Learner Driver

[gbfish]

What is the legal stance on this situation:

A learner driver is at the wheel with a 'suitable' adult in the passenger seat. However, the adult is over the legal drink drive limit, although the driver is not.

How legal is this?

[ugly_bob]

not at all.
Not sure if both would get done, but passenger would. For being drunk in charge of a vehicle. Learner may be done for not having suitable supervision.

[Impret-Sir]

As the driver does not have a license the adult would be considered by the law to be in charge of the car. There is an offence called 'drunk in charge of a motor vehicle', and I think they could be convicted of that, if they were stopped and the adult was tested and found to be over the limit.

Out of interest, I heard of a local man who was prosecuted for this offence when police found him asleep in the back of his car in a car park, sleeping off a bender rather than drive home! He had left the keys in the ignition, so the cops said he was, technically, in charge of the car.

[BillyNoMates]

I agree with impret-sir - the full licence holder would be considered to be 'in charge of the vehicle' so possibility of being charged with being 'drunk in charge' .

Re. 'Drunk in charge' - you don't have to have the keys in the ignition or even about your person to be charged with this offence.

That, sadly is a myth. The area for being 'drunk in charge' is a very grey one.

Best not to put yourself in a position where you could be charged in the first place. That includes sleeping in a car or even going into a car in a pub car park to get your coat out of the passenger door.

[kepla]

Both the learner and the drunk could be prosectued if the cops feel like it, with all the accompanying fines, endorsements and / or imprisonment. The learner for being so stupid as to drive unaccompanied (a drunk does not count as suitable accompaniment for a learner) and the drunk for being drunk in charge.
What is particularly difficult to understand is how somebody can appear to show sufficient signs of intelligence to post a question to the Answerbank but still be stupid enough to be involved in a drink-driving case. Quite a paradox !

[connor91]

every thing both 1 drunk in charge.1aiding and abeting.no insurance.see you both in 12 mounths,

[JudgeJ]

Is that what you�d like to see happen, connor91, or what you think will happen?

This is quite straightforward � the qualified passenger will be charged with being drunk in charge of a vehicle (for which he can be fined and disqualified). The learner driver will be charged with driving otherwise in accordance with a provisional licence (because he had no proper supervision as required) for which he can be fined and have a minimum of three points added to his licence.

Provided there was a Policy of Third Party Insurance in force to cover the driver driving the car, an offence of �No Insurance� has not been committed. None of the offences that have been committed invalidate insurance.

[gbfish]

Yes thank you very much kepla and connor91, I am a reasonably intelligent person. I was merely wondering about this situation and its repercussions. I am not in anyway involved in a case like this nor am ever likely to, I was simply attempting to answer a question, like intelligent people do!

[smartpaddy]

How can both be charged?

If the supervising adult is charged with drunk *whilst in charge* of the vehicle, then that means the driver was accompanied; if the driver is charged with being unaccompanied, then the adult wasn't in charge so his drunkenness is irrelevent - I reckon defence lawyers would have a field day with that one :)