The effect of a 6 month disqualification for totting up was going to have disastrous effects for Mr Haynes in terms of his employment and home life.

After considering his options, Mr Haynes contacted Cunninghams Draycott Browne Solicitors and spoke to solicitor Paul Turner. Mr Haynes explained how he did not feel that he was able to put all his grounds forward properly in relation to an exceptional hardship argument as he found himself in an alien environment, in that he had never appeared before a Court previously.

Paul considered Mr Haynes’s case and advised him that he had a strong case and that there were merits in an appeal to the Crown Court.

Due to the speed that Mr Haynes had been caught travelling, Paul advised Mr Haynes that we would seek to persuade the Court to impose a short period of disqualification as opposed to the imposing penalty points if the Court had insisted on imposing the penalty points then Mr Haynes could advance his exceptional hardship argument.

At the hearing before Kingston Crown Court, strong mitigation was advanced on behalf of Mr Haynes and the Court were persuaded to impose a short period of disqualification of 14 days and therefore the penalty points were removed from Mr Haynes’ licence .

Needless to say, Mr Haynes was delighted with the outcome.

A drink driver who may only possibly have months to live has been sent to jail for more than 12 months.

Gary McKitten of Marygold Crescent, Fenshouses took to the road whilst in excess of being 4 times over the drink drive limit after arguing with his father. The legal limit is at 35 mg in 100 ml of breath.

Mr McKitten came up behind a new driver just west of Chester-le-Street around a Corsa as it was being driven along. The Corsa driver stopped and the new driver was rammed once again. Mr McKitten was flashing his lights and the incident obviously traumatised the 18 year old who had just recently passed his test.

Mr McKitten, 47, admitted dangerous driving, driving with excess alcohol and driving whilst disqualified. He had 6 previous convictions for drink driving, one previous conviction for dangerous driving and was already disqualified for a period of 6 years at the time. The solicitor for the defendant explained that his doctors have stated that if he starts drinking again, he could be dead within months. Even if Mr McKitten reframes from drinking, his life expectancy is not very long.

The Recorder, Mr Jonathan Bennett, jailed McKitten for a period of 19 months. The Judge stated “Sometimes, when the defendant has a reduced life expectancy, the Court is able to take a more merciful course than might otherwise be appropriate. But this offence, and your dreadful driving record, indicates there is a high risk that you will drink again and pose a significant danger to other road users”.

Additionally, Mr McKitten was disqualified from driving for a period of 4 years and must also take an extended re-test if he ever wishes to drive again.

A motorist was found at the wheel of a high powered car in Burton whilst more than 3 times over the drink drive limit. He was subsequently disqualified for a period of 2 years.

Andrew Bates, 37, of Bramlingcross Road in Burton had a reading of 109 mg of alcohol in 100 ml of breath; the legal limit is at 35 mg. The defendant had been driving his black Audi A5 when he was stopped by the police in Stapenhill Road on the 21^st March 2013.

Appearing at Burton Magistrates Court, Mr Bates pleaded guilty to an allegation of driving with excess alcohol by virtue of Section 5 of Road Traffic Act 1988. In addition to being disqualified, the defendant was handed a community order of 180 hours of unpaid work over the next 12 months.

At Cunninghams Draycott Browne Solicitors, we have the capacity to deal with cases not only in Burton but on a nationwide basis. If you do require a specialist drink driving solicitor then please call us on 0161 236 6742.

Jane Wynn, 44, was seen by CCTV operators at about 1am on February 20^th walking unsteadily towards her car in Micklegate, Selby, before getting into the car and driving away.

Police were alerted and stopped the car in Finkle Street. Jane Wynn provided a positive roadside breath test. She was then transported to the police station whereby her lower reading was at 53 mg of alcohol in 100 ml of breath, the legal limit being at 35 mg. The defendant pleaded guilty to the offence. In mitigation she stated that she did not believe that she was drunk but she pleaded guilty at the outset.

The consequences of disqualification to the defendant were that she will now not be able to take her children to activities including football and that she had already cancelled a holiday.

