>>She is due to start teacher training in Sept, 2012

Thank gawd she's not breathing her fumes over my kids. In my experience, teachers don't reach those sort of alcoholic levels until much later in their careers.

To return to the original question.

Not worth bothering with legal representation, a ban is inevitable.

Worth making a brief statement in mitigation: sorry, foolishly thought I'd be OK to drive when I did, no previous trouble with the police, otherwise law-abiding and hard working citizen, etc.

Edited by ifithelps on 01/08/2011 at 11:29

...You say its inevitable but theres people with over 40 points who havent been banned yet...

Points are irrelevant, the offence of drink driving carries a mandatory disqualification.

The magistrates have no discretion whether to ban or not, they do have discretion on the length of the ban.

See page 124 of this document, and note the phrase: "Must endorse and disqualify for at least 12 months."

http://sentencingcouncil.judiciary.gov.uk/docs/Magistrates_Guidelines_including_update_1__2__3_4_web.pdf

...Or 3-11 points if 'exceptionally not disqualified' according to the penalty guidelines in the highway code....

Jamie,

I will try once more.

Quote from the online Highway Code:

"In the case of serious offences, such as dangerous driving and drink-driving, the court MUST order disqualification. The minimum period is 12 months...."

The 'must' is their bold print, not mine.

Drunk in charge does not carry an automatic ban, but drive or attempt to drive does.

http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/TravelAndTransport/Highwaycode/DG_069870

Yes that is correct, if you are disqualified for one single offence the licence can NOT also be endorsed with penalty points, which you may view as a better option as points for drink driving can remain on the licence for up to 11 years but you can apply to the DVLA after 4 years and ask very nicely for them to take them off, but if you get a two year ban, re-apply for your provisional, do the theory and practical tests again and get a licence that licence will have zero points but the conviction will have to be declared to any insurers until classed as spent.

Edited by jamie745 on 02/08/2011 at 00:26

Shocking really as i havent had any i might point out! Honest! Really!

A few years working in the sorts of businesses with people who drive fleet cars too fast, many paths crossed with the slimey lawyer types who get them off their bans and a lifetime of watching Traffic Road Wars Cops Interceptors is enlightening.

That's very interesting; and there was me thinking that in this country one was 'innocent until proven guilty'! What a ridiculous suggestion! In all seriousness though, how often is 'Drunk in Charge...' actually used? It's isn't something we seem to hear much of?!

yeah and we all want to know how Princess Choe got on in Court.

Firstly, the question at the start - while a ban may be inevitable I would agree that anyone who defends themself has a fool for a client. Can't remember who said it but I believe it nonetheless (I'm not a lawyer, by the way). First offence, twice over the limit with the circumstances being as described I would expect a minimum of 12 months but possibly with a reduction if a course is taken up. This, however, can be dependent on local circumstances - for example, if there are many similar cases in a short period of time in that locality the sentencing may be more strict, or if there has been a recent fatality due to drink/driving (por encourage les autres). I would certainly spend time on offering an apology and explanation of the efforts made to ensure fitness to drive before getting behind the wheel.

Secondly, Drunk in charge - is used often when 'driving' cannot be proved - such as two persons each claiming the other was at the wheel at the time of an accident. If both are over the limit both may be charged with this offence (or if they both claim they were driving to 'protect' the other). Or if a driver is prevented from driving when they are clearly attempting to - eg, trying to drive in a car which has lost a wheel due to being crashed immediately before police or witnesses arrive. No-one has seen them actually driving the car, which they deny, but they are clearly in charge and if the statuory defence fails they may be convicted of this offence. this charge is usually only preferred by after CPS consultation due to the statutorydefence. Less likely to be the result of police 'attitude' and more likely to be police 'experience'.

Thanks to all for some really helpful advice. The good Princess hasn't been back since 1 August (maybe she's a British Leyland Princess and has broken down somewhere), but I'll try to remember this thread if the same topic comes up again in the fduture, as it probably will.