Being in Charge of a Vehicle Whilst DrunkAccused of Being in Charge of a Vehicle Whilst Drunk? We can help…
Being in charge of a vehicle whilst drunk
Driving Conviction Offence Codes: DR40, DR50, DR90, DG40
In Charge is covered by Section 5 of the Road Traffic Act 1988
Most of us know that it’s illegal to drink and drive, but did you know that it’s also illegal just to be stood near your car whilst drunk?
Not many of us realise is that it’s an offence to simply be ‘in charge’ of a vehicle whilst you’re above the limit, but it’s a serious offence which carries a minimum 10 points or a disqualification on conviction, and in very serious cases, community orders or even prison.
Being in Charge Penalties:
- minimum 10 penalty points
- Possible disqualification
- Community Order
- Possible Prison Sentence
Do you depend on your driving licence for your job? We can help defend allegations…
Google Rating
-
Call them TODAY!!I cannot express how grateful I am for the service that was provided to me! From the initial call to receiving … More my closing letter the team have been exceptional. I want to say a special thank you to Isaac, Katie and Rima for the way they handled my matter and the support they gave me, they were informative, understanding and happy to break down/explain all aspects of the case with no hesitation. I also want to thank my barrister John who was extremely professional and kind and I was impressed with how he handled the case. All in all if you need legal support regarding a driving matter get in touch with Patterson Law today!!!
-
Fantastic work from Ashleigh Hannah, she handled my case for driving whilst on/holding a mobile device, she called me and … More gave me regular updates, she definitely went above and beyond by summoning police to attend court in my favour. We won the case and even the aftercare is the best I’ve come across.I will definitely recommend and use again
Example – Case 1
Mr X drives to the pub at 7pm and leaves his car in the car park. He and his friends pre-book a taxi for 11pm to go home. He is planning on collecting the car the following morning.
They have numerous alcoholic drinks. Just as the taxi arrives at 11pm, Mr X goes to his car to collect something. He has no intention of driving as the taxi is pulling up. However, he is seen by an officer rooting in his glove box and is arrested for being drunk whilst in charge of his car. He gives a reading of 70ug in breath (twice the legal limit).
Incredibly, even though he obviously wasn’t going to drive Mr X would be charged and taken to Court for being ‘drunk whilst in charge of a car’. He’s above the limit, he’s in a public place (even though it’s a private car park, the pub was still open so would be deemed a ‘public place’) and he had the keys on him. He had not relinquished charge.
So the only way to defend this matter would be to argue that there was no likelihood of his driving the car whilst above the limit (explained in more detail below).
Example – Case 2
Mrs Y is at home on her own. Her partner has taken their car. She drinks a bottle of wine. Her partner drives home late and drunk. An argument ensues and the neighbours call the police. Upon arrival, the police see both Mrs Y and her partner outside of the house and stood by the car. The partner is arrested for drink driving, and she is arrested for being drunk whilst in charge of a car.
Here, there would be a strong argument to say that she was not in charge of the car. She is not the owner and so it is not assumed she would have charge of it. The partner had the keys and possession of the car, and at no point did the partner pass the keys to her, so she never assumed control of it.
Defence
If someone is arrested for being drunk in charge, and it’s generally deemed that they are in charge of the car (like example 1 above) then the defendant can look at presenting a defence under s.5(2). This section says that a person is not guilty if they can prove “there was no likelihood of them driving the vehicle whilst the proportion of alcohol in their breath, blood or urine remained above the limit”.
There are two stages to this defence:
- That there is no likelihood of driving. Here the defendant must satisfy the Court that there is no real risk that he would drive. But it’s worth keeping in mind the case of Sheldrake –v- DPP where it was stated that the defendant’s intentions may change whilst drunk, and whilst a sober man may have had no intention of driving the vehicle, having become intoxicated his intentions may change.
- The defendant must also prove that by the time that he was going to drive the vehicle he would have been under the limit. Expert toxicology evidence would usually be required to confirm the same unless it is obvious to a lay person that by the time they would have driven the vehicle they would have been under the limit.
