I'm Really Worried I Have Upset My...
Family & Relationships5 mins ago
Alcohol On Football Coaches
13 Answers
I normally have a sign on my coach stating "NO ALCOHOL" and 99.9% of the supporters abide by this, so when I changed coaches on the 10th December 2016 I didn't put the sign on the new coach. When I stopped at the venue two plain clothes police officers got onto my coach after 2 lads got off it, and they said they had been caught with alcohol on them. I explained that I normally have a no alcohol sign on the bus but I can only "ASK" them whether they have any alcohol, and I have not got the authority to ask them to open their bags so that I can check. According to the organiser, the 2 lads had never been on the bus before and he didn't know them. The police officers agreed that I could not demand that they let me check their bags and it left me in a very difficult position, they said they would be very surprised if I heard any more about it but I received a "conditional offer of a Fiscal fine" last Saturday 28th January stating that I permitted alcohol to be carried on my vehicle to a designated sporting event, I can either pay the £100 fine or be prosecuted in a criminal court. It states that I can pay a Fiscal fine under Section 302 of the Criminal Procedure (Scotland) act 1995 and if I accept this offer I shall not be prosecuted for the above offence(s) Should I fight the case through the court seeing as I have not got the authority to check people's bags as they get on my coach, and the fact that my regular passengers do not normally carry alcohol on the coach?
Answers
1 to 13 of 13
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by stanbesida. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Unfortunately the legislation you quote (Criminal Procedure (Scotland) act 1995) only describes the fixed penalty procedure. It says:
"Where a procurator fiscal receives a report that a relevant offence has been committed he may send to the alleged offender a notice under this section (referred to in this section as a conditional offer);..."
What you need to find out is what the "relevant offence" is that you are said to have committed. (I know it says that you permitted alcohol to be carried on your coach. What you need is the legislation that makes that an offence. Then we can look at the wording to see what it says).
One thing I did note with Section 302 is that it says that unless you explicitly refuse the conditional offer, you are deemed to have accepted it. It says:
"that the alleged offender may refuse the conditional offer by giving notice to the clerk of court in the manner specified in the conditional offer before the expiry of 28 days,"
and (most importantly):
"that unless the alleged offender gives such notice, the alleged offender will be deemed to have accepted the conditional offer (even where no payment is made in respect of the offer);"
So if you intend to challenge the matter in court you must formally decline the conditional offer within the time allowed. Your first step will be to establish what legislation led to you being given the offer. I suggest whoever issued the offer would be a good place to start.
"Where a procurator fiscal receives a report that a relevant offence has been committed he may send to the alleged offender a notice under this section (referred to in this section as a conditional offer);..."
What you need to find out is what the "relevant offence" is that you are said to have committed. (I know it says that you permitted alcohol to be carried on your coach. What you need is the legislation that makes that an offence. Then we can look at the wording to see what it says).
One thing I did note with Section 302 is that it says that unless you explicitly refuse the conditional offer, you are deemed to have accepted it. It says:
"that the alleged offender may refuse the conditional offer by giving notice to the clerk of court in the manner specified in the conditional offer before the expiry of 28 days,"
and (most importantly):
"that unless the alleged offender gives such notice, the alleged offender will be deemed to have accepted the conditional offer (even where no payment is made in respect of the offer);"
So if you intend to challenge the matter in court you must formally decline the conditional offer within the time allowed. Your first step will be to establish what legislation led to you being given the offer. I suggest whoever issued the offer would be a good place to start.
Get somebody to pass the hat next time you're booked for a match.
Arguing with the powers that be is a recipe for grief, best paid and forgotten about.
Frustrating maybe, but not as bad as shrugged shoulders and quotes about ignorance being no excuse, it's about safety/health, you should be aware of legislation specific to your trade etc.
Arguing with the powers that be is a recipe for grief, best paid and forgotten about.
Frustrating maybe, but not as bad as shrugged shoulders and quotes about ignorance being no excuse, it's about safety/health, you should be aware of legislation specific to your trade etc.
http://
19 (7) says, "Where a person is charged with an offence under subsection (1)(b), (2) or (6) above, it shall be a defence for him to prove that the alcohol was carried on the vehicle without his consent or connivance and that he did all he reasonably could to prevent such carriage."
19 (7) says, "Where a person is charged with an offence under subsection (1)(b), (2) or (6) above, it shall be a defence for him to prove that the alcohol was carried on the vehicle without his consent or connivance and that he did all he reasonably could to prevent such carriage."
Thanks, Corby. That’s what I was after.
The upshot is that if you challenge this and go to court, the prosecution will have to prove that alcohol was carried on your coach (probably not difficult for them). The burden then shifts to you to show that it was “…carried on the vehicle without his consent or connivance and that he did all he reasonably could to prevent such carriage."
The question you must ask yourself (and which you will be asked in court) is what did you do to prevent such carriage? If the answer is “nothing” (as I suspect it probably is because you did not even have your sign on display) then take the fixed penalty.
The upshot is that if you challenge this and go to court, the prosecution will have to prove that alcohol was carried on your coach (probably not difficult for them). The burden then shifts to you to show that it was “…carried on the vehicle without his consent or connivance and that he did all he reasonably could to prevent such carriage."
The question you must ask yourself (and which you will be asked in court) is what did you do to prevent such carriage? If the answer is “nothing” (as I suspect it probably is because you did not even have your sign on display) then take the fixed penalty.
