A young schoolboy was involved in a collision within his school car-park after getting behind the wheel at his leaver’s ball.

The boy, Alexander Jenner who is a student at City of London Freemen’s School, has been banned from driving for 14 months and fined with a sum of £100 after pleading guilty to drink driving at the age of 18.

South East Surrey Magistrates’ Court heard that the collision took place just before 1am on Saturday, May 25th and defence lawyer Patrick Martin said that Jenner knows he has made a mistake after being under a number of pressures recently.

Mr Martin said Jenner’s car collided with a car driven by a friend’s mother, adding: ”He made a foolish error under these circumstances by driving home to Crampshaw Lane.” He also mentioned that Jenner’s mother had died recently, leaving Jenner acting as a taxi service for his two brothers since his father was often unable to take on the responsibility when he was away for work.

However, Jenner has been given the opportunity for his ban to be reduced by 14 weeks by Magistrate Jane Hargrave, on completion of a drink driving course.

She has urged Jenner to put it behind him and move on.

I attended Solihull Magistrates Court last week representing a client who faced a drink driving allegation.

Like many clients, he wanted to plead guilty and take responsibility for what was a poor decision made whilst under the influence of drink.

His reading was reasonably low, and there were no aggravating features.  He had planned to walk the short distance home at the end of the night but, having had a few drinks, decided to drive.

There was no complaint with his driving but he was seen leaving a pub car park and, as often happens, that was enough reason for the police to stop him and breathalyse him.

What complicated this case slightly was that the client did have a previous conviction for drink driving some 8 years ago, meaning that despite his low reading he would automatically be disqualified from driving for 3 years.

Naturally, this result would have devastating effects for my client, and any reduction in that sentence would make a difference to him.

I mitigated on his behalf, and told the magistrates his side of the story.

Before mitigation, the magistrates would have viewed my client mainly in vague terms and numbers – ‘the drink driver who blew X’ – and it was my job to help the magistrates see the person standing before them.

In preparation, I had teased out of my client all of the relevant information, and I was able to tell the magistrates about the way his life had changed in the last 8 years and how he was a committed family man with a responsible job.  I guided them through his day-to-day life and how the disqualification would affect him.  I emphasised that he took full responsibility for this matter.

The magistrates at Solihull Magistrates Court considered all of this information – information they would not have heard if my client had not been represented – and decided that whilst they had to give him a 3 year disqualification, they were sympathetic to his case and would, therefore, allow him to attend the drink driving rehabilitation course.

This is unusual for second time drink drivers, and when completed, will take 9 months off my client’s ban.

My client was delighted, as was I.

A POLL by the IAM (Institute of Advanced Motorists) shows that 80% of motorists are in favour of repeated drink drivers having their vehicles seized and sold or scrapped.

They were also in favour of the drink driving limit being reduced, with 28% of people favouring a zero tolerance policy.

IAM chief executive, Simon Best, said: “The support is there for tougher treatment of drink drivers.

“Not only do the majority want a lower limit – they also want tougher punishment for those that break the law, especially the worst offenders who present the greatest danger to other road users, their passengers and themselves.

“Our poll shows a desire to see more effective drink drive levels as well as much greater consistency of enforcement, prosecution, and sentencing, which reflects the level of danger associated with drinking drivers.”

Full story from the IAM here.