|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAILURE TO PROVIDE SPECIMEN |
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Road Traffic Act
1988, ss.6(6) and 7(6) - Failure to Provide a Specimen
There are two broad scenarios where a driver, suspected of driving whilst over the
prescribed drink drive limit, will be required by a police officer to provide a
specimen for analysis.The procedure
is valid if the officer reasonably suspects or believes that a person is
driving, attempting to drive or in charge of a vehicle whilst under the
influence of alcohol or a drug, when the driver has committed a moving traffic
offence or when an accident has occurred owing to the presence on the road of
the vehicle in question. Failure of
the roadside test, or a failure (which includes a refusal) to provide the test,
will result in arrest and a further requirement to provide a specimen at a
police station.
The preliminary, more commonly known as the roadside, test is one of breath. This is governed by Section 6 of the Road
Traffic Act 1988, and failure to provide attracts a discretionary
disqualification and fine, although there is scope for the imposition of 4
penalty points if the circumstances are deemed by the court to be sufficiently
mitigated.
Failure to
provide a specimen for analysis (the test administered at a police station) is
dealt with by Section 7(6) of the
Road Traffic Act 1988, and constitutes the more
serious of the two offences.
Obligatory disqualification of a minimum of 12 months applies in cases where the
accused was driving or attempting to drive, whilst disqualification is
discretionary with an alternative of 10 penalty points where it is established
that the accused was simply in charge of the vehicle. The latter scenario is one example of
where a specialist solicitor can make the difference as the variation in
penalties available when one is deemed to be in charge as opposed to driving the
vehicle is significant.
The defence
to either of these charges is one of “reasonable excuse”, and it is vital that
such a defence be fully investigated and properly presented in court.
It may be that the accused was
physically or mentally unable to provide the specimen, and this is particularly
relevant where a medical issue prevents provision of breath or where fear of
needles precludes an ability to provide a blood specimen.
Often the
reasons for the refusal are not immediately apparent to the police officers,
resulting in a prosecution.
The Court will look to take a narrow view of what constitutes a reasonable excuse
which makes the fullest defence case essential. A specialist motoring lawyer will be in a position to work with the
accused in preparing and presenting such a case.
Where a person is charged with contravention of either or both of the offences,
advice should be sought from the most authoritative source.
There is a great deal of complex procedure
and case law surrounding all aspects of these charges and the representation of
an expert road traffic solicitor could be the difference between loss or
retention of your driving licence, or between a disqualification and persuading
the Court to instead endorse the licence with penalty points. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ml@theroadtrafficlawyer.com |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|