For all we know, the two folk may not have been aware of the restriction and as there was no notice they'd have been none the wiser. Had the notice been displayed and had folk been asked as they boarded, I would have thought that is all that could have been done reasonably by a driver. I suspect that merely having the notice displayed would not satisfy the "[doing] all he reasonably could" defence.
"Had the notice been displayed and had folk been asked as they boarded, I would have thought that is all that could have been done reasonably by a driver. I suspect that merely having the notice displayed would not satisfy the "[doing] all he reasonably could" defence."
Yes I entirely agree, Corby. All these things are OK (e.g. "I normally have a sign on my coach stating "NO ALCOHOL" and 99.9% of the supporters abide by this,...") until an allegation such as this one is made. Then the burden shifts to the defendant to show he had a defence by doing "all he reasonably could". From Stan's brief description it sounds as though very little was done to prevent an offence occurring, but perhaps he'll come back and let us know.
Yes I entirely agree, Corby. All these things are OK (e.g. "I normally have a sign on my coach stating "NO ALCOHOL" and 99.9% of the supporters abide by this,...") until an allegation such as this one is made. Then the burden shifts to the defendant to show he had a defence by doing "all he reasonably could". From Stan's brief description it sounds as though very little was done to prevent an offence occurring, but perhaps he'll come back and let us know.
Hi stan - sorry you got screwed over this
various points of various importance arise
NJ does / did alot of criminal procedure and so his analysis would be correct.
so pay the fine and put it down to experience UNLESS you are gonna lose your carriage licence ( or whatever ) in which case you will have to fight it
haha o god how I laughed when I read the two nice police officers had said you would hear nothing more ( so you wouldnt garner defence evidence in your favour ) and then you DID! Evidence gone - poof ! you get screwed. [been there. ]
The notice or lack of it is a non starter. (IMO)
Do you say to the punters " no drinking as usual boys!" or something else ? Or do you rely on the notice and nothing else in which case I rather think you are screwed. Actually I dont think the notice may be sufficient alone.
and no I am not sure if arresting/ stopping two lads with drink on them proves that it was carried on a bus - especially if all that there is - is their say so. That is the two police can prove the two lads had drink on them but that does not prove they pre-bought it and took it on the bus.
also go onto BAILII and put in "allow alcohol"
and hey you get scottish cases ! such as this
http://
Feeney v the Fiskie [2014] ScotHC HCJAC_84
which makes me think you might have a defence to be honest
so it now depends on
does you livelihood depend on it
and how much will it cost to defend ?
If your livelihood doesnt depend on it
I would suck your belly button in, pay the fine and put it down to experience
we all have to learn the hard way - sozza
various points of various importance arise
NJ does / did alot of criminal procedure and so his analysis would be correct.
so pay the fine and put it down to experience UNLESS you are gonna lose your carriage licence ( or whatever ) in which case you will have to fight it
haha o god how I laughed when I read the two nice police officers had said you would hear nothing more ( so you wouldnt garner defence evidence in your favour ) and then you DID! Evidence gone - poof ! you get screwed. [been there. ]
The notice or lack of it is a non starter. (IMO)
Do you say to the punters " no drinking as usual boys!" or something else ? Or do you rely on the notice and nothing else in which case I rather think you are screwed. Actually I dont think the notice may be sufficient alone.
and no I am not sure if arresting/ stopping two lads with drink on them proves that it was carried on a bus - especially if all that there is - is their say so. That is the two police can prove the two lads had drink on them but that does not prove they pre-bought it and took it on the bus.
also go onto BAILII and put in "allow alcohol"
and hey you get scottish cases ! such as this
http://
Feeney v the Fiskie [2014] ScotHC HCJAC_84
which makes me think you might have a defence to be honest
so it now depends on
does you livelihood depend on it
and how much will it cost to defend ?
If your livelihood doesnt depend on it
I would suck your belly button in, pay the fine and put it down to experience
we all have to learn the hard way - sozza
If the police seen the two men get off the coach, had them in their sight at all times and were able to say on oath the men were not seen to get the alcohol elsewhere, they must have had it on the coach. Another possibility is that the two men admitted they had the alcohol on the coach.
You could try saying that one them was a Mr J. Christ and when you asked him, all he had was several bottles of water...
You could try saying that one them was a Mr J. Christ and when you asked him, all he had was several bottles of water...
Many thanks for ALL your replies and especially New Judge and Thecorbyloon. I "ALWAYS" ask the passengers as they get on whether they have any alcohol and if they say they have I tell them that it is not allowed on board the vehicle. I know for a fact that some of them carry alcohol in coca cola bottles etc. because there is no way that anybody can tell whether it contains alcohol or not, and I am not in any position to question them further when they say they haven't got any alcohol, and I have to take their word for it. I would like to re-iterate that 99.9% of my passengers abide by the "NO ALCOHOL" rule
Unfortunately, stan, this is one of the pieces of legislation that shifts the blame for potential misbehaviour (i.e. getting pi55ed on a coach on the way to football) from the miscreant to somebody else. It's rather like the fines imposed on lorry drivers whose vehicles are unfortunate enough to be invaded by illegal immigrants. The lorry driver gets a £2,000 fine and the illegal immigrant gets a council flat.
1 to 13 of 13
Latest Posts
Quizzes & Puzzles5 mins ago
Today I Heard My First . . . . .
ChatterBank7 mins ago
ChatterBank12 mins ago
Crosswords13 mins ago
ChatterBank16 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.