Convicted Driver Insurance Quotes

Convicted Driver Insurance Quoteline
Convicted driver insurance quote line owned and operated by MCE Insurance

Follow Drinkdriving.org on:


Follow Drinkdriving.org on Facebook Follow Drinkdriving.org on Google+ Follow Drinkdriving.org on Twitter

View Poll Results: Do you support and agree with this new legislation?

Voters
6. You may not vote on this poll
  • YES (Please comment and tell us why)

    1 16.67%
  • NO (Please comment and tell us why)

    3 50.00%
  • UNSURE? (Please comment and tell us why)

    2 33.33%
Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 53
Like Tree3Likes

Thread: New Drink Driving Legislation Effective 1st June 2013

  1. #21
    rspice is offline Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    3

    Default Re: New Drink Driving Legislation Effective 1st June 2013

    Hi everyone im new here, finding this amusing and frustrated at the same time.

    Can any one help with my problem?
    I had some strokes 14y ago had to do a disable driving test which I past and got my license back. After ten years I had to re do my license and tell about my health again.
    So dvla send me a eye test as that's whats dogdy about me. Re do the eye test and also go do the disable driving test again. Which again I passed. Thought that was it but now ive recieved a letter telling me ive gotta go do a naked piss test???

    What the hell ive never been done for drink driving or under the influence of drugs. I have got a conviction for a small bit of cannabis but was years ago.

    My big question.. is this for real?
    Can thay do this?
    Cheers in advance for any help


  2. #22
    price1367 is offline TTC Group Associate Director
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Telford, Shropshire
    Posts
    1,725

    Default Re: New Drink Driving Legislation Effective 1st June 2013

    Quote Originally Posted by rspice View Post
    Hi everyone im new here, finding this amusing and frustrated at the same time.

    Can any one help with my problem?
    I had some strokes 14y ago had to do a disable driving test which I past and got my license back. After ten years I had to re do my license and tell about my health again.
    So dvla send me a eye test as that's whats dogdy about me. Re do the eye test and also go do the disable driving test again. Which again I passed. Thought that was it but now ive recieved a letter telling me ive gotta go do a naked piss test???

    What the hell ive never been done for drink driving or under the influence of drugs. I have got a conviction for a small bit of cannabis but was years ago.

    My big question.. is this for real?
    Can thay do this?
    Cheers in advance for any help
    There are 2 possibilities here.......

    1. you have submitted your application to DVLA and they have checked with your doctor, who has mentioned about cannabis use, hence the requirement for you to provide a urine sample. Cannabis residue shows up better in a urine sample than blood. Yes they can do this.

    2. Have a close look at the letter to see if it is genuine. I say this because of the word naked...... That is not a requirement. Do your friends know of your conviction and is it not DVLA who are taking the p*** ?

  3. #23
    rspice is offline Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    3

    Default Re: New Drink Driving Legislation Effective 1st June 2013

    Quote Originally Posted by price1367 View Post
    There are 2 possibilities here.......

    1. you have submitted your application to DVLA and they have checked with your doctor, who has mentioned about cannabis use, hence the requirement for you to provide a urine sample. Cannabis residue shows up better in a urine sample than blood. Yes they can do this.

    2. Have a close look at the letter to see if it is genuine. I say this because of the word naked...... That is not a requirement. Do your friends know of your conviction and is it not DVLA who are taking the p*** ?
    The letter is from dvla and yes ive got cannabis on my health record but what has that got to do with it?

    This logic means if ive ever had a drink then I shouldn't drive?

    So once ive taken this test will I be re checked yearly?
    This countrys a joke!

    Oh and by the way I take hemp milk and oil which I buy from supermarkets and thats legal? Cannabis=hemp
    Hemp=cannabis

  4. #24
    price1367 is offline TTC Group Associate Director
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Telford, Shropshire
    Posts
    1,725

    Default Re: New Drink Driving Legislation Effective 1st June 2013

    Quote Originally Posted by rspice View Post
    The letter is from dvla and yes ive got cannabis on my health record but what has that got to do with it?

    This logic means if ive ever had a drink then I shouldn't drive?

    So once ive taken this test will I be re checked yearly?
    This countrys a joke!

    Oh and by the way I take hemp milk and oil which I buy from supermarkets and thats legal? Cannabis=hemp
    Hemp=cannabis

    I don't know if you will be tested annually, you will have to ask DVLA about that. If it is a matter from years ago (the same time as your conviction) then they may not bother after the first one.

