TelBoy

is it an automatic ban, no questions asked? Can anyone over the limit ever be released with just a caution?

Is there a suspended custodial sentence involved too?


And no, i haven't before anyone asks.

MattW

Auto ban unless there are significant mitigating circumstances (read life or death). High readings would usually mean ban from arrest, lower readings leaves ability to drive till court case.

Custodial would be applied if circumstances were graver, serial offender, driving while disqualified, etc etc

However, when I was doing the job prosecution threshold was 40 wheras the legal limit is 35. You would get a caution for that. Not sure whether it applies 10 years on.

MJW

Yep, definite ban and hefty fine - no cautions. Not sure about suspended sentence but I'd expect if you're involved in an RTA it shouldn't be ruled out.

TelBoy

Thanks. And what length of ban are we talking for a first-time offender?

^Qwerty^

Geezer in our local paper didn't get banned due to some mitigating circumstances. It was something to do with his wife being gravely ill. Many questions about why he didn't call an ambulance etc. but it was in the early hours of the morning after having a drink in the evening, and he thought he would be well clear.

It's the only one I've seen in 20 odd years.

talizman

iTrader: (1)

The legal limit is 35ug (microgrammes) of alcohol in 100ml of breath.

If you blow between 35 and 39ug, you are released with a warning.

If you blow between 40 and 50ug, you have the option of replacing the breath specimen with blood or urine, which are a more accurate indication of alcohol levels.

If you blow 50+ug, you are reported straight to the court.

Any court conviction, regardless of alcohol level carries an automatic ban.

In fact, a refusal to provide a specimen is also supposed to carry an automatic ban, so you are better to take your chances, provide a specimen and hope its low.

soup dragon

"Thanks. And what length of ban are we talking for a first-time offender?"

Usually 12mths.

TelBoy

Talizman - what form does the warning take? Is it just something informal, like "don't be a silly boy in future"?


Soup-dragon - thanks.

talizman

iTrader: (1)

Standard ban is 1 year, which can be reduced if the convicted person attends some kind of drink driver "rehab" group (for want of a better phrase). IIRC 3 months can be chopped off for this.
The sessions basically try and improve attitudes towards DD, and make folk aware of fatality rates etc etc due to drink drivers.

talizman

iTrader: (1)

Basically yes.

There is no formal record of the incident held.

If the person blows 35-39ug, then the crown agree that prosecution is not undertaken, as margin must be allowed for calibration and for legit alcohol content in the body etc etc.

Some mouth washes have a high alcohol content and if you were to "blow in the bag" straight afterwards, you may provide a positive specimen!

For this reason, a breath test cannot be taken if the person has consumed any form of alcohol in the previous 20 minutes.

If the person blows under 40ug, they are told that they are VERY lucky. On this occassion.

TelBoy

Thanks for all the info.

STi wanna Subaru

iTrader: (1)

I've heard of somebody getting off due to another person testifying in court that he'd spiked his drink with Vodka..... always thought it was a fair bit dodgy though.

David Lock

I thought length of ban was mostly dependant on alco level always assuming no RTA. So 3 times over say and you are off the road for 18 months plus. Of course if this is second offence you're in the proverbial.

type-r-stan

i was banned for 12 months after reading 41,got a £50.00 fine. the doctor told me if i had had my blood taken 15mins later it would have been under.. the worst is i really didn't know i was over and felt fine and my driving was fine, the police saw me get in my car in the pub car park at about 8ish in a friday night and decided to stop me.

i went on the course and got it down to 9 months. i had to go every saturday for 3 weeks. it was a nightmare for me, i lost my job that day, sold the scooby for 8 grand after spending 5 on a new engine i lost about 12k there all together....

the only mitigating circumstance they will accept is if the driver was acting to save the life of someone else. e.g rushing them to hospital and there was no one else present to take them.

Brendan Hughes

"That's what they all say".

Leslie

Not worth the risk then!

Les

scoobynutta555

Not true. My ex was caught 5 years ago and tested at 39ug. She was initially told she would get off by arresting plod. She got 12 month ban with optional course for a few hundred quid that reduced it to 9 months.

type-r-stan

''That's what they all say''

Yes, i suppose it is but i stand by that statement. That said i took my punishment and am now back on the road having learnt a valuable lesson.