So let’s go back to Example 1 - Mr X.
Mr X is being taken to Court for being drunk whilst in charge of a car. We agree that he was drunk (twice the limit) and we also agree that he was in charge of his car.
However, we are going to argue the defence under s.5(2). We enter a not guilty plea at the first hearing, and the case is adjourned for a trial for 3 months, giving us time to prepare the defence.
For the first point of the defence, we need to prove that there was no likelihood of his driving the car. We’d get statements from all the friends and a record of the taxi booking to confirm that he wasn’t going to drive, but instead was getting a taxi home. We might also want to explore CCTV from the pub car park.
For the second point of defence, Mr X says that he would not have driven until he came to collect his car in the morning when the pub reopened at 10am. So we would get an expert toxicologist report to determine whether he would have been under the limit by 10am.
And if we can prove both parts, he would be found not guilty.
The best quote to summarise comes from the case of DPP v Frost: “If a defendant when apprehended in charge of a vehicle is only marginally above the limit and persuades the court that he would not have driven for a long period thereafter, then the court may properly find it to be obvious that the defence has been made out; but if a defendant when apprehended in charge of a vehicle is well over the limit and the court is satisfied that he would probably have driven in the space of a few hours, then it will not be at all obvious that the defence has been made out. In such a case the court cannot rely on general knowledge or commonsense or personal experience but will require clear, cogent and reliable evidence as to the relative rate at which the particular defendant would have been likely to lose the alcohol found on testing to have been present in his body.”
Testimonials
Graham, I would just like to put in writing how pleased we are with your legal services. The preparations for the defence have been very thorough and detailed and we can't fault that in any way. I was very impressed with the level and volume of detailed case law that you were able to bring to bear, including the changes prepared to mitigate the very late evidence that the CPS tried to introduce. I would therefore just like to convey may heartfelt thanks for all of your efforts along the way keeping us informed on progress and which eventually lead to the CPS offering no further evidence and the case being dropped Without your expert help it could have been a very different outcome, which would have been a travesty of justice as there was never any intention to drive I would also like to express our thanks to Joseph Byrne, the Barrister you instructed to represent Chris at the hearing. He was extremely well prepared and VERY knowledgeable on our case and the points of Law surrounding it. He ran rings around the CPS Barrister who appeared to be very poorly prepared. Once again to you and your team and to Joesph Byrne, thank you.
You were simply superb defending me, thank you.
Thank you Graham. Your sensitivity and understanding was of great help to me. Never again! Please pass on my thanks to everyone who helped me. I am on the mend finally.
Two Drink Drive Allegations in 2 years - Both defended successfully. First offence I registered 153 mg's and faced a sentencing guideline of 12 weeks imprisonment, disqualification, fines etc. as it is over 4 times the limit - I received; 100 Hrs community service, £85 Costs ( The minimum the CPS can ask for!), £60 Victim surcharge, no points and no disqualification. Second offence; a vehicle I & 9 others have access to was involved in a damage only accident. Police came to my house & I blew 149 which is over four times the limit, but I had been drinking all day out on foot and indoors prior to my arrest as it was new years eve. The case against me was immediately withdrawn in court, in that it failed the Crown Prosecution Service code for prosecution. Without your legal advice I would have been hung out to dry on both occasions. Thank you to everyone who helped me.
Excellent service and professional handling of a delicate situation. Both Dan & Emma are excellent and sympathetic.
I initially got in touch with you for some advice and a quote based on my case. I felt so at ease when speaking to Joanna that it was an easy decision for me to instruct the company. Joanna was excellent throughout my case, giving me advice, replying to my emails and calls pretty much straight away and always making things as easy as possible for me. She was very personable and always put things in laymans terms for me. A massive plus when going through such a period of uncertainty. Nothing was too much hassle. Massive thank you to Joanna and all your brilliant team.
Frequently Asked Motor Law Questions
See All Frequently Asked Question Offence Categories Here
About Us – See here for details about our law firm.