In the circumstances, the defendant actually received the minimum period of disqualification. Where a defendant commits a second drink driving related offence within a 10 year period, the Magistrates’ hands are tied in that they must impose a minimum period of disqualification of 3 years.

The only way to avoid a disqualification is if a not guilty plea is found is a technical defence or if special reasons exist.

Special reasons can take many formats. Please see our advice entitled Special Reasons whereby special reasons may apply in drink driving cases.

We are specialist drink driving solicitors who can take on cases in Selby, York or anywhere in the Yorkshire area. If you do wish to instruct Messrs Cunninghams Draycott Browne Solicitors then please call us 0161 236 6742.

The article referred to a soldier who was driving with excess alcohol by virtue of Section 5 of the Road Traffic Act 1988. Akei Toa is a Lance Corporal who had a flawless army record until he committed this offence. The defendant was driving his Ford Focus through a red traffic light on Blackpool Bloomfield Road on the 22^nd February 2013 at 5.10am. He provided a positive breath test at 82 mg in 100 ml of breath. The legal limit is at 35. Mr Toa had agreed to act as a designated driver on the evening in question but he did not restrict his drink and acted completely out of character.

The defendant received a disqualification for a period of 18 months and was also fined accordingly at Blackpool Magistrates Court.

In the circumstances, this was a lenient sentence and the Magistrates must have been impressed by his previous good character. The Magistrates Court guidelines suggest a period of disqualification between 17 – 22 months where the reading is between 60-89 mg in 100 ml of breath. Therefore, on paper, the defendant was at the higher end of the scale and a different Court on a different day may have disqualified him for a period of 22 months as his reading of 82 in breath was only just within the brackets of 17-22 months where the reading is between  60-89 mg in 100 ml of breath.

Powerful mitigation that is presented correctly can help a defendant have their disqualification period reduced and this clearly worked in Mr Toa’s case.

At Messrs Cunninghams Draycott Browne Solicitors we have the resources to represent clients in Blackpool and Lancashire and also on a nationwide basis. If you require an expert drink drive solicitor then please contact us.

Kelly Stenson, 30, was nearly 5 times over the legal limit when she was found by police officers after a member of the public had alerted the police. The defendant had abandoned her vehicle after crashing into metal gates at around 4pm on January 18^th 2013. The police managed to locate the mother and her two daughters, who are aged just 6 and 3, near the car.

The legal limit is at 35 mg in 100 ml of breath. At the police station, the defendant provided a specimen of breath and the reading was at 151 mg in 100 ml of breath. This is an astronomically high reading. Indeed, the Magistrates Court Guideline suggests that the starting point is a 12 week custodial sentence where the reading is 120 mg or above. Chairman of the Bench, Stuart Swallow, said “This reading that was gathered was one of the highest I have ever come across and that’s something”.

The defendant pleaded guilty to drink driving and was handed a 3 year disqualification. In mitigation the defendant had put forward marital problems and financial problems which have since been resolved. She also referred to the fact that she had recently lost her grandmother and had not coped well in the circumstances. Since the incident, the defendant has undertaken voluntary work with Turning Point and a group called Lifeline to tackle her alcohol use and depression. In addition to the disqualification, the defendant was given a 12 month community order and 30 day activity programme requirement.

In the circumstances, the defendant was lucky to avoid an immediate custodial sentence and the Magistrates must have been persuaded not to send her to prison due to the mitigation presented by her solicitor.

If you do require our services at Messrs Cunninghams Draycott Browne Solicitors then we can cover all drink driving cases in Yorkshire. We have the resources to operate on a nationwide basis. If you do require a specialist drink driving solicitor then please contact us. We will use our best endeavours to achieve the best outcome for you.

Carl Millar recently represented Mr B at Manchester City Magistrates Court in respect of an allegation of speeding. At the time of the offence Mr B had 9 penalty points endorsed on his licence and therefore faced disqualification under the totting up procedure.

Carl presented powerful mitigation on behalf of Mr B in order to try and persuade the Magistrates not to disqualify Mr B from driving for the minimum period of 6 months.