I am a lorry driver, 2 kids, mortgage etc etc so no way would i have got in the car knowingly over the limit. i now have a zero drink policy - that way i know i'm not going to end up in that position again.. it definately isn't worth it, the cost financially and mentally is almost immeasurable. and of course if i had been involved in a crash i would have that to live with as well. i am only telling you what happened to me and i hope that if anyone has a couple pints after work thinks its ok to drive home i hope they are enlightened.

ajm

type-r-stan, out of interest, how much had you had to drink?

Brendan Hughes

Stan, it wasn't aimed at you personally, but it was a lazy (and obviously ineffective!) way of saying that alcohol is famous for having that effect - people simply don't realise that they're affected. In comparisons between alcohol and cannabis users, the drinkers get in the car, say "I feel fine", and go on to crash, whereas the stoners get in the car, say "whoooa, I better be careful", and drive home at 26 mph carefully in the middle of the lane. I don't know the chemistry of it, but basically anyone who drinks shouldn't rely on how they "feel", as it simply isn't accurate.

type-r-stan

ajm- i had had 2 1/2 pints in about 2 hours, i hadn't eaten since lunchtime except for a pack of crisps. Even the magistrate said i was unlucky and they wouldn't have banned me if they had a choice, which is why i only got a 50quid fine.

Brendan - point taken. i just know that i wasn't pissed. Every other friday i would drive to the pub have a drink get a cab home and pick the banger up on saturday afternoon (i had an old citroen for work - scooby for weekends only) but that friday i just didn't fancy a drink so i went home (well via watford nick anyway!) the best bit was when the policeman asked if i wanted to be dropped back at my car????? i was speechless- he'd just nicked me !! i declined the offer and went back to get my car the next day and it had a parking ticket where the git had parked on a double yellow line !!!
I wish now that i kept the scooby but thought my insurance would be too high so sold it. When i was on the rehab course part of it was to ring insurance companies for quotes and the increase was minimal. i have just been put on the misses focus and that was 45 quid extra for the year.

talizman

iTrader: (1)

I find that extremely bizarre considering that we do not report anyone to the Procurator Fiscal (CPS) if they blow 35-39ug.

So, bearing in mind that we don't report anyone between these readings then how can the court impose a ban?

Even if they blow OVER 39ug, ie 40ug-50ug, it is still recognised that the breath reading may not be entirely accurate, hence the provision to replace the breath reading with a blood or urine sample.....

For calibration anomalies, readings just over the limit are not prosecuted. Fact.

scoobynutta555

Maybe you don't report anybody between those readings, but you aren't everyone are you.

talizman

iTrader: (1)

LOL

You are quite right, I'm not everyone, but.....

Just for he record, the decision not to prosecute 35-39ug readings is not mine, it's ACPOS's!

Dr Hu

SO if ever cauaght & you are offered a blood/urine sample - accept their offer and by the time they get you to the station and you have given all your details etc you may get off if it was a close run thing....

Not saying DD is right or wrong, just a view.

My wife was a legal secretary, and all the Solicitors are **** heads, there was a story of one that was pissed had a minor RTA close to home, said to the other person involved I'll pop home to get my ins docs, necked a bottle of NEAT ribena and then subsequently passed a breath test - allegedly neat blackcurrant has a marked effect on breath test readings somehow.....

GC8

Im not sure whether anyone has added this Tel; but even where there are mitigating circumstances and a ban is avoided, the offender will still receive the same licence endorsement.

Simon

GC8

I notice that we have the usual ScoobyNet mixture of people who actually know what theyre talking about along with people who have an opinion but no idea what theyre talking about who 'know a bit'.....Ffs, do other forums suffer as this one does?

Neanderthal

iTrader: (6)

Depends if you're an immigrant

scoobynutta555

I assume you are on about guidelines and not actual law when quoting ACPOS. Still, does not change the fact that she was prosecuted and convicted on 39. I'm not on about the norm, I'm on about a specific case.

Dr Hu

GC8 - not everyone knows everything mate.......

I don't confess to know everyhting there is to know about anything, but if I need to know the answer Scoobynet USUALLY comes up trumps eventually - you just have to sort the wheat from the chaff, so to speak