    They want to test you because they have received information that you have taken an illegal substance in the past, and that could have an effect on your driving if you are still taking it today. Alcohol happens to be legal. I agree with your logic but that is the way of the western world, alcohol is tolerated, encouraged and taxed, cannabis use is frowned on.

    Hemp oil and milk is indeed legal, but your statement cannabis = hemp..... Hemp = cannabis is not necessarily correct.
    Hemp oil is normally made from cannabis plant fibre, which does not contain THC, and you would therefore not test positive for that or it's metabilites in a urine sample. that is what is looked for to indicate the DRUG cannabis use in the past few weeks, the time being according to your tolerance to the drug. There can be some hemp oil that is made from the seeds of the cannabis plant, and this could indicate THC, but modern methods or manufacture has been successful in eliminating most of it. Perhaps you should check with the manufacturer.
    You would not fail the urine test unless the metabilites found were above the threshold. I am not sure what their threshold is, probably not a good idea to ask them for obvious reasons....! Some drug screening agencies report at 15nm / ml, and consider a positive at 50nl /ml. You can buy home screening kits that would give you an indication of what the result MIGHT be.

  5. #25
    gutted is offline Established Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    236

    Default Re: New Drink Driving Legislation Effective 1st June 2013

    Quote Originally Posted by bristol.red View Post
    Up until today people got there licences back because they had completed there disqualification, finished the sentence which the courts gave them. Now the government has decided that they have to prove they are not dependant on alcohol before they are allowed to drive again and you are not allowed to start proving this to DVLA untill 3 months before the ban ends
    This seems a pretty common misinterpretation.

    They still get their license back when they finish the sentence which the court gave them. That sentence demands that the convicted a) is disqualified from driving for a specified duration, and that b) regardless of (a) the convicted driver must pass a medical to prove that they are not dependent on alcohol before they are allowed to drive again.

    I'll repeat again, this only applies to new convictions.

    If you think that drink driving is not worth the risk of (a) and (b), then don't do it. If you think that the perceived benefits of drink driving are worth (a) and (b), then knock yourself out, but don't complain when you get caught and have to prove that you are not dependent on alcohol before they let you drive again. You put yourself in that position, not the courts and not the DVLA.

  6. #26
    bristol.red is offline No Longer a Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    280

    Default Re: New Drink Driving Legislation Effective 1st June 2013

    Gutted, the more I read your posts, the more I think you should stand as a conservative MP & put in for Ian Duncan Smiths job when he resigns or gets sacked later in the year or sometime next year.

    Now its your time too chose, You can either take it as a compliment or an insult the choice is yours and only you can make that choice, let me know what it is when you have chosen please.

  7. #27
    gutted is offline Established Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    236

    Default Re: New Drink Driving Legislation Effective 1st June 2013

    Quote Originally Posted by bristol.red View Post
    Gutted, the more I read your posts, the more I think you should stand as a conservative MP & put in for Ian Duncan Smiths job when he resigns or gets sacked later in the year or sometime next year.

    Now its your time too chose, You can either take it as a compliment or an insult the choice is yours and only you can make that choice, let me know what it is when you have chosen please.
    Because I think we should take responsibility for our actions? God forbid! No you are right, it's always someone else's fault. Well done.

  8. #28
    riotgrrl is offline New Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    2

    Default Re: New Drink Driving Legislation Effective 1st June 2013

    I have quick question on this new legislation:

    A friend was banned for 18 months for refusing to provide a blood sample (after successfully providing two clean breath samples) in early 2009, and that ban expired in mid-2010. The police wanted a blood test because they believed he might have been under the influence of drugs (other than alcohol). He refused due to an intense fear of needles (his offer of a urine test was dismissed without consideration). This fear of needles was not deemed to be "reasonable excuse", and he gave a guilty plea at court after being advised by his lawyer that if he pled not guilty he'd be looking at a longer ban and a high fine.

    He was told at the time that upon his ban ending he would not need to retake his test, and would just need to reapply and pay the requisite fee in order to regain his licence. The possibility of undergoing a medical prior to having his licence reinstated was not mentioned at all.

    My friend has not applied for a renewed licence to date (due to not needing to drive during this period); however, he is now concerned that due to this new legislation he will need to undergo a medical prior to being able to get his licence back.