Carl was trying to compete with his colleague, Paul Turner, at Cunninghams Draycott Browne Solicitors who had a hat trick of successes in London, Oxfordshire and Manchester outlined in his article of the 18^th February 2013.

In Mr B’s case, he was concerned that not having a car as a mode of transport for a period of 6 months would result in redundancies at his workplace. He accepted that it was not his employee’s fault that his manner of driving was unacceptable and the Magistrates were persuaded on the balance of probabilities that exceptional hardship would fall upon Mr B and his employees.

Cunninghams Draycott Browne Solicitors represent clients on a nationwide basis including London, Birmingham and Manchester.

The Courts are more willing to accept exceptional hardship if other people are affected by you being disqualified from driving. In Mr B’s case, the Court accepted that his employee’s would suffer if he were to be disqualified from driving as there was potential that he may have to make people redundant.

We will see how Carl manages in his trials the following week whereby he is due to appear at Tottenham Magistrates Court for a case of failing to provide a specimen of breath for analysis, Bury Magistrates Court for a case of careless driving and Portsmouth Magistrates Court in respect of an allegation of driving with excess alcohol.

Cunninghams Draycott Browne were recently instructed to represent Mr M at Aylesbury Magistrates Court in Buckinghamshire after he reached 12 penalty points on his licence and was at risk of a disqualification under the totting up procedure. Any driver who accrues 12 or more points on their licence within a 3 year period is at risk of a disqualification from 6 months.

The effects of a disqualification on Mr M would have had serious implications given that he drove for a living and ran a business as a chauffeur.

Mr M contacted Paul at Cunninghams Draycott Browne and was advised in respect of the criteria that the Magistrates will consider when hearing an exceptional hardship argument.

The argument was advanced on Mr M’s behalf and the Magistrates found that Mr M would suffer exceptional hardship and therefore exercised their discretion not to disqualify Mr M from driving.

Needless to say Mr M was delighted with the outcome. Any driver who does advance exceptional hardship may not advance the argument again within a 3 year period of basis of that argument remains the same.

Paul was instructed by 3 separate clients who were all at risk of a disqualification under the totting up procedure having accumulated 12 or more points on their driving licence. The effect of a disqualification in all 3 cases would have had serious implications for a variety of reasons including their ability to work, implications on the business, financial implications and implications to their families.

In two cases namely Mr T in Waltham Forest Magistrates Court in London, he was a bus driver and also Mr W in Banbury, Oxfordshire, a taxi driver, a disqualification meant that they would not have been able to work for 6 months.

The other case Mrs R at Manchester Magistrates Court has a case based mainly on personal and family circumstances.

Carl Millar briefly read an article from crime line that refers to the case of R –v- Wright (2012 EWCA and CRIM 3069).

A gentleman pleaded guilty to intending to pervert the course of justice and was originally sentenced to 12 months imprisonment.

Following a road traffic accident a witness had reported 2 men leaving the scene. The Appellant’s partner had telephoned the police to report a burglary at her home and that her car had been stolen. She shared the address with the Appellant. The complainant had explained to the police that when she arrived home at approximately 4am in the morning her car was outside the house. She explained that she had gone to bed and that the Appellant had gone to a party. She explains to the police that when she woke up at 9.30am in the morning she saw that the car was missing and she telephoned the Appellant who, in turn, told her to contact the police. In the midst of the conversation with the police, the Appellant came home from the party that he attended and the police soon realised that he matched the description of one of those leaving the scene. He was unsteady on his feet, his speech was slurred and he smelt heavily of alcohol. He provided a sample of breath which was over the legal limit. However, this matter was not pursued as the driving with excess alcohol crime was statute barred. A crime by virtue of Section 5 of the Road Traffic Act 1988 (drink driving) is a summary only offence and there is a time limit of 6 months for proceedings to commence. This can be by way of proceedings to commence.

The Appellant subsequently pleaded guilty to an act intending to pervert the course of justice and his custodial sentence was eventually reduced on appeal to 8 months and he was given credit for his early guilty plea.

Mr W had put himself in a far worse position than he was in originally. He would have been disqualified from driving but by telling a lie to cover his tracks he ended up with a prison sentence.