When does a Drink Driver lose their licence ?

[captainvilla]

Around a week ago, I had no alternative but to phone 999 after a problem neighbour came home, hit my car and when challenged threatened my family for a fight, on our own property.

He was paraletic , could hardly stand and was obviously drunk. I gave a Police statement to say he was seen driving.

7 days later, I'm astounded to see him driving still. Now, did the Police revoke his licence immediately and he is flouting the law...................................or is he awaiting trial under "the innocent until proven guilty" thing ?

Finally, the guy has a life threatening illness, so would he get away with it, citing that he needs the vehicle for hospital visits for treatment ?

People like this should not be on our roads.

[bednobs]

i would imagine he would have to go to court, however, as the police didnt catch him driving, who knows?

[captainvilla]

I'm the witness to say he was driving. My statement says that.

[Suzyboo]

The licence is not taken before they have gone to court. His illness might be taken into account as mitigating circumstances when deciding the outcome

[Rock'n'Roll]

Sorry Captainvilla,but just becaiuse you say he was driving is no proof that he was,unless the police actually eee him in charge of the vehicle. He could say someone took him home in his own car then ran off after the bump,who can prove otherwise? I can't see any illness having an effect on a courts decision,after all,no shortage of buses taxis

[Buenchico]

The police have no powers to revoke a driver's licence or to disqualify them from driving (which are not the same thing). Only a court can disqualify someone from driving. (The DVLA can, in certain circumstances - which are not relevant here - revoke a licence).

If your neighbour has a good solicitor, the Crown Prosecution Service might find it difficult to get a conviction for drink-driving. The only evidence that he was driving under the influence of alcohol comes from you. The defence could seek to show that the defendant was not always in your view from the moment that he left his car until the time he was breathalised (assuming that he was). This could lead to the possibility that he consumed the alcohol after, rather than before, driving. Further, the defence could seek to show that your evidence should be disregarded by the court because your disputes with your neighbour might lead you to give false evidence against him.

I'd actually be very surprised if the CPS decide to prosecute your neighbour for drink-driving. However, if they managed to obtain a successful prosecution, I doubt that his medical problems would be regarded as a good enough reason for the court not to impose a driving ban.

Chris

[captainvilla]

Maybe I need to fill in a few gaps here.

1) I watched him drive down the road and park after many goes.

2) I saw him hit my vehicle.

3) I challenged him straight away, by opeing my window and yelling at him that i saw him hit the vehicle, which he admitted.

4) He then cam eand stood on my property asking for me to "sort it out" in an aggressive manner.

5) I called the police on 999.

6) Whilst he was still on my property or just moved off it, the police arrived , smelt the alkcohol on him, and they nicked him for drink driving.

7) The vehicles were still touching as the police examined them.

8) The officers felty the bonnet of the vehicle to see if it was "warm".

9) He tried to fight the Police whilst under arrest.

I dont really think, the fact that he was drunk is in question.

I may be the witness against him and yes we may have past history but the circumstances seem piled against him, i believe.

[captainvilla]

When the Police returned afterwards at 3 am for my statement, they told me that he refused all tests and would give nothing.

From what i understand, this is worse than testing positive.

[captainvilla]

That maybe so, I can see but the priority is that he is taken off the road.

That offence is still ban worthy i presume. Espiecially with testimonies to the fact of the smell of alcohol.

[Yorkie580]

The only way you'll know is if you aks to speak to the Officer in the Case.

One possible scenario.... he refuses all test at the station. The decision whether or not to prosecute for Sec 4 of the Road Traffic Act is refered to the CPS to decide on whether he is to be charged. (possible 2 week delay).

He returns to the station, is charged and then bailed. Up to 5 days for a court hearing.

He pleads not guilty.

Case is adjourned to get the case ready and to warn all witnesses. If everything and everyone are working quickly an extra month.

If he were then found guilty by the court an application could still be made for his illness to be taken into consideration prior to sentencing (another delay).

Drink Drive and Driving whilst unfit cases can go on for months. I know of one in particular that is still going through appeals at Crown Court 18 months later (all centred around when a solicitor was actually called).

Als, if you're saying he assaulted the police officers then further evidence is probably still being obtained around injuries etc.

The fact that he refused a breath test at the station has actually narrowed his chances for defence - he'd had been better off taking it and then arguing that he wasn't driving. If what you've said is true, then the offence is more centred around failing to provide samples when legally required to do so.

If he is found guilty then a ban would be usual. There are a hell of a lot of arguments that may be put forward throughout the trial and muerous points of procedure that get argued in order to throw doubt on the evidence.

[captainvilla]

Thanks for your help.