Call us - 0800 005 1009
Motoring Lawyers - News
Fixed Fee Advice and Representation - £500 plus VAT
20.09.10 - Our motoring lawyers excel at Exceptional Hardship Cases
Here at Cheshire Motoring Lawyers, we have recently reviewed all of our exceptional hardship arguments from the last 12 months. We are pleased to announce that 75% of the cases in which clients received advice and representation at court resulted in the clients keeping their driving licence, despite having 12 points or more.
We’re always looking to improve on our success rate though, so if you’re facing 12 points or more on your licence call us today on 0800 005 1009. We can provide representation that could mean you save your licence, for a fixed fee of £500 plus VAT
19.11.09 - Court of Appeal decision on Breath Samples in Drink Drive Cases
The recent case of Thomas Goldsmith v Director of Public Prosecutions clarified the laws surrounding prosecutions for excess alcohol involving breath specimens. In this case the Defendant crashed his car, having been drinking in a public house.
Following the crash the Defendant returned to the public house and continued drinking. Shortly after he was arrested by the police and taken to custody where he provided a breath specimen with a reading of 71mg. A back calculation carried out by the police gave the figure, at the time of driving the vehicle, as being 46mg. The Defendant’s own expert calculated that the figure, at the time of driving could be no more than 57 mg.
The Defendant sought to enter a guilty plea on the basis of this calculation. This was not accepted by the prosecution under the section 15(2) Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988 assumption that the Defendant’s level of alcohol was not lower than the reading. The district judge agreed with the prosecution and found that the section 15(3) exception (consuming alcohol following the accident) did not apply as the Defendant had pleaded guilty and was not having a trial.
On appeal the Court of Appeal held that the court should not be bound by a factual basis which has been proven to be wrong. Furthermore as the section 15(3) exception only applied to trials, it would also follow that the section 15(2) assumption was also only relevant to trials. A Defendant is entitled to plead guilty to drink driving and argue his alcohol level was lower than those presented in the prosecution.