    It seems like the new legislation relating to a refusal to provide a blood sample only applies to convictions made after June 2013, and that said conviction (made in 2009) COULD therefore not be classified as High Risk, as follows:

    "The Motor Vehicle (Driving Licences) Regulations 1999 provides legislation on the criteria drivers must meet in order to be classified as a high risk offender.

    This criteria will be extended to include any person disqualified by order of a court for failing, without reasonable excuse, to give permission for a laboratory test of a specimen of blood taken from any person while that person was incapable of consenting to the specimen being taken.

    NOTE: The new legislation DOES NOT APPLY where the conviction in respect to which the disqualification was ordered was imposed before the date on which the new legislation commences. The new legislation commences on 1st June 2013. The new legislation will apply to any relevant convictions on or after this date."

    However the part referring to being "incapable of consenting to the specimen being taken" is somewhat vague.

    Is it the case that his conviction is not High Risk, and therefore no medical is needed? Or must he undergo a full medical before he is able to get his licence reinstated?

    Thank you in advance for your reply!
    Last edited by riotgrrl; 06-11-2013 at 07:57 PM. Reason: Typo

  9. #29
    bristol.red is offline No Longer a Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    280

    Default Re: New Drink Driving Legislation Effective 1st June 2013

    Quote Originally Posted by riotgrrl View Post
    The possibility of undergoing a medical prior to having his licence reinstated was not mentioned at all.
    The courts at that time did not tell the the defendant about the HRO medical after the disqualification has ended, they still don't to my knowledge. BUT you raise some very interesting points. I am not familiar with the law on this point, I am starting to wonder if you maybe right. Hopefully Price1367 will be able to clarify this situation.

    Quote Originally Posted by riotgrrl View Post
    It seems like the new legislation relating to a refusal to provide a blood sample only applies to convictions made after June 2013, and that said conviction (made in 2009) COULD therefore not be classified as High Risk,
    The new legislation, will not have any affect on your friend regarding driving under section 88 once he has a valid application. I am also starting to think that your friend may not need the medical either. I look forward to reading Price1367's comments on your post.

    Hope my reply helps a bit.

  10. #30
    price1367 is offline TTC Group Associate Director
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Telford, Shropshire
    Posts
    1,725

    Default Re: New Drink Driving Legislation Effective 1st June 2013

    Convicted Driver Insurance Quotes
    Riotgrll,
    the answer to your first question is that your friend Is a high risk offender and WILL have to have a medical before he gets his licence back.
    section 7 of the road traffic act (read with section 4) clearly says that anone failing to provide a sample lawful requested dring an investigation into drink driving or driving under the influence of a drug IS classed as a HRO.
    because the offence was prior to 1st June 2013 he may still avail himself of the 'get out' of getting a temporary licence if his medical results are not completed by the time he is entitled to drive after his ban finishes.
    the second question relates to the wording of "incapable of consenting to to sample being provided"
    this is not about the procedure in the police station, but to when there are samples provided at hospital.
    years ago, if someone was unconscious, ( or appeared to be) then they could not provide a sample because they had to give consent for the sample, but were not able to, obviously.
    the law was then changed to say that it was lawful for a blood sample to be taken from an unconscious person, but they then had to be seen subsequently and consent sought for the sample to be used for analysis. If the person refused consent, they were charged with failing to provide a sample. So the position was that the police HAD a sample, but it had only been 'provided' aft consent was given. No consent = faiL to provide.
    the HRO legislation, however, up until the 1st June did not cover this fail to provide offence. From 1st June this offence as described DOES qualify as an HRO offence and a medical IS required for those circumstances.
    it is a bit complicated, like lots of Legal wording...... I hope I have explained it simply enough?

    bristol.red, you were putting your bit on as I was composing this

Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 07-26-2012, 05:21 AM
  2. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 02-25-2012, 02:39 AM
  3. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 02-25-2012, 12:04 AM
  4. UK Toughens Drink and Drug Driving Legislation - autoevolution
    By Latest News in forum Drink Driving News
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-22-2011, 08:31 AM
  5. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 08-01-2010, 01:31 PM

Thread Rating Thread Rating: 1 votes, 5.00 average.

The thread 'New Drink Driving Legislation Effective 1st June 2013' has been rated 5.00 out of 5 by 1 registered forum members and 52 members have commented