are the Notices Often Sent Together?

The police may have evidence identifying a vehicle as being involved in an offence without knowing who was driving it. For example, a speed camera or red-light camera may record the vehicle and its number plate, but capture an image that does not provide a clear view of the driver. The police therefore send an NIP to warn of the intended prosecution and a Section 172 request to establish the driver’s identity.

The same process may follow CCTV footage, a witness report or police observations where the vehicle was not stopped and the driver was not identified at the time.

Our guide to what happens after you are caught by a speed camera explains the wider process, including fixed penalties, speed awareness courses and court proceedings.

Who Receives the Initial Notice?

The police will commonly send the initial notice to the vehicle’s registered keeper using the address shown on the DVLA vehicle record.

Where the vehicle belongs to a hire company, leasing company or employer, that organisation may receive the first notice. It will need to provide details of the person or business that had possession of the vehicle. The police may then send a further NIP notice to that person.

This means that the eventual driver may receive subsequent correspondence more than 14 days after the alleged offence. That does not automatically invalidate the process. The 14-day requirement concerns the first NIP served on the registered keeper, who may or may not have been the driver.

A similar chain may arise where a vehicle has recently been bought or sold and the DVLA system still shows the previous owner. The dates on which ownership and keeper details changed will then be important evidence, should you consider appealing a penalty on the grounds that the NIP was not served or was served outside the legally mandated 14-day period.

Can a Section 172 Notice Be Sent Without an NIP?

A Section 172 request does not always have to accompany a written Notice of Intended Prosecution.

The police may send it separately where the NIP has already been served, where information is needed from someone who is not suspected of being involved in an offence or where the police are working through a chain involving a company, hire vehicle or leasing arrangement.

The absence of an NIP from the same envelope does not therefore mean that you can ignore the Section 172 request.

Do You Have to Respond if You Dispute the Alleged Offence?

Disputing the allegation does not remove the duty to respond to a valid Section 172 notice. You can identify yourself as the driver and still defend the allegation if you wish - it does not amount to a guilty plea or prevent you from challenging the prosecution evidence later.

A possible defect in the NIP should also not be treated as permission to withhold the driver details. The validity of the Notice of Intended Prosecution and compliance with Section 172 are separate legal issues.

You should provide the required information while reserving your position on the original allegation. A solicitor can assess whether the NIP was valid without exposing you to a separate charge for failing to respond.

What Happens if You Fail to Respond?

Failing to provide the requested driver details can lead to prosecution for a separate Section 172 offence.

A conviction for failing to provide driver details carries six penalty points and may also result in an unlimited fine or driving disqualification. If the additional points take your total to 12 or more, you also face a totting-up ban.

The penalty for failing to respond can therefore be more serious than the likely outcome for some lower-level speeding offences.

The police may initially pursue both the original allegation and the failure-to-provide charge. However, they must prove each offence separately. Our failure to provide driver details defence page explains the possible defences and how JMW challenges these prosecutions.

What if You Cannot Identify the Driver?

Being unable to remember who was driving at the time of an alleged offence does not remove the legal duty to respond to a Section 172 notice. The person keeping the vehicle must use reasonable diligence to try to establish who was driving or face charges themselves.

Reasonable diligence that the court would expect to see includes checking calendars, work rotas, vehicle logs, messages, bank transactions, parking records and location information. You may also ask the police whether photographic evidence is available.

Simply returning the names of several possible drivers may not be enough if further reasonable enquiries could have identified the correct person.

Where you remain genuinely unable to identify the driver, keep evidence of every step you took and seek legal advice before the deadline. That evidence may support a reasonable diligence defence if the police prosecute you for failing to provide driver information.

What if the Notices Went to an Old Address?

The police generally use the registered keeper details held by the DVLA. Changing the address on your driving licence does not automatically update the address on the V5C vehicle registration document.

If the V5C contains an old address, the initial notice and further correspondence may be delivered there. This can affect both the 14-day NIP issue and any later prosecution for failing to provide driver details.

The legal position will depend on which address the police used, when your details changed and whether the notice was correctly served. A failure to update the V5C may weaken a defence, but it does not necessarily resolve every issue.

If you only discovered the matter after receiving court papers, enforcement correspondence or six penalty points on your driving record, obtain advice immediately.

How Can JMW Help?

At JMW, our motoring offence solicitors will examine the NIP and Section 172 notice separately rather than treating them as a single document.

We will establish whether a written NIP was legally required, whether it was served within the relevant timeframe and whether any exception applies. We will also review the Section 172 request, explain what information should have been provided and determine whether your response complied with the legal requirement.

If you dispute the original offence, we will preserve your ability to challenge the evidence while ensuring that the driver-information requirement is handled correctly.

Where the police allege that you did not respond, we will examine copies of the completed form, proof of posting, online submission records and further correspondence. We will also assess whether non-receipt, reasonable diligence or another statutory defence applies.

If court proceedings begin, we will consider defence to the original motoring allegation, alongside any s172 (failure to respond) charge you may have also received.