News2 mins ago
Speeding Paramedic
12 Answers
http://
Should he be given special preference?
Should he be given special preference?
Answers
1 to 12 of 12
“i presumed that it was an instant ban for over 100mph thats before the six previous points” No it is not. The guideline penalty for a speeds of 101mph or more is either a ban of between 7 and 56 days or six penalty points. However, Magistrates have guidance which suggests that where they are faced with such a sentencing choice, if the penalty points take the...
15:14 Fri 12th Jan 2018
“i presumed that it was an instant ban for over 100mph
thats before the six previous points”
No it is not. The guideline penalty for a speeds of 101mph or more is either a ban of between 7 and 56 days or six penalty points. However, Magistrates have guidance which suggests that where they are faced with such a sentencing choice, if the penalty points take the driver to twelve or more then they should impose points and subject the driver to a “totting up” ban.
This is exactly what happened to Mr Hickling. He was given six points, taking him to twelve. However he then argued that “exceptional hardship” would be visited upon him and/or others if he was disqualified and the court accepted his argument, allowing him to keep his licence. Interestingly had he been banned for the single offence (and it is doubtful that he would have been banned for as long as 56 days) he would not have had the opportunity make his hardship plea. That is only available for “totting up” bans.
For what it’s worth, I am of the belief that there should be no opportunity to argue exceptional hardship. To get a totting ban a driver has to commit at least two and more usually four offences within three years. He has ample opportunity to modify his driving to keep within the law. People suffering mandatory bans for a single offence (such as excess alcohol or dangerous driving) or discretionary bans (such as speeding) have no such argument open to them and they have no opportunity to modify their behaviour. But the law is as it is, not as we’d like it to be and the question asked was whether Mr Hickling had received preferential treatment. He didn’t.
thats before the six previous points”
No it is not. The guideline penalty for a speeds of 101mph or more is either a ban of between 7 and 56 days or six penalty points. However, Magistrates have guidance which suggests that where they are faced with such a sentencing choice, if the penalty points take the driver to twelve or more then they should impose points and subject the driver to a “totting up” ban.
This is exactly what happened to Mr Hickling. He was given six points, taking him to twelve. However he then argued that “exceptional hardship” would be visited upon him and/or others if he was disqualified and the court accepted his argument, allowing him to keep his licence. Interestingly had he been banned for the single offence (and it is doubtful that he would have been banned for as long as 56 days) he would not have had the opportunity make his hardship plea. That is only available for “totting up” bans.
For what it’s worth, I am of the belief that there should be no opportunity to argue exceptional hardship. To get a totting ban a driver has to commit at least two and more usually four offences within three years. He has ample opportunity to modify his driving to keep within the law. People suffering mandatory bans for a single offence (such as excess alcohol or dangerous driving) or discretionary bans (such as speeding) have no such argument open to them and they have no opportunity to modify their behaviour. But the law is as it is, not as we’d like it to be and the question asked was whether Mr Hickling had received preferential treatment. He didn’t.
New Judge, I agree with just about everything you say, however, when reading the comments of the Chairman of the Magistrates, it looks like preferential treatment to me. I know you can plead exceptional hardship, it doesn't mean you'll avoid a ban. Would a parcel delivery driver have received the same consideration.
“Would a parcel delivery driver have received the same consideration.”
If he could persuade the Bench that he or others would suffer exceptional hardship. Mr Hickling clearly has exceptional skills which he uses to the benefit of the wider community. The court probably took the view that the “wider community” will suffer if Mr Hickling was banned.
The only way Mr Hickling’s treatment could be seen as preferential is if you believe that the three out of four drivers who are unsuccessful with their plea are treated badly. Successful EH pleas are by no means restricted to the rich and famous, or the well off, or professionals. People from all walks succeed (and fail).
If he could persuade the Bench that he or others would suffer exceptional hardship. Mr Hickling clearly has exceptional skills which he uses to the benefit of the wider community. The court probably took the view that the “wider community” will suffer if Mr Hickling was banned.
The only way Mr Hickling’s treatment could be seen as preferential is if you believe that the three out of four drivers who are unsuccessful with their plea are treated badly. Successful EH pleas are by no means restricted to the rich and famous, or the well off, or professionals. People from all walks succeed (and fail).
I was hoping for a comparable offence to come to light, and so it has. A motorcyclist in Devon gets an 8 month prison sentence, suspended, for doing 118 mph. The most likely death or injury would be to the rider. Unlike the paramedic, where other motorists would be in danger. I do think the paramedic got off lightly.
"A motorcyclist in Devon gets an 8 month prison sentence, suspended, for doing 118 mph."
It's not a comparable offence. You cannot be sentenced to prison for speeding, no matter how fast you go or how many offences you commit. The motorcyclist must have been charged with something else (probably dangerous driving). In England & Wales (but not in Scotland) excessive speed by itself is not usually enough to support a charge of dangerous driving.
It's not a comparable offence. You cannot be sentenced to prison for speeding, no matter how fast you go or how many offences you commit. The motorcyclist must have been charged with something else (probably dangerous driving). In England & Wales (but not in Scotland) excessive speed by itself is not usually enough to support a charge of dangerous driving.
1 to 12 of 12
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.