Forrest Williams - 24 Hour Motoring Lawyers - page 23 Motoring Advice Blog - Page 23 of 82 - Forrest Williams

Freephone: 0800 1933 999
Mobile Freephone: 01623 397 200

Chat Online

Motoring Advice Blog

Punitive Magistrates Find Exceptional Hardship Unsuccessful

Legal Advisor Encourages Appeal Following Unsuccessful Exceptional Hardship Application

 

At her hearing today at Nottingham Magistrates’ Court, our client Kylie Bannister told her barrister that she was disappointed by the magistrates’ decision not to allow her application for Exceptional Hardship.

 

In a case which demonstrates that not every Forrest Williams client achieves a favourable outcome at the first hearing, it is fair to say that there was a genuine feeling that today’s ruling called into question exactly how decisions regarding Exceptional Hardship applications – ie whether they are successful or not – are made.

 

Kylie had worked very closely with her case handler over several months, gradually building the strongest possible application. It was an investment of time as well as money because, for Kylie, there was such a lot at stake. By the end of the process, the volume of paperwork ready to be considered by the court, in support of Kylie’s application, was impressive.

 

If Kylie’s application was unsuccessful, she knew from the beginning that this meant she would be disqualified from driving for a period of 6 months. (She knew she had the right of appeal, but this would obviously incur further costs.) For Kylie, a disqualification would be extremely difficult to bear as she is employed within the publishing industry, on a freelance contract, and has to travel across the whole of the country, at short notice, to meet with clients and industry executives.

 

In addition, Kylie told us that she is essentially the breadwinner for her household as her partner is in lower-paid, temporary employment. Therefore, if she were to be disqualified from driving for 6 months, exceptional hardship would be suffered by her family, which includes 3 young children.

 

After hearing full evidence, the magistrates retired for 10 minutes to consider their verdict. Once they returned, they informed Kylie and her barrister that they had not found the test for Exceptional Hardship had been met.

 

In an interesting twist, however, the Legal Advisor strongly advised Kylie’s barrister immediately after the hearing that they ought to consider an appeal and apply to have her disqualification lifted pending the appeal.

 

From speaking to court staff, it became clear that no favourable decisions had been made during the whole of the day and that the magistrates’ approach towards all defendants was punitive, to say the least.

 

Forrest Williams are now discussing a possible appeal with Kylie, in the hope that when this application is re-considered in the Crown Court it will be allowed – and Kylie enabled to continue driving.

 

This case goes to show that Exceptional Hardship applications are not easy, or straightforward. While we can never guarantee a successful outcome, Forrest Williams always endeavour to prepare as fully as possible, and this is reflected in our very high success rates of well over 90%.  In the rare event that an application is not successful, we ensure that our clients are advised honestly about their right of appeal, additional fees and chances of success at the Crown Court. 

 

If you would like to discuss an Exceptional Hardship case, or any other motoring matter, with a dedicated legal team who will fight for you, call us now on 01623 397200.

 

Case Study: Speeding Client Avoids Having Licence Revoked

In Nottingham Magistrates’ Court today, Mickey Brown told Steve Williams, Senior Partner of Forrest Williams, that he was very worried about the prospect of having his licence revoked and therefore returning to learner driver status.

 

When Mickey first approached us, he explained that he had been summoned to a court for a speeding offence of 100mph in a 70mph limit.

 

However, as his case handler soon realised, Mickey’s story was very different to the stereotypical assumptions that could easily be made of a ‘new’ driver who is charged with a serious speeding offence.

 

To begin with, Mickey is not a young ‘boy racer’ but a teaching professional who is approaching 30 years of age. In addition, he has a lot of driving experience both in the UK and abroad.

 

So why the speeding offence, you may ask.  Again, Mickey’s explanation of what happened on the date in question flies in the face of our common-sense understanding of what constitutes a speeding offence. Mickey explained to his case handler, as she prepared his case for court, that he had been making a long journey back home in a heavy storm when a lorry veered into his lane of the dual carriageway.  Mickey told us he had to make a very quick choice – to brake hard and risk skidding on the wet road, or to accelerate and move out of the way of the lorry.  Mickey did the latter.

 

At today’s hearing, Steve Williams advanced mitigation regarding the circumstances of the speeding offence, together with details regarding our client’s usual careful attitude towards driving, extensive driving experience and his clean driving licence.

 

Although the magistrates made very clear to Mickey that every person before them that day with a speeding offence had been disqualified, and gave Mickey a hard time in terms of how his speeding offence had occurred, in the end they were minded to award 5 penalty points – which meant that Mickey avoided the revocation he had been dreading.

 

Mickey told Steve after the hearing that he was very pleased with this outcome, as it meant that he could continue to drive to the various locations at which he delivers education, thereby ensuring there is no future threat to his employment.

 

Once again, the message from Forrest Williams is that representation is vitally important if you have been charged with a serious speeding offence. Mickey was the first (possibly only) defendant today, at Nottingham Magistrates’ Court, to avoid a disqualification for a speeding offence. The facts speak for themselves.

 

If you are being charged with a motoring offence, call our expert team now for honest advice on 01623 397200.

 

 

Is Intoxication A Defence?

But I was drunk. I didn’t mean to. I would never have done that sober. I didn’t know what I was doing.

 

So when is intoxication actually a defence?

 

First we must distinguish between intoxication by alcohol and intoxication by drugs, here I will consider alcohol intoxication. There can be a perception that intoxication causes offences – indeed British Crime Survey Statistics actually look for alcohol related crime but this can be misleading.

 

‘Alcohol-related crime’ is a popular rather than a legal term. Normally, it is used to refer to 2 main categories of offences:

 

  • Alcohol-defined offences such as drunkenness offences or driving with excess alcohol
  • Offences in which the consumption of alcohol is thought to have played a role of some kind in the committing of the offence, usually in the sense that the offender was under the influence of alcohol at the time.

 

The law likes to confuse matters, nothing is straight forward and what may help you in one situation may not in others. Intoxication from drinks or drugs is not, per se, a defence but it may, in certain circumstances, support an argument that your case should be considered in a different light than it may previously have been. The circumstances and situations in which intoxication can be considered are far too vast to consider in one article so please continue reading here for the next instalment.

 

The law gives no clear definition or consistent threshold for “intoxication” – just lots of mentions. We all know that what will render one “legless” will have little effect on another so the law will take each case on it’s own merits. Intoxication is also considered as either voluntary or involuntary; voluntary generally accepted as knowingly consuming the substance with involuntary more complicated. Involuntary doesn’t mean you didn’t know you were taking it (though can mean exactly that) it can also mean that the substance (potentially legal and even prescribed) consumed had an unforeseen effect.

 

What is found below is in no way exhaustive but may help to give you an idea of where you stand.

 

Motoring:

 

In motoring offences there are 3 main offences relating to intoxication (in laymans terms):

 

  • Drink Driving
  • Drunk in charge
  • Unfit through Drink or Drugs

 

Offences created through the Road Traffic Act 1998 (so those above) are considered a strict liability offence – meaning that you either are over the limit or you are not. The law states that the legal limit in breath is 35µg in 100µg of breath (or the equivalent in blood or urine). Driving offences are one of the few areas where a definitive limit can be found however even if you are found to be over the limit there may still be grounds for the court not to disqualify you. If the intoxication was involuntary then there may be Special Reasons for the courts not to disqualify you.

 

At Forrest Williams we promise to listen to you, to advise you honestly, and to help you in any way the law allows. Give our team a call on 01623 397200 and we will work with you to get the best outcome possible for your case.

Forrest Williams TV