Quizzes & Puzzles5 mins ago
No Driving Ban For Stan !.
Stan Collymore escapes a driving ban.
http://
http://
Answers
1 to 17 of 17
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by tonyav. 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.
He was not facing a ban for the single speeding offence. He was facing a ban under the "totting up" rules, having accumulated twelve points in less than three years. He argued that "exceptional hardship" to him or others would follow if he were banned. This option is only open to those facing a ban under the totting up rules and not to those facing a ban for a single offence.
My view is that very often this argument is too flimsy but is nonetheless accepted by Magistrates. In any case the option should be removed. Drivers facing such a ban have committed at least two and more usually four offences in a short space of time and that should be warning enough.
By the way Mr Collymore should refrain from commenting about the Falkland Islands as he obviously hasn't a clue what he's talking about. As a historian he might (or might not be, I wouldn't know) a good footballer, but that is it.
My view is that very often this argument is too flimsy but is nonetheless accepted by Magistrates. In any case the option should be removed. Drivers facing such a ban have committed at least two and more usually four offences in a short space of time and that should be warning enough.
By the way Mr Collymore should refrain from commenting about the Falkland Islands as he obviously hasn't a clue what he's talking about. As a historian he might (or might not be, I wouldn't know) a good footballer, but that is it.
It's not actually, Zacs.
The success rate of the "exceptional hardship" argument is quite high and a large number of the successful applicants either represent themselves or employ a jobbing solicitor.
The problem is that Magistrates' interpretation of "exceptional" has become increasingly less severe in recent years. Many Benches now take the view that loss of employment amounts to exceptional hardship when, in fact, it is almost certainly a given for somebody who needs to drive for their living and is by no means exceptional. However, most of the successes usually involve the plea that a ban will lead to hardship for somebody else (as in Mr Colleymore's case).
I am firmly of the belief that the facility to make the argument should be withdrawn. It is becoming abused and in any case those in danger of reaching twelve points have plenty of warning to moderate their driving. They need to consider what hardship might follow if they are banned rather than expect the court to agree that what is a perfectly forseeable consequence is "exceptional". They almost always know what a driving ban will mean to them and others who may rely on them. It is doubtful Mr Colleymore's mother became ill and dependant upon him between him having nine points on his licence and acquiring the other three. In many of these cases it is not "hardship" that will follow, but merely inconvenience.
The success rate of the "exceptional hardship" argument is quite high and a large number of the successful applicants either represent themselves or employ a jobbing solicitor.
The problem is that Magistrates' interpretation of "exceptional" has become increasingly less severe in recent years. Many Benches now take the view that loss of employment amounts to exceptional hardship when, in fact, it is almost certainly a given for somebody who needs to drive for their living and is by no means exceptional. However, most of the successes usually involve the plea that a ban will lead to hardship for somebody else (as in Mr Colleymore's case).
I am firmly of the belief that the facility to make the argument should be withdrawn. It is becoming abused and in any case those in danger of reaching twelve points have plenty of warning to moderate their driving. They need to consider what hardship might follow if they are banned rather than expect the court to agree that what is a perfectly forseeable consequence is "exceptional". They almost always know what a driving ban will mean to them and others who may rely on them. It is doubtful Mr Colleymore's mother became ill and dependant upon him between him having nine points on his licence and acquiring the other three. In many of these cases it is not "hardship" that will follow, but merely inconvenience.
NJ - yes, a good assessment.
I know in civil cases where people face eviction as a starter tenant and plead hardship. The test applied is a 'stringent' one. Trouble is, one judge's application of the guidelines can differ to another.
Are more well known folk more likely to succeed in escaping driving bans? Flintoft also springs to mind i.e charity work!
I know in civil cases where people face eviction as a starter tenant and plead hardship. The test applied is a 'stringent' one. Trouble is, one judge's application of the guidelines can differ to another.
Are more well known folk more likely to succeed in escaping driving bans? Flintoft also springs to mind i.e charity work!
1 to 17 of 17
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.