What is a totting up ban?

If you’re caught drink driving in the UK, the punishment can vary depending on how over the limit you are.

Punishments can vary between a twelve-month driving ban or a substantial fine. And in extreme cases, imprisonment. If you’ve been prosecuted. Or currently facing prosecution for drink driving, we can tell you everything you need to know.

Place: Stockport Magistrates Court

Offence: Driving with Excess Alcohol – guilty plea

Defence: Mitigation

Carl Millar from Messrs Millars Solicitors was instructed by Mr A in respect of an allegation of driving with excess alcohol.  His reading in breath was at 78µg of alcohol in 100ml of breath.  He was advised that the Magistrates Court Sentencing Guidelines suggest a period of disqualification of between 17-22 months where the reading is between 60-89µg of alcohol in 100ml of breath.

Mr A was a minor (below 18) and had very good mitigation.  He was supported by his mother in Court.  The Court were sympathetic to the mitigation that was advanced and imposed the minimum period of disqualification of 12 months.  He was also awarded the Drink Drivers Rehabilitation Course, which would allow a reduction of 3 months in the circumstances.  In effect, his disqualification will be for a 9 month period when it could have been as high as 22 months.

Offence: Driving with Excess Alcohol

Defence: Mitigation

Carl Millar was instructed by Mr S who appeared before Wimbledon Magistrates Court in relation to an allegation of driving with excess alcohol.  His reading in breath was at 111µg of alcohol in 100ml of breath.  The Magistrates Court Sentencing Guidelines recommend disqualification of between 23-28 months where the reading is between 90-119µg of alcohol in 100ml of breath.  In addition to that, the guidelines suggest the imposition of a Community Penalty, and there is also the possibility of a custodial sentence.

Mr S’s case was aggravated by the fact that he had been involved in an accident.

Powerful mitigation was advanced to explain that Mr S was addressing his alcohol related issues.  Furthermore, he wished to return to his country of domicile and it would have been difficult for him to abide by any community order that was imposed in respect of voluntary work in the community.

The Court were persuaded by the argument and instead gave Mr S a fine and a period of disqualification of 23 months, which was the minimum in the circumstances.  Mr S was delighted with the outcome.  He was advised by another firm of solicitors that he would go to prison.  Prison and even a community order was avoided in the circumstances.

Offence: Failing to Provide a Specimen of Breath for Analysis – Guilty Plea

Defence: Mitigation

Carl Millar from Messrs Millars Solicitors was instructed by Mr T who faced disqualification for a minimum period of one year and up to 3 years.  The Magistrates Court Sentencing Guidelines also suggest the imposition of a community order whereby there is a deliberate failure to provide a specimen of breath.

Mr T’s case was compounded by the fact that his roadside breath test was at a reading of 101µg of alcohol in 100ml of breath.  If he had provided a specimen of breath at the police station then he would have faced disqualification of between 23-28 months and he almost certainly would have received a community order as well.

Mr T had powerful mitigation that was advanced at Court.  The main concern was that if any period of disqualification was imposed then he may lose his livelihood as a chef working unsociable hours.  It would also have set him up to fail if a community order was imposed because of the shift pattern that he was required to work.  The Magistrates accepted the powerful mitigation advanced at Court and imposed the minimum period of disqualification of 12 months.  He was also offered the Drink Drivers Rehabilitation Course which effectively reduced his driving disqualification down to a period of 9 months.

Offence: Drink Driving – guilty plea

Defence: Mitigation – defendant wishing to avoid a community order

Carl Millar was instructed by Mr W who was involved in an accident and was also driving with excess alcohol, with a reading of 99µg of alcohol in 100ml of breath.

Mr W was advised that the Magistrates Court Sentencing Guidelines suggest the imposition of a community order where the reading is at 90µg of alcohol in 100ml of breath or above.  Mr W was also advised that his case was aggravated by the fact that he was also involved in an accident.  The disqualification was kept to a minimum in the circumstances.  At all costs, Mr W wished to avoid a community order as he was a maintenance man in a care home and worked irregular hours.  We told the Court that we had concerns that the imposition of a community order of unpaid work would set Mr W up to fail.  We explained that he had to work irregular shift patterns with unsociable hours and also had to respond to emergency situations.  The affect of a community order would mean that Mr W would not be able to do his job.  The court accepted Millars Solicitors assertions and instead dealt with Mr W by way of a disqualification and a fine, instead of punishing him with a community order.  Mr W was delighted with the outcome.

Offence: Driving with Excess Alcohol, reduced to being Drunk in Charge of a Motor Vehicle

Defence: No evidence of driving

Carl Millar was instructed by Mr W who was charged with driving with excess alcohol.

Mr W was charged with driving with excess alcohol and the prosecution evidence was lacking, as there did not appear to be any evidence of him driving.  He accepted that he was drunk in charge of the motor vehicle, but that he was not going to drive the vehicle.  Upon persuasion at Court, the prosecutor accepted our assertions and the offence of driving with excess alcohol was discontinued and substituted for the lesser offence of being drunk in charge of a motor vehicle.

This was of a massive benefit to Mr W as he would have faced a minimum period of disqualification of one year, and possibly up to 3 years.  In the circumstances, the Judge awarded 10 penalty points for the offence of being drunk in charge of a motor vehicle.  Naturally, Mr W was delighted with the outcome.

Another fantastic result for our client at Newport Magistrates Court!

Offence: Drunk in Charge of a Motor Vehicle – Trial

Defence: No reasonable prospect of driving whilst over the legal limit

Carl Millar from Messrs Millars Solicitors was instructed by Ms M in relation to an allegation of being drunk in charge of a motor vehicle.

Ms M found herself in a position whereby her work colleagues had gone home and she was uncertain of how to get a taxi back to the hotel where she was staying.  Ms M was staying in a city centre that she was unfamiliar with, and did not know where any taxi ranks were.  She felt vulnerable and walked to the car park where her car was and decided to sleep in her car.

The plan was to sleep in her car and when she woke up, she was going to get some breakfast in Manchester town centre and then get a taxi back to her hotel and check out.  The Court accepted that there was no likelihood of her driving the vehicle whilst she remained over the legal limit and she was therefore found not guilty of the offence of being drunk in charge of a motor vehicle.

Offence: Failing to Provide a Specimen of Breath for Analysis

Defence: Technical Defence

Mr O was charged with an offence of failing to provide a specimen of breath for analysis.

Millars Solicitors were able to persuade the Crown Prosecution Service that Mr O had been incorrectly charged, and the offence should have been one of failing to provide a specimen of breath for analysis whilst in charge of a motor vehicle, rather than driving a motor vehicle. The Crown Prosecution Service accepted the argument and the charge was changed to reflect the lesser offence.

We managed to persuade the Court to impose 10 penalty points on Mr O’s driving licence instead of a driving disqualification. Naturally Mr O was delighted with the outcome as he faced a minimum period of disqualification of one year, up to a maximum of 3 years.